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?

"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."

Sorry but this sounds less than "really clear". "there's flex but we ask that people mostly try to hit the core days of tues/ weds/ thurs" is not the same as saying people have to be in the office, on these days, contractually, as part of their job role.

If you have three new starters all grumbling about something you thought was clear I'd say you'd need to look at your own communication. What is in their contract? A 'hybrid' role can mean anything really in terms of number of hours/ days in the office.

I sympathise a lot with wanting people to be in, but you do have to set very clear and specific expectations from the start of the hiring process and stick to them otherwise people will just do what they like!

Yep, exactly.

It's simply the workings of the labour market. OPs organisation are demonstrably not paying enough to get the staff they need in the office like they want them. If they were, they wouldn't have this problem. By definition.

Other people talking about luck is pointless and stupid. I don't get paid anywhere near 6 figures either, but I still understand how supply and demand work. However good a gig it might look to the average worker, it's evidently not good enough. Or this problem wouldn't exist.

We have this issue. We now make people sign a hybrid working agreement along with their contract to set out exactly what's expected of them. It works well as a filter for the flaky ones, they usually reject the job offer when they see that.

I think if people feel the value of the days they are in the office they are more inclined to be on the same page as you as to why they have to be in certain days. In my role we have to be in 2 days a week however these days aren’t different to the others so I manage my own workload and so what I need to do. When we have meetings as a team they are on teams as we have an office in Glasgow and Manchester and some will be at home those days so no benefit to be in for the meetings. I do feel less productive on office days as it’s noisy, partly down to us all chatting away catching up which is part of what I do enjoy. Adding on the time to drive leaving home at 7.30 and home after 6 plus nursery drop off and pick up and my baby coming home to essentially get ready for bed and not seeing here. Days im
at home I have an extra 2 minimum hours to my day which is so precious to me. Baby is still at nursery but can start and leave earlier.

You need specific days = you need to be in on Monday & Tuesday & make it a personal request if theyre unavailable one of those days to make it up on Wednesday the whole 'please attend on any of these days but also you can come in on Thursday or Friday if necessary' is giving people the idea they can push the limits here

From now on only hire (& employ to replace people who miss enough days) on a proper roster & no open exceptions made (if theyre genuinely needy you will have control over it)

2 days a week is more than acceptable, even to a single parent. I'd just do 2 VERY long days those days to justify the child care then drop the hours on my home working days. Why apply for a job if you don't want to stick to it's terms and conditions?

@Niallig32839 I WFH but DH is hybrid and I complete agree. Some days he will go in, as expected, which costs us money, costs him 4 hours commuting time, and then the person he may have a meeting with that day is still at home, so then the meeting is done via phone anyway. What the hell is the point? If you have a meeting where it NEEDS to be in person, then fair enough. If not, just let people be. UNLESS of course, they are taking the piss and their work is not getting done. DH is so much more productive from home and only goes into the office to 'show face'. It's ridiculous.

If it’s in their Contract, you give them whatever number of warnings is required then you terminate them. What else is there to say?! Once you’ve actually followed through with this once, perhaps it will all suddenly resolve and perhaps at future interviews you can mention that you’ve been forced to let staff go who refused to comply with the in-office requirement.

When you are at that level though, the working terms will be something like 9-5, when it really, really isn't 9-5. If someone wants to leave early to do the school run but then is up all evening working, so what?

I found it really funny when DH boss questioned him about being in at 10 after dropping the kids off when officially he starts at 9 (DH works late a lot, works weekends, has done an overnight stint once to get a project done) DH just said, so, you want me to work my contracted hours then? Boss 'yes' DH ok, so you don't want me to do anything after 5pm? Boss.....silence.

I could fit that lot in my medium size rucksack with no difficulty- but obviously my workplace is more reasonable and so I have duplicate docking stations, keyboards and mice, so a laptop and lunch bag is no problem to carry at all. (And even if they won't shell out, the price of a duplicate keyboard and mouse is pretty minimal).

I agree 1 hour 20 minutes is excessive to walk twice a day regardless of what you're carrying. but there might be a compromise involving taking one bus and a long walk.

That's how you increase sickness levels among your staff. Rather than paying 1 person 200k and expecting them to be "on" for 12 hours a day 5 days a week, plus weekends and have a work place culture that means you work through leave. Have 2 x 100k staff and share the work load and treat your staff like human beings.

