To request WFH after Mat Leave ends

[Workdilemmahelp]

Hello, just want some thoughts & advice:

Before mat leave I was working in the office 5 days a week, in my final month of pregnancy I worked from home full time (was advised by HR due to working in healthcare/covid risk)

I am due to return to work in a few months and previously emailed in to see if I could WFH 3x a week, and office x2 due to nursery costs - I can only really afford to send DS twice a week. My mum is able to help look after DS on days I WFH, but cannot help full time as she also works mornings and late afternoons.

HR have said it is not fair on other staff and to work effectively I would need to be in the office more days than I WFH.

AIBU? What can I do?

So you are either neglecting your baby, your work, or probably both.

Even the easiest of babies still needs attention and interaction.

Sounds like you’ll have to ask for part time

You can’t work from home if looking after a baby and you’ve said that your mum can’t do the whole day.

It’s also quite reasonable for them to ask you to be in the office more than at home and to show you have childcare for the entire time when you are at home.

Can you ask for reduced hours so that your mum’s help will be enough?

Amazing. So many spins on this from people trying to 'manage' with babies and childlren to WFH. My view is that if you are trying to work with kids, is simply not fair on kids or employer or colleagues, even on 'odd' occassions like others have mentioned. Even if you have permission it's not right. There needs to be agreed working hours and non working hours where children can be looked after. A clean line between those times. Trying to make it work feels like a piss take.

My bad. OP says ‘healthcare’, I interpreted that as NHS instead of private. Still doesn’t change any of my other points.

Not only would this be extremely irritating for your colleagues, its so unprofessional and bad for your baby to have that screen time. The worst thing with these mums who are "wfh", is that they're not working but even worse being a super shit parent. Babies shouldn't be there when it's convenient for you in between emails. Like a PP said, even the easiest baby needs interaction. This is horrible to read. Your poor child.

Well your employer is not supporting everybody else then are they? The colleagues that have to do a proper job and probably pick up your slack too are being hugely taken advantage of whilst you pretend to work. Hopefully somebody will either wise up or there will be a complaint and you are told to sort yourself out.

It’s actually disgraceful that your employers are letting you get away with this. As well as the other employees who are being taken advantage of, the owners of the business / shareholders / tax payers or whatever are being shafted because you are being paid to do a half arsed job.

No wonder many employers don't like WFH with pisstakers like this around!

I don't understand these angry Mumsnetters who think it's unfair if a company allows wfh with children.
How do you know others are picking up the slack if they can't work properly? Not every job has team shared work
My job is all stuff I do on my own, whether I'm the office or at home - no one would be forced to pick up my slack. It's up to me to manage that workload. So I imagine if people are managing to wfh with children without if affecting them or their workload then it's okay

Personally my 1 year old makes it impossible but I'm not ignorant enough to believe it means it's impossible for everyone and that there aren't any workarounds.

@willithappen that's the point. There should be no workarounds. People should have clear boundaries between work and home and shouldn't fudging one or the other. We have one or the other first; a job or a child. If we then decide want the other as well, then you have to factor that into your life by perhaps getting a job that allows someone to work hours around childcare, pay for childcare or something else more logical and practical.

It appears that people feel that they have a given right to both and that both potentially have to suffer due to selfish workarounds or selfish people.

People generally know about their situations well in advance and have time to plan and prepare.

@WillTimeCome unless you know the specifics of peoples jobs and what's required from them then I don't think you can't accurately comment like that.

You've missed my point entirely. The bit where is says you have one or the other first.

I have a colleague who does the school run and pick up.

They will not pay for after school club ( understand the cost involved).

This means they leave work whether office or WFH at 2.30pm

They then 'make up' the time in the evening. But this means between our normal working hours up until 5pm they are not available for meetings , enquires etc.

Very annoying especially in relation to arranging meetings but this has been allowed to happen by their line manager.

It's not one off it's everyday !

I recognise that employers want to be seen to be accommodating and inclusive but core hours are 10 to 4 in post Covid world and you are expected to be available during that time.

Taking piss.

You are speaking rubbish saying you can only have one or the other 🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️
Strangely enough we all need money to live, even when having children. You can't expect people to have enough money to not work for three years.
I'm not missing your point out, I just think you are being ridiculous

Again, you have not read my comments have you. I didn't say you can only have one or the other did I? Please quote me if you can find that, however you will have a hard time finding it because that's not what I said.

I said that people already have one or the other usually (job or child) and if they want the other, then they should find an appropriate solution, for example CHILDCARE, and not try to do both at the same time. So, either find a job with, or request, proper hours that allows someone to stop working and certain times to care for their child.

Read my posts properly rather than accusing me of writing content that I didn't. It's really not difficult to understand and worked very well before the WFH boom.

You can't expect people to have enough money to not work for three years

What do you think happened before WFH became widespread @willithappen ? Do you think before covid people just easily saved up three years salary, or so you think they planned and paid for the childcare that they needed?

It is not an employer’s job to facilitate an employee to avoid paying for childcare. This ridiculous sense of entitlement will only make employers even less likely to hire women.

Surely you have savings when you plan to have a child. Would be extremely irresponsible not to. What if there is a reason you can't work after giving birth. Can't imagine leaving myself that vulnerable. Here's hoping the baby is healthy.

Very much depends on your job and how flexible and interdependent your work is with others in your workplace. I'll be honest I'm not sure there are that many jobs that would be compatible with what OP is suggesting.

Except in extremis I would not accept my team working whilst looking after young children. They would not be able to work effectively. If I had a request from a maternity leave returner for WFH so she could look after baby during that time the answer would be 'no'. We could discuss flexible working, reduced hours, compressed hours etc but during working time she would have to be available for work not looking after baby I'm afraid.

Savings are a luxury many people do not have. I think you perhaps need to check your privilege here. If there is a reason why these people can't work it's either a second job for the other parent or benefits.

I am not privileged. Just sensible enough to know you need savings to have a child. Having a child is a luxury that people need to decide if they can afford. I can't afford one so don't have one.

Well said 👏

Ridiculous

For me throughout the years, because I've had many colleagues who have children and only a couple of them take the piss, and we all know it. So it really irks me when I see people who are so blase about the whole thing. You only notice it when it impacts on your workload, otherwise why would you care. The latest was the one who said she would make the time up in the evening, never used to happen. Sure she'd show as 'online' but nothing ever actually got done.

I am not privileged. Just sensible enough to know you need savings to have a child. Having a child is a luxury that people need to decide if they can afford. I can't afford one so don't have one.

Very well said!

Why is it ridiculous to wait to have a child until you can afford one?
Not talking polo ponies and caviar here but basics like having a roof over your head and being able to feed them.

Have a quick look through MN - very many posts from people who were struggling financially before they had a child and are seemingly surprised when they are struggling even more after having one. If you care about your child (even a potential unconceived one) why would you not think about how you will look after them before you have them?