To be filled with panic about WFH culture becoming a thing of the past?

[themusingsofaninsomniac]

prefacing with please read the context before blanket responses 😊

I am stressing away as I tend to do lately on the same topic. I have WFH since the pandemic, with the odd day or so in the office I am lucky to have full flexibility with.

I have Autism. I also have ADHD. The combo together is quite the clusterfuck to navigate as a newly diagnosed female. Essentially the pandemic shone a light on so much and I'm so grateful that it enabled me to seek diagnosis, as much as it's an ongoing struggle.

From working remotely since the beginning I've never felt more stable and successful in my career. I was able to secure a promotion into a field I'd never have had the confidence to try in a non-remote setting in the first place, and I've been fortunate to earn a fair bit more as a result.

I feel completely at ease in my own environment and with the ability to tailor things to what works well for me. Having that commute time back has helped my wellbeing, as has having my lunch breaks in my own home. I am in a routine that I feel helps my mental health and the challenges neurodiversity brings me massively.

My current employer is great but they are the type of company that won't be around forever unfortunately. And from a lot of media and on here etc, it's becoming obvious that things are shifting to either back in the office or a hybrid with a good half your days expected in the office.

This absolutely fills me with dread. I feel like it would turn my world upside down. I'm sure people who don't relate to this will think I'm being dramatic but change and environments outside of your own control are so so hard especially once you've had several years of the opposite.

I guess I'm just wondering where this leaves me. I still have a few friends who WFH but not in my industry. I'm not sure if there would be more flexibility for me, but I also worry about how that will reflect towards my colleagues and I don't want to get anyone's back up. I guess I'm catastrophising that if I need to find another job I'll never be able to maintain what is working so well for me.

Not sure what I'm seeking here to be honest - reassurance maybe or just help to navigate this and whether it's best to be upfront with new employers from the start, or whether that might reduce my chances of being hired. I've been told I don't present as autistic, or typical ADHD but I guess the mix of both means it's a lot more blended. Either way I have generally got good feedback from interviews so it would likely not be known unless I was transparent.

I'd especially like to hear from someone in a similar boat too, if there is anyone? Probably not at twenty to one on a weekday though I imagine 😅

Thanks to anyone who has read this to the end as I know that got wordy!

This is very true. At my last employer, WFH arrangements were condition on having worked 6 months on site, have an acceptable sick record and appraisals being good. Any breach of the last two and it was automatically revoked. It was also clear WFH was not a contractual right although legally I think that is dubious under the "custom and practice" rules

@MarieG10

''This is very true. At my last employer, WFH arrangements were condition on having worked 6 months on site, have an acceptable sick record and appraisals being good. Any breach of the last two and it was automatically revoked. It was also clear WFH was not a contractual right although legally I think that is dubious under the "custom and practice" rules''

Actually this could be seen as discriminatory as someone who has a long term health condition or a disability could potential have a higher sickness record. That is the problem with blanket policies...

Yes because it's that simple for an autistic person who struggles with finding and keeping a job.

Not necessarily unhelpful at all. A few of my clients started their own small businesses exactly because the traditional workplace didn't suit them. One is severely physically disabled, partially paralysed, who runs a successful "virtual office" business acting as a mailing address, telephone answering, domain hosting, etc. Personally, I run a small accountancy practice, never see clients in person, seldom even speak to any on the phone - 99% done via email, online etc. It's an "option" for people for whom the traditional office workplace doesn't work. For some, maybe for many, it's not going to be feasible, but for some, it's entirely doable and maybe something that the OP hadn't considered, hence the advice!

I would have thought people have less sick leave when WFH, not more. If you don't have to travel and in particular drive, you may well be able to do some work.

No, what happens is those who WFH are able to mask their true sickness rate and/or requests for short-notice leave to provide care for their children when said children are unwell in a way those who have to attend a workplace are unable to do.

Meaning those WFH are less likely to face (usually rigorous) absence management procedures than their office-based colleagues.

