Why does it seem most are against WFH?

[user6776]

Just read an article that has said civil servants are now to work from the office at least 3 days a week. I'm not a civil servant, but my company adopts the same approach. WFH is generally frowned upon and they are all about being in the office as much as possible.

I prefer WFH. Less time commuting, more productive as no office distractions, can get stuff done on my lunch hour. It's a no brainer for me. I agree going in the office periodically to meet with the team and for important meetings but other than that I don't benefit much

What does everybody else think?

Because most people aren’t more productive. Junior staff need training, staff need to interact with clients, issues with confidentiality. Unfortunately people need to be in the offices if they want career progression. But the main reason you really need to be in the office is you can be replaced by someone in the Phillipines or India for a fraction of what you are being paid. And it’s starting to happen. There are lots of people that won’t go above and beyond, walking in at 9, and leaving right at 5 that won’t have jobs for much longer. It’s hard to fill jobs at the moment, and everyone seems to think they can do as the please as they can’t be replaced. But it’s changing, unemployment is low at the moment, but it will be at a high soon.

That's such a funny regurgitation of a Jacob Rees mogg mentality @Somewhereoverthersinbowweighapie

As if trotting obediently to your pod every day will stop them getting rid of you

Join a union instead

It does kind of amaze me that people are still trotting out that offshoring routine, nearly 4 years after the mass enforced move to remote work.

March 2020 was quite a while ago. If a job is being done remotely now, it probably has been for at least three and a half years. Maybe more, since some people worked remotely before covid. Even the least observant boss has had enough time to clock that a job can be done from anywhere.

If it's not been offshored by now, at a time when we literally can't fill a lot of vacancies, there's a reason for that. Yet apparently we're going to all of a sudden see increased offshoring once it becomes easier to recruit people in the UK? Mmmkay. The copium is strong in this one, although the knowledge of salary demands for English speaking professionals in India not so much.

Every time i see such discussions online most people seem to be pro working from home so i disagree with you thread title and not everyone is as productive as they like to think.

Working your actual hours is something to be applauded, it's about time we get rid of the must do x unpaid overtime to show we are committed. Most jobs won't be offshore as this would have been done by now, but being 'visible' in the office will no doubt help progression even though this shouldn't be the way. Lots of junior members of staff probably feel like they need to tow the line to not upset the teams they have joined, we did an anon survey and 95% wanted more time in the office, compared to roughly zero saying this in meetings etc. It's a balance I think, half in office and half at home IF there's reasonable office space and people knew when they applied things could change, and if there's no adjustments needed for someone.

I do a mix of wfh and in the office (about 50-50). So do most of the people I work with. I never see any of the weird behaviours mentioned on here about people taking calls while driving, kids running about, disappearing for hours on end. Literally never.

I think a mix of both is ideal. But it depends on your job and your stage of life.

Working your actual hours is something to be applauded, it's about time we get rid of the must do x unpaid overtime to show we are committed.

Quite. The internalised capitalism in some people is just pitiful.

I work in the civil service from home. The team I’m in is small and geographically split so when I work from the office I’m never with a single member of my team which makes it seems quite pointless. Same with the rest of the team. None of us are close enough to each other to go into the same office.

As an aside, I think WFH exclusively badly impacts women in terms of career progression - because it ends up being mostly women who want to WFH to fit around childcare and school hours.

This is so true.

There is a difference between three days a week and say one day, with things such as one to one meetings with your manager and team events/meetings being done face to face.

The problem with this argument is that it's clearly underpinned by an assumption that wfh women would be working in person if they weren't working remotely. And that's not necessarily true.

That is a mixture of scaremongering (offshoring will be done regardless, WFH makes no difference), specific examples that can be dealt with flexibly (not all training requires face to face for example) or things that simply don't apply to all jobs (clients, what clients?).

For roles in my team, hybrid working works best, a mixture of home, office and site working. Home working is much better for staff who need to have a period of reduced distraction to focus on complex individual tasks. I have found that these are performed much better with fewer errors now that we have regular home working. I myself know that when I'm in the office I'm not going to get that kind of work done as I am constantly being interrupted. I still get interruptions at home but they tend to be for less trivial matters an smaller in number.

Office working seems to only be of benefit to me and my team where there needs to be complex team interaction such as workshops, idea generation meetings, certain types of training and performance meeting with contractors. You'll notice that these are all meeting-type scenarios. I see no value in someone coming in to the office to sit and do individual work at a desk.

We have operational sites so being present at them for specific task is also part of the job. This is made clear to all my team and is actually a really interesting part of the job.

In terms of developing team relationships and culture I've found that there are enough opportunities to be face to face in the work we do that I don't need to engineer more. I'm also particularly impressed with how younger members of my team are able to use remote technology very flexibly to have those kind of office "chats" that help build rapport.

I'm not saying that this approach will work for all and it really depends on what you are doing. However imposition of blanket rules that get rid of the wellbeing benefits of home working just so execs can feel better about themselves in a full office is not good leadership.

This has been the opposite in my experience. I've worked remote or hybrid for 5 years and my salary has increased by about 60% in that time. My career progression hasn't been hampered in any way. I have chosen to work for orgs that have a mature remote working policy, with teams across the globe. That probably makes a difference.

I have caring responsibilities and a good work/life balance. It works well for me and my family.

Is it? I know loads of men who WFH, particularly popular for a long time in the male-dominated tech sector.

Is it? I know loads of men who WFH, particularly popular for a long time in the male-dominated tech sector.

Are they doing it specifically for childcare reasons though? Are they taking on additional caring and household responsibilities?

WFH can be beneficial and work well for some sectors/people. In fact, I wfh 2 days a week pre-pandemic.

