To hate the Daily Mail and its anti WFH vendetta

[catsliketowearsocks]

There is yet another DM story doing the rounds today about people 'working from beach'. Apparently it's council worker this time rather than civil servants. I work for a council and we would not be able to live abroad as we have impromptu office meetings, but even if we wanted to for the short term (like, for a family emergency or flight issues) we would have to apply for permission due to cybersecurity rules.

The DM would like to ban WFH which is just nasty. There may be a small number who take the piss but I don't believe that's the norm. WFH has vastly improved my life and mental health.

I'm willing to bet many DM journalists work remotely.

I'm willing to bet many DM journalists work remotely.

Of course they do. Most Daily Mail journalists are bright people and don’t write what they actually believe - it’s all based on what will get clicks from riling up their readership base. Same with Telegraph etc - what will wind up X and get them to click this article?

Not to mention retiring at 60 or 65, instead of the ever-moving retirement goalposts we have nowadays.

Increased wfh is bad for the newspaper industry in general, because so many commuters bought papers as part of their routine, something to do on the train or bus. I interpret all coverage with this in mind.

The "hard working" narrative really pisses me off. They were only able to achieve their lifestyles by moving to a debt based economy. Essentially, they created growth and prosperity for themselves by leveraging the labour of future generations.

I benefit from hybrid working (and did so before the pandemic tbh) but full time WFH does result in a loss of certain benefits that office based collaboration brings. As ever there is a balance.

Is it the Daily Mail only?
The FT has an article about banks trying to get staff in, including Lloyds who are giving free food to entice workers in twice a week.
Like all good things, WFH is being ruined by a small number of chancers and a general air of expectation which is not a good look.

DH is public sector and they're moving premises soon as they lease their current office. The new office they're moving to only has capacity for two thirds of the staff so hybrid working is not only available, it's encouraged. He got an email just this morning asking what his preferred work pattern is and saying that he can WFH a minimum of two days a week if he so chooses. He's going to do two in the office, two at home and wildcard the other day depending on operational needs. Some people in his team want to do every day at home and only go into the office when necessary, others want to work solely from the office, others are doing a mix of the two.

This level of flexibility benefits the workplace because it makes it more accessible to employees who are facing barriers to work. It supports a better home-life balance and of supports better mental health by placing control into the employees' hands.

I don’t like the Daily Mail but do think that WFH is causing lots of issues. I can’t speak to anyone in the Tax Office, despite phoning them repeatedly for the last 3 months. I emailed them in April about an issue and finally had a letter of acknowledgment last Friday, almost 4 months after sending them a query. It remains unresolved and they owe me some money. Their workers need to get themselves back to the office!

Lloyds have also wrapped up changes in working patterns and hours with the hybrid work / come in 2 days a week rule.

People who work part time longer days eg 8-5 8h days are being told to either do 7h for 4 days a week for a pay cut or increase to 7h for 5 days, but the company still want flexibility to ask for cover on early and later start and finish times ie 8-4, 10-6, etc so it’s not like they are only open 9-5. Really hard hitting on part timers who have had a pattern in place, often for years. Union is fighting it.

That's not WFH causing that though, it is not having effective systems or enough staff to deal with demand. If there were double the trained staff to manage the incoming calls then it wouldn't matter where they were working from would it?

@Savoury "Like all good things, WFH is being ruined by a small number of chancers and a general air of expectation which is not a good look"

No it isn't. It's being deliberately ruined by the Tories because of their vested interest in the property industry.

We need ulez apparently to help the environment, but people working from home, keeping them off the road… absolutely not! I would go as far to say, if a company can function with employees wfh, then they have a responsibility to allow them to. Remember how clear the roads were, and how cheap the fuel was, in lockdown.

Don’t read the articles. Seriously clicking on them gives them data which means their readers like those articles. I’m a civil servant, I don’t think anyone realistically works from a beach as you can’t even see your screen for a start! I tried Garden working in covid and it didn’t work. The DM just like to whip the general public into hysteria

It's not just the Daily Heil, it's the Times as well. They are obviously very worried about their investments in offices. I am not sure why - most people are back 2-3 days a week so it's not as if the offices are empty.

