is my colleague unreasonable?

[ipal]

I am based in the North of England and I am on a fully remote employment contract for a company in London. The reason why the company recruited a fully remote team is because they find it difficult to hire people in London with my specific skill set. They have a team in London as well and before the pandemic this team worked in the office of my company in London. During the pandemic, everyone in London worked from home and now the company is asking everyone in London to return 2 days a week to the office and the remaining 3 days they can work at home. A London-based colleague of mine had a bit of a run-in with our boss during a zoom call, because she said she only wants to work at the office 1 day, not 2 days. Our boss told her in a nice but firm way that basically she has no other choice to work at the office for 2 days. Today we had a teamevent and she told me that she had asked for a meeting with our boss next week. She said that she will tell my boss it's unfair that she has to work 2 days in the office if there's other people like myself who are on a fully remote contract.

So I am wondering - is my colleague unreasonable or does she have a point? I can see both sides. On the one hand I think a company can set the rules of your employment. On the other hand I can understand her that she finds it hard commuting to the office in London and I think the company should work together with her.

What does mumsnet think?

Flipping heck has no one read the post? She's asking if her colleague is being unreasonable not "what should I do"

All this don't get involved advice, completely unsolicited.

Your colleague is not being unreasonable IMO.

There are 2 people where I work who were recruited close together during the pandemic.

By virtue of living nowhere near an office person A was given a home based contract. Person B lives half an hour from an office and so was given an office based contract.

Both have (successfully) worked remotely for the last 12-18 months.

Recently, our employer decided that those with office based contracts must go in 2-3 days per week. The reason given is that it has been deemed this is how they can be most effective in their roles.

Person A and person B do EXACTLY the same job in the same team. Person B has to go into an office 2-3 days per week "to be effective" but that doesn't apply to person A who never has to go into an office.

If I was person B I'd be royally pissed off.

Yeah she’s totally unreasonable but it reflects poorly on her, not you.

if she wants to change her contract terms then she needs to put in a flexible working application. That’s all really.

She can use any argument she likes but it is unlikely to work.

Yours is a very different contract to hers but if she wishes to argue the point let her.

Many people I know are loathe to be in the office more than 2 days a week.

I am just of the viewpoint that using the argument "it is unfair" is not a good argument to use when she talks with our manager

You're right it's not, but if she wants to make herself sound like a 3 year old that's on her

As PPs have said the key here is her contract, and while you were recruited on a fully WFH basis she wasn't
Nothing wrong with negotiating these things, but obviously the company's needs matter too and you may have no way of knowing how the London staff WFH worked out for the business

@ipal
I understand your perspectives, and if an agent can do what's required where ever they are, then what reasons can hq, require the asset to be in the office ?

It might be unfair , but what I learned so far in my career is that everything is based on business needs. Meaning my company didn't give me and some other colleagues remote contracts because they love us so much and wanted to do something nice for us. They struggled to hire people in London, that's why they were willing to hire people who live far away and can never come into the office. That doesn't mean they don't want people that live in London not to come in at all.

A company can treat people differently in that regard as wfh isn't a legal right.

If she is doing a role which can be done remotely she is not unreasonable to request WFH on the same terms as other people who do fully WFH.

If the business is struggling to recruit and the employee has in demand skills ultimately she might decide to walk.

But the business need to recruit people from outside London us not the same as the business need for people to be physically in the office, in fact the two are at odds with each other.

If you and your colleague are doing the same job and you are managing to do it perfectly well remotely, then what is the "business need" for your colleague to be in the office?

She's being unreasonable is she's pissed of at you, but she's not unreasonable to be pissed off with your employer and is perfectly within her right to have a discussion with management and try to renegotiate her contract.

As other have said, it's not really any of your concern though, let her crack on!

She can request it. The business doesn’t have to support it just because others do it. And they can remove any London premium from her pay if they do agree it.

Length of commute isn't an argument isn't really an excuse if she did it pre-covid.

Two days is still very flexible.

I think it's fine for her to refuse to go back into the office.
She can put her resume out and find something else that is WFH in case they say no.
That's what I'd do if I still worked for someone else. I'd just find something else and leave.

@MintJulia ypu mean your employer wants you to resume your pre pandemic working arrangement now that we are no longer in a pandemic?

I'm in a similar position to you in that I'm a northern outpost of a London team but I have a local office too. It takes me Ges to get into London for the odd team meeting and i am paid less than London staff in same role.

Are you not occasionally expected to travel to London at great inconvenience? Are you paid less? Your situation is nog comparable with a full time London based staff member. 2 days a week is more than reasonable.

Takes me ages

It's not unfair because it's part of her contract, and it's not part of yours. You were hired on different terms.

She can try to negotiate a new contract if she wants to.

I would just stay out of it if I were you, it doesn't concern you.

How successful she is at pushing back will be based on how likely they are to be able to replace her probably. I would expect them to remove London weighting though if she pushes to have remote working or going in less than the business are stipulating I'd expect them to take her London weighting. Of course that's a tough one as she lives in London so does have higher costs for rent etc, but it's calculated on where you work rather than where you live.

I am just of the viewpoint that using the argument "it is unfair" is not a good argument to use when she talks with our manager. It would be physically impossible for me to commute to London every day and for many others.

I would see it differently. Are you doing the same role? If it is possible for you to do that same role 100% remotely, why isn't it possible for her to?

Either you are not meeting the requirements of the role fully but thats being tolerated in your case & not hers (not fair?), or she doesn't actually need to be in the office and is being made to go in due to some ridiculous managememt desire for presenteeism (stupid).

No, I was recruited during lockdown, and work location is Remote.

I go in once a week to maintain relationships. He wants two days, but that's an extra £250 a week in train & parking.

We'll work it out eventually - He'll probably meet me half way in terms of annual pay rise.

I'm inclined to agree. DH used to commute to London and he has made a huge saving in commuting costs by working from home, even going in twice a week he's still saving.

Well, quite. But it's not an unreasonable request in of itself.

I think she'll have to expect her her employer stick to the terms of the contract, it opens up a can of worms otherwise
Where she goes with that is her decision

I’m a bit tired of people using “commute” as a reason for not wanting to abide by requests for people to return to the office. It’s a lifestyle choice ultimately. I live close to my office, and made a choice to do so as I don’t like to commute for hours. Others didn’t used to mind it…

We should be focused on having mature conversations about the future of workplaces and working hours, and people dragging their puppy, childcare and long commute muddies the water.

@MintJulia apologies in that case, they shouldn’t try to change the terms in which you were employed, that’s crap. Hope you get a decent outcome x

This.

I appreciate some people are finding it shit. But if you were employed in an office based role as part of your contract, then it is what it is.

Either negotiate, find a new role, or suck it up.