However, there is emerging research that shows that wfh policies result in women picking up more of the 'unpaid' work and can result in women specifically asking/choosing to wfh for childcare reasons.
There is a risk that the office becomes the new golf course and that women become excluded.

You only have to look at who was disproportionately negatively impacted by the pandemic 🤷🏼‍♀️

However, there is emerging research that shows that wfh policies result in women picking up more of the 'unpaid' work and can result in women specifically asking/choosing to wfh for childcare reasons.
There is a risk that the office becomes the new golf course and that women become excluded.

Again this is all based on the assumption that women who work remotely would be in the office if they didn't work from home. Which isn't true. I've yet to see any research that has adequately dealt with this issue, especially in the context of our childcare sector shrinking.

Additionally, you're quite clearly referring to a particular type of woman worker here. Why would a woman who knows she's got no interest in golf course type promotions attribute more value to theoretically being able to contend for those than to something that makes her life easier?

This has been the opposite in my experience. I've worked remote or hybrid for 5 years and my salary has increased by about 60% in that time. My career progression hasn't been hampered in any way. I have chosen to work for orgs that have a mature remote working policy, with teams across the globe. That probably makes a difference.

I think that does make a difference. I've wilted hybrid for years and it works well.
Where it's not quite working as well for women is when they're specifically choosing to WFH for either reduce childcare costs or not use childcare at all! All that's resulting in is women doing twice as much work while men continue to work in a way that suits them as individuals. ( not all obviously but I'm taking about trends)

What would really benefit women is for more men to work flexibly around family commitments.

I have caring responsibilities and a good work/life balance. It works well for me and my family.

It works really well for many, me included but I think the key is that it suits the job and it's how the job has always been.
I'm not trying to work AND do childcare at the same time.

No, nor am I.

And since I've split from my DC's father, he has been forced to take my career seriously (it isn't "pin money" - I earn as much as him!) as well as step up into more childcare responsibilities (I'm working overseas for a week and he's doing the school run and taking half days for that week - flexing to meet family responsibilities in ways many women do without thinking).

Remote work is still work, after all.

Again this is all based on the assumption that women who work remotely would be in the office if they didn't work from home. Which isn't true. I've yet to see any research that has adequately dealt with this issue, especially in the context of our childcare sector shrinking.

You make a good point. For some women, flexible/hybrid/WFH has meant that they have been able to enter the labour market.
While that is a positive, it isn't without its issues.
We know that women take on significantly more unpaid work than men and that they often choose (or have to) work flexibly to accommodate this. There is some interesting research on the illusion of choice when it comes to women's career development.
What would make the biggest difference would be more men working flexibly to do their fair share of the unpaid work.

Additionally, you're quite clearly referring to a particular type of woman worker here. Why would a woman who knows she's got no interest in golf course type promotions attribute more value to theoretically being able to contend for those than to something that makes her life easier?

Well yes, I'm talking about women's career development and the barriers that women face when trying to progress their careers. This is one potential barrier for some women in some sectors.
Not everyone wants that, I know that.

No, nor am I.

I never says you were.

And since I've split from my DC's father, he has been forced to take my career seriously (it isn't "pin money" - I earn as much as him!) as well as step up into more childcare responsibilities (I'm working overseas for a week and he's doing the school run and taking half days for that week - flexing to meet family responsibilities in ways many women do without thinking).

Exactly, we need more men to do this.

Remote work is still work, after all.

Absolutely!
I'm not against remote work or WFH. I just don't think it's always the panacea people suggest it is.

@Eleganz I really hope you are right. Wfh works for so many people. But I have seen firsthand how it’s changing. But I do hope it’s scaremongering.

Probably we all agree that it would be better for men to take on more unpaid caring work @ElaineMBenes. While it's important to talk about what needs to be changed, we do also need to make sure that doesn't come at the expense of minimising the importance of things women need now in order to manage the double shift we get lumbered with. The fact that women opting for flexibility don't do it in a vacuum absolutely doesn't mean that the flexibility or the other tools we use are bad for women in themselves. The analysis I've seen on the subject has generally fallen into this trap.

We need to also not use women in particular professional/managerial roles as shorthand for women full stop. There are class issues here.

Mix is best.

The fact that women opting for flexibility don't do it in a vacuum absolutely doesn't mean that the flexibility or the other tools we use are bad for women in themselves. The analysis I've seen on the subject has generally fallen into this trap.

I don't think anyone or any of the research is being so black and white. But we shouldn't ignore the implications of these tools on women's careers. It's important to acknowledge the positives and the potential negatives.

We need to also not use women in particular professional/managerial roles as shorthand for women full stop. There are class issues here.

Of course there are. However, this is MN thread, not a research paper or lecture.
I actually deliver lectures on this topic and it's impossible to cover on here what I'd cover in hours and hours worth of teaching.

I don't think anyone or any of the research is being so black and white. But we shouldn't ignore the implications of these tools on women's careers. It's important to acknowledge the positives and the potential negatives.

Yes, we should be discussing the issue in full. And saying that wfh exclusively badly impacts women in terms of career progression, as you initially did, is very much not doing that.

In a UK specific context, which obviously not all the research is (someone mentioned Stamford upthread) we have a particular problem with the childcare sector that needs to be properly acknowledged in any research. You mentioned the covid experience. What we learned then in lots of societies is that when there isn't childcare, it's the women who work less. That doesn't just apply in pandemics.

Of course there are. However, this is MN thread, not a research paper or lecture. I actually deliver lectures on this topic and it's impossible to cover on here what I'd cover in hours and hours worth of teaching.

It hardly needs research papers or lectures to acknowledge that the golf course thing only applies to some women workers, maybe not even a majority. You did it yourself in two sentences in your first reply to me!