To be losing the will to live with staff who chosen a job with a long commute & then complain about it

[Benibidibici]

I work in a well paid industry - think 6 figure salaries.

We've made really clear through hiring processes that roles are hybrid, not remote, we as a team really get a lot from collaborative working so we expect 2 days a week in the central office. There's flex about which days but we ask that people try to mostly hit the core days of tues/weds/thurs. As a line manager I'm not watching the clock and we are happy to play around with what time people start & finish - eg. One guy leaves at 4.30 to collect his kids by 5.30 & this is fine.

We've hired 3 people this year and made all this clear and they're all grumbling about their commutes and regularly asking to come in less. We offer what we can in terms of flexibility but when we insist we need them in 2 days, they are basically sulking. Its clear one of them in particular never had any intention of coming to the office more than a day or so every 2-3 weeks and expected to get away with remote working.

Its really frustrating. We were honest about what we needed and people just seem to think they can insist.

Why do people do this? One lady has moved 2 hours from our city 3 years ago, and during that time consistently keeps applying for and taking jobs here rather than in the large city where she now lives. Her husband also works in our industry and between them they'll have an income of £200k plus, so they aren't forced to live in a cheaper area.

Its really shit for me to have to go through the unpleasant process of monitoring people's attendance & imposing formal consequences etc (I'm not that kind of manager at all) because they took a job they don't want to turn up for.

What can I do to stop people doing this?

I think this too. This is why teaching can’t get staff. Teacher training courses are 50% down. No one wants to go into work anymore.

People are - rationally - doing what suits them. They believe, for whatever reason, that their best option is to accept the job and then push things as far as they can. Maybe this is poor communication of expectations from OP at the outset. Maybe they just know that they'll probably get away with it because it's not cheap or easy to find new staff, especially new staff who'll be willing to go in two days a week.

£10 says OP knows that if they did this they would find it much harder (or more expensive) to recruit and staff would quit or just carry on as before until they got sacked

This situation is really frustrating me. I have two young DS who are actively looking for work and finding very few opportunities for training. Most vacancies seem to require experience (even though the salary offered is low). I do feel that firms are less able to offer training because staff are wfh. Will they spend their working lives sitting on a laptop at home? Its not what they want. I feel young people are being sacrificed for the convenience of the comfortably-off.

I think I'd make it clear that 2 days a week are expected in office, those two days should be clarified at interview, " IE, Tuesday &Wednesday are the in office days, which are compulsory. We have had people not pass their probationary period for not keeping to these terms of employment"

Tbh, I would think discussing it like that, would be best. Then you've shown some wriggle room if they say, Thursday would be better than Tuesday for me and you accommodate.

I think you're being too accommodating

I think every company had the right to dictate what they need actually. People shouldn't accept roles and then try to change the rules.

The world has definitely changed and wfh has been life changing.
2 days a week seems fair enough to me if that is what the employer feels is necessary.

What can you do about it? I guess unless you make 2 days in the office either mandatory with non compliance being a disciplinary matter, or part of the performance management process, not a lot?

That is of course true.....however although some barriers to diversity may be hard to avoid I think that employers should take whatever practical steps they can to maximise diversity and be seen to do it.

I'm a feminist to my core. There are many many things that affect women's working conditions and pay, but isn't it funny how many jobs like nursing, teaching and caring that cannot be done remotely are female dominated?

As someone who has hybrid working that works incredibly well for my family situation, I get so frustrated with people who take the piss, because they risk other people's flexibility.

I'm sure my mate in IT in the City won't reverse his decision he made 18 months ago when he told his boss to get lost - he will continue to work from home and will continue to tell his boss that is non-negotiable. If at some point in the future his skill set is in much less demand he may be forced to do what he's told, but no sign of that right now!

If you’re that bothered, make your point as firmly as you can and then cross your fingers that they don’t resign/work-to-rule/carry on regardless until they’re sacked. 🤷‍♀️

OP is totally willing to lose candidates who aren't planning to work 2 days a week from office. She just wishes they would make their mind and apply for some of the other, more flexible jobs, instead of one clearly marked as hybrid.

In this case presence allows dealing with physical samples, so the value is clear.

Not being funny, but you can always up the salary a percentage point or two every single month until you find that the staff are so keen to keep the job that they're willing to behave properly! Clearly they are showing the dedication that they believe the pay on offer deserves and they can get away with.

Well good for him, but in my industry salaries have gone up by around 12% in the last 18 months. He’s stuck working that job now isn’t he for his wfh conditions.

You say 'Its really shit for me to have to go through the unpleasant process of monitoring people's attendance & imposing formal consequences etc (I'm not that kind of manager at all) because they took a job they don't want to turn up for.'

I appreciate it is unpleasant...but it is the duty of a manager to do this so not sure what you mean when you state you are 'not that kind of manager'. No managers (or very few) actually enjoy taking disciplinary action against their team members. But I agree with other posters who say that you need to be very clear about the expectations and the consequences of not meeting them, and follow through if you have to.

Once expectations are crystal clear, you can then exercise discretion and allow variations when you think they are called for.

It helps though if you (ie your employer) are able to be very clear about the case for requiring presence in the office and the operational benefits of a hybrid work pattern.

DH tried to recruit recently. It is not a job you can do at home, ever, especially on the level he was recruiting (in science). He personally could work at home sometimes with what he does (but chooses to go in).

2 of the people who applied asked if they could work at home a few days a week. One complained it was a lot of travelling and cost a lot. It’s bananas. There literally would be nothing for them to do at home. Years ago they would have moved closed but now they want adjustments.

I wasn’t talking about your mate in IT. Who knows what he’d do if he was laid off and vacancies were scarce? Nobody’s indispensable and he’s fortunate his boss is a doormat.

You are right, IMO.

But I think that there is another factor. A lot of people prefer to be alone where possible. Now we are constantly being encouraged to be our authentic selves, to bring our true selves to work, to celebrate diversity.

Well my authentic self LOVES not having to see other people on a day to day basis... and I have been taught that this is fine, I do not need to pretend to be sociable like I used to do when I went into an office every day. Being introverted and loving being alone is normal and healthy and you should fight to build a life that is right for you - and that is one that does not visit an office.

When I was a lot younger I had a job where I always turned up 5 minutes late... and I got lunch from a sandwich shop two minutes from the office, and worked past my contracted hours of 6pm. Guess what happened when the boss made a fuss about being in for 9am? I started - literally - going home for lunch every single day and taking the full hour, and leaving on the dot at 6. And left 6 months later!

i had a job like that. It was very quiet first thing anyway and because of the bus I used to get in at 9 on the dot. Manager went mental and said we had to get earlier buses so we were sat at our desks at 9 (to sit with little to do before 11), so we all came in at 8.30 and left at 5 on the dot.
It was really busy between 5 and 5.30, so he relented but we all just left anyway.

If an employer gave me a low performance rating because I was completing my work just fine but was WFH too much for their liking I don’t think I’d be able to keep a straight face as I ran for the door.

No no, surely this must be you being a fantasist because it can't possibly be the case that some people are able to enforce remote working as a condition of taking a job.

Companies will always do the minimum training they can get away with. One consolation for your sons is that companies (and industries) that don't offer training might find themselves in all sorts of trouble in the future when their experience staff retire and there is no-one with the skills to replace them.