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?

I personally don't think commute is a good enough reason because she knew what her commute would be when she applied for the job and accepted it on the understanding that she could get herself there as required by the company. I think it does absolutely no harm for her to ask the question but if they've said no then I think it's unreasonable for her to continue pushing it. If you've come in on a contract that was always going to involve remote working then that's completely different. The company aren't obligated to uphold her request. As others have said I'd stay out of it completely and let her argue it herself if that's what she wants to do .

I expect you (or someone equivalent to her in a remote role) is paid less. Presumably she can ask to go onto a remote contract and take the associated reduction in pay.

But agree with others, it's not any of your business.

It is for her to raise in a separate conversation. Personal view is that two days a week from what you describe adds little to the business that could not be achieved by one day a week, perhaps varied as to which day.

You were recruited on a fully remote contract, people can be on different arrangements.

Is there a difference in your employment contracts? Are you a fixed-term contractor and she a permanent employee? If so then I think it's reasonable for you to be fully remote and her go into the office sometimes. As an employee she benefits from being employed in more ways than just being paid to do a job, so it's fair for her to contribute time in the office - there is a lot more benefit to both staff and company from being in the office than just physical presence.
If you are both equal in employment terms then I think she is reasonable to raise it. You might have specialist skills that are difficult to recruit but if they are willing to make reasonable adjustments for you then they should for everyone, regardless of location. But as I say, if you are a fixed-term contractor then fair enough for only you to stay fully remote.
(For context, I'm a fully remote fixed-term contractor)

Her commute is not the employer's problem.

We had quite a few people on home-based contracts before covid - this means if they attend the office, they claim travel expenses (although currently you need to get such travel approved by someone high up as a money-saving thing.) Some people were already on contracts with adjusted hours allowing them to work round school pick-ups and things like that.

Most of us were on normal 40 hours a week, 8- 17:30 contracts, but in practice, had a lot of flexibility (I usually worked from home once a week; starting/finishing times often varied, which HR encouraged because it meant we're not all sitting in traffic queues at the same time, so improves our green credentials, and departments as a whole are available for longer.)

Since covid, those of us on office-based contracts have changed to hybrid contracts, which means we are expected to ne in at least one day a week (some departments are teo or three days a week.) If you don't want to do that, you are meant to renegotiate your contract to a home-based one. In practice, I don't think many have, they're just not coming in. However, we are a department which is spread across about 7 or 8 offices in 5 countries, so we are almost never in the same place at the same time, and have been accustomed to using video conferencing since the technology has been available for it. (Other departments are different, especially legal and financial, which tend to be in-country; I'm tech.)

There's been guidance that office days should focus on face-to-face meetings and collaboration - if you're just going to spend the day on the phone, you might as well be at home.

But ot all comes down to the business and what they want. If someone can show the benefit to the business of being on a home-based contract, then put in a request for that, but the cost (time or money) of an individual's commute isn't something they'll be interested in.

Businesses insisting people come back into the office when there is no actual need are missing an opportunity to give employees a cost saving without any cost to the business.

This could save the business in terms of giving big cost of living pay raises.

It does cost the business to have people working at home.

*Home workers are entitled to claim travel
costs to attend work sites.
*if they have equipment needs, eg a specialist chair or desk the organisation needs to supply 2 - one at home and one at work.
*if the employee falls over at home it’s potentially an industrial accident over which they have no control
*increased sick leave/claims from employees who have worked hunched up over a dining table and now have MSK issues or agoraphobia
*They have to pay to heat and light and equip offices with 20% (or less) occupancy.
*It doesn’t help green credentials when fewer people travel but then heat their houses rather than
one office.

Presumably she is contracted and paid to work in the London office, so it is not reasonable of your colleague to refuse to come in. Also assume the commute will have been the same as before the pandemic and, if she moved further away, she needs to live with that additional travel time as a consequence.

I know personally I am more productive at home but value my in-office days to create and maintain relationships with a wide range of my colleagues who I do not normally work directly with and some tasks can be done much better in person.

Equipment cost is the same whether someone is home working 5 days or 1 day per week

Never heard of accident risk being used as a reason for people being pulled back into the office

IME people take less sick leave when working from home as they are better able to manage minor ailments from home

It’s a H+S nightmare if you look at the legal implications.

(I’m a HR director.)