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?

Part time doesn’t really work as everyone need a vehicle ( sharing impractical as they park at home) so the end up paying for a van that only moves two a week
a lot of the safety equipment is personal to yourself you can’t share safety harness
test equipment is for the individual can’t be shared
Saturday is just a normal day in many many industries now
I think people who work 9 to 5 mon to fri in an office just don’t get the concept of weekend and shift working as normal working patterns

Plenty of places that open 7 days a week will have some staff that just do weekends, usually because workplaces like retail and hospitality are busier then so more staff are needed, but also it allows the full time staff to have at least one weekend off a month. However you cant really have a two completely separate paralell sets of staff - if nothing else managers tend to be full time.

YABU because if you can't get as good a collaborative effort going on with some/all people working remotely you're not using tools available to you properly. There's a lot of bullshit about face-to-face being better for collaboration but it usually comes from employers who are either too lazy to move with the times or don't trust their staff and like to keep an eye on them.

If you genuinely believe it's a problem then only employ people who live within a few miles of your office.

I run a business and I do employ one person. Part of the reason I don't employ more people is that I know that many potential employees are going to do what suits them, so I do what suits me - keep the business small!

Sorry, but in a capitalist system workers need to do what is best for themselves and their family, not the company that is trying to make as much profit out of them as possible.
So take their labour elsewhere that offers the working patterns they want, or get unionised, or fight for better terms and conditions.

Don't take up a post that has Saturday working clearly stated and then moan that you're expected to work Saturdays. That's not sticking it to capitalism. It's just being stupid by taking a job you have no intention of doing.

If as people say it's an employee's market and they're offering an in demand set of skills, they'll be able to find workplaces offering something similar to what they want, or at the very least they can find an organisation who'd be open to some negotiation before a job offer is accepted or take a job and do the job you've taken until you've mutually negotiated your contract.

That is a long way of saying "HR aren't any good at sorting the wheat from the chaff at interview stage and as a result all applicants need to be completely open and honest".
HR don't generally interview and given mind reading isn't a thing how exactly are interviewers meant to work out which people who are applying for a job will actually show up to the job they've applied?

Because then you get into really dodgy ground of trying to draw up personal profiles of which people might be likely to apply for jobs they have no intention of doing, which leaves the door wide open for discriminatory practices.

Eg. deciding not to take on a woman of childbearing age because she might have young children and there's a risk that although she says she can do the shift, she might have lied and only want 9-3 so better not appoint her.

Or not appointing fresh graduates to something with weekend working because your experience is that 5 20-somethings have recently applied for and accepted jobs, only to moan that bar shifts involve the evening pattern you mentioned at interview.

It's not unreasonable to expect the person you offer a job to, to read the terms, confirm the terms and then actually do the job. Assuming every candidate is a liar who is going to moan and try to bait and switch is going to hurt some groups of people more than others.

Your point (1) is basically "I know that people will fight for their own interests, but I believe I get to set the acceptable ways of doing that".

(2) is you saying that it is impossible to fully assess potential staff at interview and through the recruitment process. In which case why hasn't OP got very clear Ts and Cs and probationary period set up to get rid of the piss-takers ASAP so she doesn't need to come on here whinging.

Your point (1) is basically "I know that people will fight for their own interests, but I believe I get to set the acceptable ways of doing that".

(2) is you saying that it is impossible to fully assess potential staff at interview and through the recruitment process. In which case why hasn't OP got very clear Ts and Cs and probationary period set up to get rid of the piss-takers ASAP so she doesn't need to come on here whinging.

It's just common sense.

If I'm working in a rubbish job with rubbish terms then I'll take my labour elsewhere because I know that my skills and knowledge are valuable and I can negotiate with other employers. This is not an unusual thing to do. Lots of people do it in many lines of work.

If I'm job hunting I'd have a list of essentials and nice to haves for what I'm looking for a role or company. I'd find jobs that matched, or closely matched, what I'm looking for and would be willing to negotiate as part of the recruitment process. This is also not unusual.

What I'd not do is see a job for weekend work, take it, apply for it, be told again that it's a weekend working role, accept it, and then throw a strop that I don't want to work weekends.

I can't help but wonder if the people doing this sort of behaviour aren't as good a candidate as they think they are. Surely if they're such great candidates they'd not have to resort to applying to jobs they have no intention of doing?

OP, one thing I agree with you is that managing people is not easy, and often in a managerial role you are not given the time for this.

People will try what they think they can get away with- just look at some of the behaviour by car drivers as an example. Enforcement is painful but necessary and I get that you could do without it.

@AnonnyMouseDave and I very much understand that too-

Definitely
Saturday is a normal working day to us, we don't get paid extra
Also open Sundays but not our department, the other departments don't get paid extra but get time back. Salaried

It's the same as shift work, waitressing, retail, care work, they're not being paid extra for working Sundays

From what OP says they are being rational because they get away with it.

An employee can ask to negotiate a variation to their contract at any time they like, not just when you think it’s acceptable. It may or may not be granted. Then the two parties either come to an agreement, or part company. It’s as simple as that. It’s easier to negotiate as an employee if you have been there for longer, but it’s not obligatory.

Because the job was otherwise attractive to you and you think it might be possible to negotiate not to work weekends down the line?

Retail and shift work do pay penalty rates at the weekend, depending on the employer..

Caring jobs often have terrible terms and conditions, which is why care companies are having such trouble recruiting staff.