It creates an imbalance as to the perception of 'reliability' of employees WFH and those not afforded that privilege.

WFH allows me to work when too sick to commute but still able to do my desk work. If I have an IBS flareup and can't commute because I need to be able to use a loo with very little notice, I can still work from home.

For migraines, WFH helps a lot. Instead of losing the entire remainder of the day during an attack, I can take painkillers, go to bed, and be back at my desk a couple of hours later. Plus I don't have to battle public transport whilst temporarily partially-sighted and in considerable pain.

If I have a cold or COVID, I can work perfectly fine from home without giving it to my colleagues.

All the above ailments are reasons why I would end up taking entire days of sick time if office-based. By working from home, the only illness that costs my employer any time at all is a couple of hours lost to a migraine.

@VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia and your sickness absences, no matter how short duration, are not recorded as such. Whereas your office based colleague will (potentially) face capacity issue meetings because they can't just pop into their bed for a couple of hours.

As a migraineur, I was in a perpetual loop of absence management meetings because of my condition i.e. not defined as a disability and, as such, not exempt from any measures within absence procedures.

Unless, of course, you're informing your employer of your lost time and they are monitoring it in line with their procedures? In which case, ignore the above.

So, what you're saying is because some are miserable BC they aren't able to work from home then everyone should be miserable and just have to come into the office? Pass.

No, what I'm saying (fairly clearly I thought) is those WFH are at a distinct advantage when it comes to masking their true sickness absence in ways office-based staff cannot.

I'm also saying office-based staff are subject to absence management procedures that WFH employees can 'dodge' by disappearing to bed for a 'couple of hours'.

We don't record anything below a quarter of a day. But, I'm not allowed to stay in a dark room for two hours at work because "health and safety", so I had to go home.

As a migraineur, I was in a perpetual loop of absence management meetings because of my condition i.e. not defined as a disability and, as such, not exempt from any measures within absence procedures.

Migraines can be a disability if serious enough because fluctuating conditions count. It's in section D15 of here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/equality-act-guidance/disability-equality-act-2010-guidance-on-matters-to-be-taken-into-account-in-determining-questions-relating-to-the-definition-of-disability-html You could have and should have had an absence management exemption, as you imply that your employer granted these for disability-related absence.

Where I work, migraine being a disability wouldn't necessarily make a difference because my employer doesn't automatically discount disability-related absence from your sickness tally. The office lighting triggers my migraines so being at home means that I get fewer of them. Given both those facts, I have no qualms at all about working from home. It's utterly unreasonable to expect me to work in an environment that makes my sickness record worse when I could work effectively from home, only to then use that sickness record to threaten me with dismissal.

@VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia that's grand for you.

However, it is not an even playing field for colleagues who are required to attend the office.

That is my point.

Right, but what is the obvious answer to your alleged problem, or is it just that some people are just luckier than others to have the WFH option and it is what it is? If so then I retract my statement.

Being disabled at work isn't a level playing field. The cards are stacked against the disabled person. Our legislators recognised the fundamental unfairness of that and wrote laws that require employers to make reasonable adjustments. For me, an autistic migraineur, WFH is a reasonable adjustment. I am not going to give it up nor be browbeaten into feeling guilty about it by anyone.

What you seem to be advocating is identical treatment instead of fair treatment. Disabled people's equality requires the latter.

For me, an autistic migraineur, WFH is a reasonable adjustment. I am not going to give it up nor be browbeaten into feeling guilty about it by anyone.

Especially as the office lighting triggers my migraines and causes sensory overload. It would be extremely unfair for my employer to needlessly compel me into an environment that makes me ill and then punish me for that illness

@VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia No, I have always stated those with recognised disabilities are those who should be afforded the privilege of working from home.

Migraine (that you pop to bed for 'for a couple of hours') is not a condition directly related to your disability status: Autism.

Colds/Covid events are not conditions directly related to your disability status: Autism.

