To think we shouldn't assume WFH is easier / cheaper?

[BoredtoTiers]

Having read quite a few pieces in the ongoing debate about return to the office, some of the arguments being put forward have been that WFH is necessarily easier / cheaper (often accompanied by a suggestion that it's totally fine to pay less to home workers).

Now obviously, employers can make a job office based and employees can either accept that or go elsewhere. This isn't really about that.

My own experience is that home working has been more expensive and longer term will be cost neutral at best. Easier? In some ways, but not in others.

Yet I see a lot of articles and posts in threads suggesting that of course it's easier / cheaper. Often this is based on things like the cost of a London commute. AIBU to think that this argument simply doesn't hold water for many who have shifted to home working during the pandemic?

YANBU.

WFH is more expensive for me. I have a short commute to the office and usually took a packed lunch. My heating bills have increased more than my costs have decreased.

Abd yes productivity from staff has dropped. It’s not ok and no longer needed. Jobs for the masses shouldn’t be made harder so Joyce can tinker in her garden whilst on a tea break from her cosy Insta gram friendly office the majority don’t have . Aside from anything I frankly don’t want a lot of the services I use bring located in peoples homes with my data security compromised.

Before - Cycle to work (daily exercise).

Now WFH - heating costs all day. Gym membership (as just can't motivate myself to do fake commute -i tried) and buy lunch out from lovely deli most days just to have an excuse to escape the house.
Def more expensive WFH for me. As posters say. All depends on what your commute was.

@0blio

More expensive for me as I had to heat the house all day and use my own tea, coffee and biscuits!

And it's hardly environmentally friendly to heat perhaps 100 homes instead of one office.

Our sustainability officer was raving about how WFH was amazing for our organisation’s carbon footprint with so few cars being used for commuting until I asked how she was calculating the impact of an office being heated for 30 people now being an office for 2 (more heating cost as fewer bodies to warm the air) and 28 other rooms/houses being heated instead.

I also pointed out that cars didn’t like not being driven, so I was taking mine out of an evening a few times a week without any other reason to, which pretty much offset any savings on my commute.

She hasn’t spoken to me since.

I was a talking to a man the other day (actually at a MH support thing) who is miserable wfh. He has a young family, DW is a SAHM, he has nowhere proper to work, they're all under each others' feet, he feels he can't get away from work in the way you do when you leave the office, he's missing the social side of work (and after work) and he feels he does better work in the office and enjoys collaborating with colleagues.

He could go back now, the company are giving staff the choice. However, with a young family, he feels obliged to "choose" the option that saves him the time and cost of the 1.25 hour commute. He can't voluntarily deprive the family of £3000+ pa and not be around to help with after school activities, chores etc.

How can there ever be a definitive answer when everyone's circumstances are so different? For me, it's pretty cost neutral

Food at work is heavily subsidised and great quality, WFH for me means ending to Mail plan, shop, cooks and wash up a lot more than working in the office. Travel to gym and leisure activities which used to be on the work campus.

DH is retired so heating is on at home all day anyway.

Saving on fuel for the commute.

WFH is more expensive for me, my office is a mile from my house, I can either walk there or drive which costs almost nothing, I have a free parking space if I need it. WFH means the heating is on this time of year, I'm making cups of tea, using my own electricity for my computer, charging monomers, lights etc. Usually if we are both at work everything is switched off for at least 8 hours

It's not about the money for me it's the time.

2 hours a day commuting, 4 days a week, I get a full working days worth of hours back. Before Covid I had thought I was going to have to drop to 3 days a week, instead I have been able to stay at 4 and flex my hours. Its meaning we get the best of both worlds and I'm happier and more dedicated to my work as a result.

My flat isn't suitable for two adults to WFH permanently, as it's too small, especially with all of DS's baby clobber around. We are also from a culture where long visits from family are the norm, so that's yet more pressure on our living space. Our setup means that hybrid working makes more sense for us. We would have to move to a bigger place and leave our London neighborhood/take out a bigger mortgage if both DH and I had to WFH permanently,rather than managing quite happily in a flat as a family of three. So in a roundabout way, yes, WFH would be more expensive for us

Definitely cheaper for me. I was paying £85 a month for parking at work and filling my car up every 10 days which is now £75 a pop. Only have to fill up once a month if that now. I always took packed lunch and don’t drink coffee so didn’t spend on that. DH walked to work so no saving for him.

