To be reluctant to pay travel costs again

[Subaru4336]

Pre-pandemic I used to have a 4+hr commute, and worked in the office 3 days/week, leaving home ~5am and returning home after 7pm. Because I was travelling 3 days a week, an annual season ticket was the cheapest option.

Fast forward to now, and my company are wanting to mandate a minimum of 1 day/week in the office. This would represent a cost of ~£300/mth, which I obviously haven't been paying for the last 2.5yrs.

If I were to go to the office, I would still spend a significant time on Teams calls, as my team are spread across various locations (and have different offices as their local hubs).

We've had below inflation payrises for at least the last 10 years, and so I'm feeling somewhat resentful that my household budget has to take a £300/mth hit, on top of all the other rising costs, just to sit somewhere different on Teams, and be 'present' in the office.

Am I being unreasonable?!

Presumably no one here knows you so you wanted opinions from people who don’t know you? Otherwise I’m not sure what the point posting was. And that’s a perfectly valid opinion you’ve been given. It’s unfair to criticise for not responding to information you haven’t given.

The information you’ve given doesn’t change my view either - 1 day a week is eminently reasonable of your employer. If you think it’s going to be a waste of your time then make it not. Arrange to meet people face to face, do those tasks which do benefit from meeting in person and have the majority of your Teams calls on all the other days when you’re at home.

Or look for something fully remote, rather than just extremely flexible.

And (disclaimer I don’t know you; you don’t know me, blah blah blah) a 4 hour round trip and £7000 travel costs implies a high salary in return otherwise, frankly, why would you bother. So posters handwringing about cost of living are missing the mark.

I knew you would get some on here saying the employer can ask you to do whatever they want. It is standard on MN.
I would argue your case first of all.
If you get nowhere, look for another job.
Presenteeism is old-fashioned, you want a forward-looking firm. Apart from anything else, an old-fashioned place is far less likely to survive the coming deep recession.

I asked for opinions on whether it was unreasonable to be resentful about being mandated to do 1 day/week in the office, not snarky comments about what I may or may not have spent the saved costs of commuting on.

I also didn't ask for opinions/assumptions on what I earn, so I won't respond either way on that 🙂

Always good to have an employer who moves with the times. The world HAS changed and businesses which evolve do best (and I am generally an proponent of if it's not broken don't fix it).

we have a climate crisis, why add pointless commutes? Companies have green targets, reduce emissions by not forcing people to travel for no reason

this is perhaps the most cogent reason of all!

Neither you nor employer is in the wrong

You can ask to stay wfh and see what they say, if they say no then decide if you want to stay

This completely.

Yes, you are being unreasonable and entitled if you think it's unfair.

Being annoyed by it and wishing you didn't have to, that's understandable.

YABU but it's your call if you think it's unfair. Find another job that's fully remote?
Your employer is entitled to require you in the office. You're not a prisoner there.

4 days at home is incredibly flexible.

YANBU but, you used to pay this. It's very nice to have been able to save it and not to go in, but ultimately up to your employer to decide where you should work. That said, you should feel able to discuss it reasonably. We are under no pressure to go back; some people want to, others don't, or will go back less, but it's all being openly and collaboratively discussed to get to a compromise that works and doesn't result in lower productivity. The alternative is to go for a fully remote role, either within the company or at another (there are loads of remote jobs - far more than used to be the case). So have a proper conversation with your boss - show the pros and cons, prove the work won't suffer and show that you will be happier/more productive not doing a long commute and see where that takes you.

Youre not losing anything, you just gained something for a couple of years.

She used to pay this travel cost. But prices are rising fast. We are not in the same situation as we were two years ago.

They're not unreasonable to hold you to terms that you signed up to (in fact, what you're being asked to do is less than that).

Equally you can leave for any reason you like. Up to you.

My thoughts exactly, that £300 a month could be used for the ever rising cost of utilities, food, fuel, general living. And OP has already she's used the money saved to help her brother.

Or it could be used to travel for no reason or benefit to anyone 🤷‍♀️

Yanbu

If they've not given you a pay rise in line with inflation and with the rising cost of living, I think that the cost of it is not irrelevant. The fact you could afford it 2.5 years ago is meaningless if on real terms you are now being paid less. £300 per month is a lot. Could you negotiate a pay rise to make this a more manageable expense if they definitely need you in once a week and if they don't then the other options above such as fewer days per month or 1 block per month (if that made the train fare cheaper) would be second best option (while you look for something fully remote.

They are being flexible already and you have a contract of employment with them. You can ask for more flexibly but ultimately you need to suck it up or find a different job.

If you are in an industry with shortages of staff, remind them of that.
Too many employers who have staff shortages have only themselves to blame.

Except her employer.

Is there an actual point of the OP being in the office? It clearly isn't for team collaboration, as the rest of her team are based at various other locations. And they aren't all going to a fixed location on a fixed day. Is she providing on site support on those days (eg covering a reception?), presumably not.

So what is the point? What is the added value to either her or her employer?

I'd be tempted to email the line manager

"I'm interested to explore the added benefits of commuting to the office on a weekly basis - will our team meet on a set day at a set location? I can appreciate how this may have positive effects on our team as a whole. My understanding is that we can choose which day/ won't all be in together, so I'm curious to find out the nature of the need for us to work office based each week. Happy to discuss further in our next 1.2.1"

You aren't being unreasonable to prefer being at home.

However, your bills aren't the concern of your employer. You're not incurring a higher cost than previously, and they have every right to require attendance on however frequent a basis as they so desire.

Thing is, it is hard to demonstrate measurable benefits from going into the office, but it's the small seemingly inconsequential things that make a difference.

Understanding what a different team does through talking to someone and identifying a potential impact. Your boss being able to hear you at work and understand how you go about things. Having a laugh with workmates in person.

It's an expensive time drain. I get it. But I don't think it's as simple as saying people never need to go in or once a month is sufficient to build an office presence.

It's an expensive time drain. I get it. But I don't think it's as simple as saying people never need to go in or once a month is sufficient to build an office presence.

I agree, but I also don't think it's as simple as saying be in the office 1 day/wk as a blanket rule.

My line manager is based in an office 200 miles away, this is normal within our wider team, I've always communicated with him by phone and now Teams.

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz this is the question, what is the actual point of being in the office? More than happy to go in as and when required, but to have it mandated seems somewhat bonkers!

It’s one day a week. Hardly presenteeism if you’re not there 80% of the time.

I don’t think one day a week is unreasonable at all but there are plenty of ft wfh opportunities if it doesn’t suit. I think it’s unfair to try to argue this on the basis of your travel costs when you knew where the office was when you accepted the job and you are only being asked to return for a third of the time you were in the previously.

@LuaDipa of course it’s still presenteeism if it’s just going in for the sake of it. It only being one day doesn’t change the fact that it’s pointless.

Exactly.