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?

on interview

I note that you currently live around 2 hours from the office. you would be required to be in the office on either a tue and wed or a wed and thur with the rest of the time working at home. If you were offered the job would you be proposing to commute that journey twice a week or would you be willing to stay in a hotel overnight?

can you stop the generalisation there. I am a woman and go to the office 2 days a week, sometimes 3 and enjoy it. it does not negatively impact me

but like the @Benibidibici OP I have flexibility to leave for school shows, pick ups and events as they know I will make up the time - have been in the company 15 years +

My company moved office during the pandemic so it's now in a rubbish location that's a pain to get to.

Whereas I can see that is a nightmare for you it really has nothing to do with this thread, where the OP has been very clear she is talking about people who chose to apply for a role a long commute from where they live, even though it was clear they would have to be in the office 1/2 the week.

You should. A good strong dose of realism from one of their peers could work wonders.

She'd rather people DID reject the roles if they can't follow the job spec

From Jan we are being asked to go to the office 2 days a month (1st and 3rd Tuesday of the month) which is doable, i guess. However, all my team are all in different offices around the country. I will not be sitting with any members of my team.

In actual fact, I have had to cancel our normal meetings on those days as everyone will be in open plan offices so online meetings wont work.

My office have got rid of our parking spaces, so I will now have to get 2 buses in, so am looking at about a 2 hour commute each way due to traffic and buses not turning up (I live 7km from the office).

The best part is we have down sized office space. They are expecting 700 people to fit in to 470 desks.

My productivity is going to drop off a cliff for those 2 days each month

and will probably have to sit on the floor to work

But you are all right, we need to say nothing and just get on with it

to be honest i think the best solution to this is just to hire people who are local, unfortunately..

@Week54 retired but forgot to tell anybody😁that's the description of a colleague I've been looking for, thanks.

You are being paid to manage these people but you are moaning about it and trying to avoid doing it.

So actually that’s not much different to the staff being paid to come into office and moaning and trying to avoid it.

Do your job and the rest will follow

She'd rather people DID reject the roles if they can't follow the job spec

This, i had other applicants. If i had known they would refuse to come i could have considered a different person for the job but now am stuck with guy who gave his parents address on form but then moved in with his friend 40 miles away his probation period ended

I often say the team gets a lot from
collaborative working, but I don’t think the people I manage agree 🤣 we do once a month in person days that are really focussed. People waste a lot of time in offices, and the constant interruptions can be unbearable

Since leaving full time education aged 18 - with a huge sigh of relief after many boring hours daydreaming in a classroom - I have since got a degree (a 1st) and Masters (distinction) through distance learning.

The idea that 'in person learning' is far superior to on-line shows a worrying lack of critical thinking skills.

There are too many factors, including personal learning styles, the demands of subject (e.g. use of technical equipement), the measures put in place to support active discussion on-line, to generalise in that way.

I've had the opposite experience to the OP, in that I have been clear about my caring responsibilities during the recruitment process, and been told that the company supports flexibility, and then when I was in post suddenly flexibility was a huge problem and a sign I wasn't committed enough. More than once! I ended up leaving each job after a relatively short period, which was very frustrating as I was absolutely explicit about my commitments before accepting.

Anyway, I would suggest stressing the non-negotiables at every stage of the recruitment process, and planning the days everyone is in the office to ensure that the in-person collaboration takes place. Team meetings, discussion sessions etc, maybe a team lunch. So it isn't a tick box exercise based on 'if everyone is in the office collaboration will spontaneously happen', but structured and planned.

You are right i could walk 7km with my laptop, keyboard, docking station, mouse, 2 phones, lunch, waterbottle and cup.

What kind of tundle bag would you recommend ?

Edit: just google mapped it 1hr, 20mins walking time

Not our experience at all. Our younger team members want to be in the office and work with people, not isolated and remote. On that basis I go to the office every day

I’ve read this and your other posts. My team situation at work sounds similar to yours. I’m sorry but I think there’s no wonder solution- you just need to manage and give these people the bad news that they took a job on the understanding they would come in and they need to do the minimum number of hours in the office

The latest one on our team is wanting short days in the office. Sorry no we ask for a minimum of seven hours work per day.

And don’t hire individuals whose commute will be longer than an hour or so. Whatever they say

Give them notice then. Honestly, they are holding you to ransom.

It's not unreasonable for people to do the job they've signed up for.

If someone signs up to shift work, they don't get to moan that their have shift patterns.
If someone signs up for hybrid 2-3 days on site, they don't get to moan and be awkward about having to go to the office.

If someone wants a fully remote role then they should apply for it, not take a hybrid role and expect to take the piss to get what they want.

People accepting jobs and then deciding that the huge commute doesn't work for them or they want to do the school run or it's not convenient for them, or they'd rather work at home are taking the mick.

If being in the office was beneficial to them they’d come in. Clearly it’s not, whatever you think about your collaborative approach. Instead of putting an arbitrary quota on people how about making it actually worth their time to come in?

Stick to your guns, OP. The moaners will always find excuses not to come in.

My team is required to be in the office once per month and the same people- same day every month, manage to duck out of coming.

Have you asked them about how they find being in the office, what makes it a positive working place and what gets in the way of them being productive?

It may be just that they are moaning, of course, but it might be the way the workplace and workdays are structured that is causing them to feel they are more productive working at home.

There are some aspects of many jobs which need people together in person, some learnings which need people together in person.

Our juniors develop much faster when together, able to observe each other and also how their seniors interact with teams, clients etc despite the fact that their jobs could be technically done from anywhere. Its the "soft" components of the job which are hard to learn remotely for us. There is no reason why a hybrid environment can't be successful for everyone and have room also for those who actually need to be near full time remote workers for whatever reason.

Don't change the rules for the group rather than addressing individual problems - that isn't fair and creates resentment amongst the majority trying to make it work. If it makes sense for the business to say "Wednesday is sample review day, everyone in plus one other day" then say that and monitor it.

Take it up with individuals who don't abide by the agreed model and if they whinge about commuting costs the answer ultimately is "tough this is what you applied for". Punishing the group rather than addressing individuals is just in invitation for your best people to leave and the coasters to stay.

I think the problem with this approach is it could be discriminatory or discourage diversity - eg if the workplace is in an affluent area that some potential candidates can't afford, or if certain demographics are over/underrepresented.

I haven't read all the responses sorry. But if not suggested, on approach could be to include in job applications a question like 'Are you willing and able to attend (workplace address) at least 2 days per week?' Anyone who responds 'no', their application is not progressed.

If they respond 'yes' then refuse to do it once employed then you are fully justified in holding to them to that application statement and follow through with disciplinary action if necessary.

Yep, all our children under 30 work in offices all week despite having options not to. One doesn't need to attend at all but goes in every day. They don't want to be in their cold house shares and they like the interaction with people when they have moved to cities where they don't know anyone. Def 40 to 55s where this is the main issue. Those that have nice home environments and not looking to learn from colleagues.

After my last comment I will admit (as easy as I find it) that at least half the days spent in the office could easily be spent at home because we are scattered about and barely speak to one another. BUT the other half we absolutely make use of the time by ALL being present and together to work on some of the bigger things and usually always back it up with a team lunch or after work drink.

Realistically though there is nothing we do in the office that we can't do over Teams. Going into the office is just a "nice to have". I get that some jobs have elements that cannot be done effectively over Teams but I would argue that the large majority of jobs CAN be done remotely and a lot of the "collaborative, team building" shite is just that. Shite.