I get that it’s a pain for managers and business owners, but very few people actually want to work night shifts or weekends. If you want people to do it happily and to minimise requests for variation (AKA being awkward/complaining) then you have to make it worth their while.

And I understand that in the past there might have been fewer requests for variations, but we’ve already discussed at length why things are different now and employees feel more empowered.

In my DH company people will actively choose to work night shifts or overtime, because they get well paid for it. If they find it too much, they can ask to change, and this isn’t viewed as “being awkward/complaining” although I’m sure it makes work for him, but that’s all part of managing people. There will always be someone else willing to swap.

In all these cases, from OP’s on, if you want to keep the member of staff, it’s worth considering if the change can be accommodated. If you don’t care if they leave, or it really can’t be done, then you just tell them - no sorry, it can’t be done. Maybe you’ll be happy if they leave because they were a bit rubbish anyway.

But there’s no point in getting upset and angry and thinking people are not entitled to ask for a change (or that they can ask for a change, but only after a length of time or for a reason that you deem acceptable.) People are always going to try to negotiate the best terms and conditions that they feel they can at that point in time.

An employee can ask to negotiate a variation to their contract at any time they like, not just when you think it’s acceptable. It may or may not be granted. Then the two parties either come to an agreement, or part company. It’s as simple as that. It’s easier to negotiate as an employee if you have been there for longer, but it’s not obligatory
Again, a mutual negotiation of contract is not the same as:

• Applying for a job that specifies weekends, with an application saying you want the job
• interviewing for a job that specifies weekends, saying you want the job
• being offered a job with weekend working and saying you want the job
• accepting the job with weekend working
• shortly after starting start complaining about the rota because actually you don't do weekend working, you've booked stuff on your shift time, it doesn't suit you and you never planned on doing the job anyway

It's hardly rocket science why an organisation who has hired someone would be irritated to find that the second their foot's in the door they don't want to work the job they've just applied for and accepted.

You're deliberately trying to confuse mutually agreed changes to contract with people being awkward about getting rota-ed for the job they've just signed up to.

@LolaSmiles exactly
My workplace clearly states how many weekends you are required to work in the job advert, and it's not paid more because it's salaried and you are given the time back in the week. Same with working some days over Christmas period

I have worked for decades and navigated many contract changes, however, I did this through mature discussions with my managers.

I've always followed the appropriate channels instead of simply avoiding commitments, such as not showing up for a night shift because I no longer felt like doing them.

The staff in the OP are simply not bothering to come into the office 2 days a week as per their contract, just because they don't want to. There has not been any negotiation of a contract on their part, just a complete lack of professionalism and entitled that they can do what they want and fuck everyone else.

//I think this is what I was trying to say many posts back. Absolutely agree

christmaspaws
Exactly.
Using some of the logic on this thread all school staff should start taking term time holidays left right and centre. After all, just because they applied for and accepted a position with a term time work pattern, what matters is they only work on their terms.

I looked at a job advert and they made it clear the service was 24hour and 365 days a year. They also said there were several positions being recruited for. One was part time but with evening shifts, another was full time done as 3 x 10/12 hours and there were other patterns advertised. I didn't apply, but if I did I'd not apply for the part time evening one and then complain that I've been rota-ed for evenings.

This attitude is the arrogance of those able to go into the office. Plenty of people cannot and the pandemic was an opener for many. For example those with caring responsibilities, those whose partners / spouses work away / those rural communities.

I fitted every one of those descriptors - elderly parents, bloke away Monday to Friday, live in the country - I was in the office every day. If you can’t go in don’t apply for a job that requires it. That’s common sense not arrogance.

This attitude is the arrogance of those able to go into the office. Plenty of people cannot and the pandemic was an opener for many. For example those with caring responsibilities, those whose partners / spouses work away / those rural communities.

But nobody is saying people in those situations HAVE to apply for a job that's on site!

They can apply for a remote working role that suits their needs, preferences and circumstances or seek a mutually agreed change of contract. Someone I know has WFH as their default due to their disability and it's all down above board.

I ruled out applying for a hybrid role in a local city with 3 days on site because it would be a ball ache in the school holidays and the commute wouldn't be compatible with family life 50% of the time. I'd not take on the job and then moan that the company want me in 3 days a week and that's unfair and arrogant of them because I've got children.

I agree. It’s bizarre everyone on here acting like jobs are randomly assigned to you rather than something you select with the full knowledge of your circumstances

@BIossomtoes Entitlement? How? How is wanting not to come into an office unnecessarily, dropping the dead time commute, increasing productivity, create a better work life balance and in some cases remove career barriers for single parents, as well as not forcing young families to pay over the odds for a nursery which probably only meets the most basic of requirements as some examples entitled?

In the case of a young enthusiastic start up maybe it’s ‘fun’, but not in corporate when bonuses are being cut and you’re expected to go way over and above.

Please though, go ahead, enlighten me.

PS ‘six figures’ is not quite the same as it was pre pandemic unfortunately so it’s no longer the proverbial carrot it once was.

@Alicesmagicmushroom, it’s been explained numerous times on this thread that it’s not the wish to work from home that’s entitled. The entitlement lies in taking a job in the full knowledge that some office days are required and then expecting the employer to change that because the employee thinks they’re special. Incidentally, most of us don’t go to work for “fun”.

Shocking I know, but not every job can be done 100% effectively from home.

The OP has already said part of the job os analysing and comparing samples, which works better in person.