Also people don't like anything that helps women or people with or caring for people with health conditions or disabilities.

James Whale in the Daily Express had a similar article a couple of weeks ago, saying that more HMRC employees are now WFH than at the height of the pandemic. Really? When every single office was closed. That's impossible.
He was also banging on about no one being available to answer the phone because people are doing the school run and hanging out washing. He clearly doesn't understand how call centres work and how heavily monitored the advisors are. Every single minute has to be accounted for.
We're required to be in the office at least 3 days a week and while some people stretch that a bit it's mostly observed. There are stats pulled for each department weekly and questions are asked if you haven't met your quota.
It really pisses me off especially since he probably claimed on several of the covid initiatives that the very same HMRC workers processed for him, while WFH, to make sure he could maintain his cushy lifestyle.

I’m sure all civil servants are setup to take calls from home. It took a few days to switch our call centre to home working. So whatever the reason they aren’t answering your call has nothing to do with them working at home. Our staff do more work at home, their stats are a bit lower on office days (we do 40% and so do most of government, or more) as they are encouraged to ‘collaborate’. Some local authorities haven’t returned to the office at all, but again I don’t think it has any bearing on output of work. Like everything you’ll get a few chancers who want to sit and watch Netflix but the vast majority of people who WFH on a regular basis do just as much (if not more) work than they’d do in the office. No travel time, no chats in the kitchen, many work a longer day as don’t have to factor in cancelled or delayed trains to their day. I think those against it have no idea really

Our council are working from home still. Council tax went up 10% this time. They're in a financial hole after six months of £ thirty million. Their new £fifty million office is empty, their old offices lie unused. As do other council properties libraries, a cafe on the seafront. A huge industrial unit they built and can't use because the floor is unsuitable, it's full of ppe from covid at the moment.

So as you can imagine there's a lot of simmering resentment here and WFH gets thrashed as the cause.

On commercial property values, TBF it is more likely to be your pension fund that has an interest in commercial pooperty keeping its value rather than Telegroph journalists. Pension funds like commercial property for the historically stable and long term returns.

The Telegraph is exactly the same for ridiculous anti wfh stories. I’ve just assumed their pension funds are invested in office blocks, and places like Canary Wharf.

The owners of these papers are huge, real estate-owning capitalists. They need central London to stay profitable, which WFH puts at risk. COVID normalised WFH, which many of us had already been doing for years, but it killed off city centre sandwich shops and cafes. There's an opportunity now for small businesses to open business cafes so WFH-ers can have a change of scenery - but that will not become as hugely profitable as, say, Prêt was, or at least not for a long time.

@UnfortunateTypo not just their pension fund - probably yours and mine too.

It is definitely possible to create a good team atmosphere and develop new staff in a hybrid setting.

I would also say that what the new hybrid and remote working has done is enable people who live outside of London and city districts to further their careers so it has allowed talent in deprived areas of the country to work in sectors previously inaccessible from a geographical perspective.

How do you think working at home is affecting this?

All HMRC post is received centrally, scanned and distributed electronically.

All the files and notes are online.

So how is where they are sat affecting it?

HMRC delays are because the workforce was slashed in half since 2005.

If you call what was my desk number, it will come up on my computer wherever I am working and I can answer it. I don't have an actual phone on my desk any more.

WFH isn't the problem. Failure to set up the phone system to route calls to Teams is.

I don’t think getting people back to the office is a capitalist conspiracy to support commercial property.

For every owner of commercial property, there is another company that benefits from reduced property rental costs. It is a zero sum game as far as capitalism is concerned.

Many benefit from WFH. However, I would venture that more suffer from it. As a PP said, it is a balance. Some flexibility is great but too much is a negative. Most new studies support this, both in terms of productivity and emotional well being.