Yet, you seem to be completely ignorant that having sicknesses that are completely unrelated to your disability status and you are able to mask because you WFH affords you an advantage as opposed to equality.

With that, I'm out because if you, someone intent on equality, cannot accept you have an actual advantage, there is no further point in engaging with you.

As I already said, severe enough migraines are a disability. When considering whether a medical condition is disabling, the untreated effect is considered.

How bad would my migraines be if I didn't take two kinds of painkillers and go to bed? How frequent would they be if I wasn't on prophylactic medication to reduce how many I get? My untreated migraines are severe enough to be a disability and are another reason why the cards are stacked against me. WFH is a reasonable adjustment for my migraines too. To have migraines severe enough to constitute a disability isn't an advantage compared to my colleagues who do not get migraines. They have the advantage of not having a disability adding to their sickness absence record.

I'm sorry that your employer didn't discount your migraines from your sickness record nor give you a reasonable adjustment of working from home. They should have.

Office staff being jealous of the advantages of WFH is not a good reason to prevent others from WFH.

If you would like to WFH and feel it would be advantageous for you then it is up to you to make the case to your employer or look for another employer that does offer WFH.

At least you are acknowledging advantages!

Does your acceptance of advantages extend to being able to 'play' the absence management system to pretend your reliability as an employee is greater than it actually is?

Anyway, it's not as though I have skin in the game, beyond fairness. FTR I'm happily retired, very financially comfortable and extremely content with my life.

I don’t actually WFH at the moment as my job cannot be done from home.

If you are retired, I am afraid you are possibly out of touch with the way of things.

Your complaints do not represent the way in which anyone I know behaves when WFH.

Of course WFH has advantages - otherwise why would anyone want to do it? Eg time and money saved from commuting, a more comfortable and less distracting workplace etc etc. Nothing to do with “playing” anything, just getting the job done in a more productive and less stressful environment.

Other jobs have certain advantages Eg if you are a pilot, you can’t work from home, but you get cheap flights. It would be senseless for the pilot to complain it’s unfair that the accountant can WFH, just as it would be senseless for the accountant to complain about the free flights that the pilot gets. It’s just part and parcel of the type of work you have chosen to do.

WFH improves quality of life for some people. Other people thrive on face to face roles. Why do we all have to be the same? Why would you be against something that improves quality of life, just because it’s not available to everyone in every job?

And a manager should be able to tell whether or not an employee is going a good job without standing over their shoulder for the whole day. Every job has some sort of outcome or product. If you can’t tell whether your employees are productive or not then I don’t think you should be managing them.

Most adults prefer to be trusted to be autonomous and to get on with their job to the best of their ability and that is what most people do .

In fact I think the problem is actually the reverse. There are too many people who sacrifice too much to their jobs, giving up hours of unpaid overtime and expending all their energy and stress on their job to the detriment of their personal life and family.

This is one of the reason birth rates are so low, and why we have a labour shortage and impending population decline.

And as a retired person, you are dependent on the dwindling working population to provide all the goods and services you need, along with your state pension.

So you should really be in favour of the expansion of WFH, since it enables more neurodiverse, disabled people, parents and older people to remain in the workforce for longer.

So what are you suggesting? Thst someone who gets migraines should have to go into the office so that if they get one they have to come home because that's better somehow?

You sound like you have a massive chip on your shoulder.

@Shalopea exactly right! Of my fully remote team, three of us are only in employment because we can WFH. One has chronic fatigue, I'm a lone parent of a young child, and another is a mother of 3 young children. Our productivity and targets are shared for all to see, all of us exceed our targets every month. But the flexitime (being able to pick up work again once kids in bed, do school runs, watch school plays) and not having to commute (for the fatigue), is what let's us

Yes, with our demogaphics we really can't afford to be placing barriers in the way of people who want to work, but need to do it from home. It's just not a luxury we have.

Thinking as well of those who've had to give up work or reduce their hours because of being long term sick or caring for them, they're probably disproportionately likely to need home based roles if they're to get back in.