Our gas and electric usage has definitely increased but the cost of that is less than my parking really so it’s fine.

Now both our offices have made WFH permanent we have to either buy a bigger house or one of us (me, as I earn less) quit. So yeah, that’s a big expense.

I agree that you cant just say its cheaper for everyone to work from home. For us, the commute was short and not expensive so its been offset by heating and needing a dedicated space.

Different for everyone. I certainly don’t tell every person I interact with that wfh is easier and cheaper, because everbody’s circumstances are different. It’s cheaper and easier for me. I’m early 50s, married with grown up DCs and have good friendships. I have experienced the office socialising stuff and climbing the ladders, but am now happy to be away from the cut throat and office politics that working in the office brings. But I absolutely understand if might be different for a young twenty something, starting out in their career, and wanting to build a social network and pursue career ambitions, and who doesn’t want to be couped up at home 5 days a week.

I bought a heated throw so I didn’t have to heat the whole house in winter.
I save on bus fares and lunch. Spend more on broadband though!

For a lot of couples, one going to the office doesn't mean no power use during the day. I could WFH but I don't want to. DH WFH so we need the heating on anyway. You add my petrol, it's definitely more for me to go into the office but 2 months on our dining table was enough.

Not everyone has long commutes where they feast upon pret everyday wearing their new jigsaw work clothes- quite London centric thinking

Not just London.

I have worked in offices on trading estates for over 20 years in Yorkshire, so my commute has always involved a lot of motorway driving, plus the fiddly bits at either end. TBH I have never lived near my workplace, as no workplace I have worked at has anywhere nice to live nearby.

I am one of the fortunate ones. DCs had already started to leave home so we had space for me to have an office. WFH means that I save significantly on commute costs. I have started a new job where I will be expected to be in the London office 1 day per week. This will cost around £45/day but is more than offset by being paid a London salary.

Interesting set of replies. It is definitely more expensive for me who used to cycle to work.

Some days I love the fact I can get on with my work uninterrupted. I schedule a 930, 20 mins max, chat with my team every day outside meetings for specifics.

Other days I feel really lonely. I live alone with DC who aren't here all the time. I don't have a big friendship circle since I moved here and struggle to make the time to do stuff after work long hours. I don't enjoy that element of it.

Overall I think it balances out, I can go to an 8:30 class at the gym and start at 10/work later in the day or do some at the weekend if I need to (I did that anyway but without being able to justify going to the gym).

Someone upthread mentioned security - most responsible organisations will have dealt with that. My employer arranged for a VPN/lots of additional security measures around IT. Same with not everyone can do it arguments - that has always been the case depending on your job.

One or two days a week in the office is an ok balance for me.

Re security, our IT department are really hot on this. We have a VPN, and have to regularly change our passwords.

It has been expensive for us. DH used to take bike into his London office so there are no savings on commute costs. Our electricity and heating use increased as well as having to replace equipment more often as work don’t provide everything.

I have to discuss sensitive information over the phone, which means I can’t have any children in the house at all during my working hours, which has made childcare more difficult as my mum used to pick them up from school/nursery and look after them at our house 2 evenings a week.

I don't know anybody who is unhappy with WFH. My husband has saved a small fortune as well as not having to sit in traffic for 2 hours everyday !!!.

@RampantIvy

Re security, our IT department are really hot on this. We have a VPN, and have to regularly change our passwords.

That doesn’t resolve the issue of conversations though.

All of our doctors WFH during the first lockdowns and had virtual consultations with patients whilst their partners/kids were home. They had patient files at home. It was a huge exercise trying to establish the data protection risks of that way of working.

That doesn’t resolve the issue of conversations though.

I hadn't thought of that. I guess it depends on the home set up. In my case I have turned a spare bedroom into an office where I can close the door. Although, I don't work in healthcare so I don't have any conversations where confidentiality is important.

There's WFH and "WFH", really. The latter being the done-on-the-cheap version with no equipment supplied, no H&S assessment, no security assessment (the list goes on).

I wrote a whole series of policies for WFH for my employer back in 2010, when I started doing it, and it was already getting to be old hat then. So I find myself questioning how it still seems to be in any way new for anyone. I just wonder what those businesses will do when they learn that Telex isn't a thing anymore ?