I work in an industry where we have to be in the workplace, Covid or no Covid. It drives me nuts when we recruit somebody who has been WFH and after 2 days decide they can't possibly leave the house anymore and can they WFH. No they fucking can't! Are these people stupid?

The time to recruit, not mentioning the cost, is such a waste. Although I have seen questions on here by people having been offered a job and asking whether they should negotiate more time at home and responses saying just accept the job and then negotiate - NO! If you want to WFH then just apply for jobs that support this rather than wasting everyone's time.

The other side of this is if someone has a job that can be done from home why not let them have a day or 2? Sometimes the office is too noisy, too filled with interruptions and people just can't concentrate. I hear a lot from people who say they get more done at home than on their office days.

Put it in contract that two days are in the office. Maybe make these two days mandatory ie Tuesday and Wednesday. Also don't hire the people that live too far away. Or do we not disclose our address when finding a job!? I love being in the office I hate working from home sat on my own all day, with the dishes and the washing reminding me I have a whole host of other jobs to be doing!

I know hybrid is much loved by many on MN, but for those who don't find it to be the best of both worlds, it can end up being the worst of both worlds when you're recruiting. And I wonder if this thread is an example of that.

There are posters on here, there was one the other week, sharing their recruitment experiences of how something like 2/3 days in and 2/3 days at home can be a nightmare to get and keep people for. Because you're still requiring people to live within doable commuting distance of the office, which as the UK is pretty London centric often means the south east only. It's not like with a hybrid where you only have to be in eg once a fortnight so it actually is feasible for someone to come from a long way away. But you're also not getting the people who really flourish in an office environment and can't/won't work remotely, because it's not enough in person for them.

As soon as one person takes it too far and gets managed out of the business people will take notice and stop complaining.

as far as the whole this affects women thing, those women need to hold the dads accountable. We will only get equality once we all realise that it takes two people to have children

Yes, this. I think the problem (given it's a few new starters) is that it's coming across as "ideally 2 days in the office for collaboration but we're fairly flexible".

My contract states 2 days in the office per week but my manager has said he doesn't want people coming in for the sake of it. So I go in if others will be in. Some weeks that means I'm in a couple of days, some no days.

Is there any reason for them to be in if nobody else is in? For example, if they prefer Thurs/Fri but nobody else likes to come in Fri then why can't they just do 1 day in the office.

Wow @Benibidibici and @Week54

What are these industries, that pay so well but attract such complaining types? What is the connection?

My approach as a manager was:

• compulsory Tuesday and Wednesday once a fortnight for all staff
• A long lunch social on the Tuesday
• Monday morning Teams meeting the other week
• Regular meetings of other teams in the office encouraged

All meetings were stacked on the fortnightly in-office days. 15m gaps between meeting slots to regroup, and all planning for the next fortnight done that day. Because of the regular whole-team engagement, lots of catch ups occured organically on the two meeting days, both in office and on Teams.

Weekly was actually very annoying for hybrid. Not long enough for projects to breathe and make progress between one and the next.

I have been delivering training this year and the undertones to the training has all been about the fact that they are asked to come into the office for that training. This is despite the fact that we have to be in on a weekly basis anyway or whenever required. People take working for home as a given now and get arsey should they be asked to come in. Combine that with a general disgusting attitude from staff then it makes the workplace a really enjoyable place (not).

We have hybrid working and are supposed to be in the office 3 days a week. Core hours are 9-4. We're also not supposed to routinely work Mondays and Fridays from home. Some people stick to the rules religiously. Some work 5 days in the office. Some are in once in a blue moon, but you do have to question what value there is to coming in if no one on your team is in the office. Travel for work should be counted as a day in the office.

You have to enforce the being in the office properly. I do think some people have an inflated sense of how important they are to their employer, especially as we've all heard that it's become increasingly difficult to recruit, and think they're so valuable they can get away with doing what they like.

It doesn't adversely impact women unless they have partners who don't their half of childcare. Which is on them to fix, not the employer. Women still to stop accepting so little from men

I don't think you understand what a job is do you?

From the other side of it.

I was headhunted for a job and promised the world, I knew it was a long commute. But according to Google it was 40 minutes and realistically there were always roadworks, road closures, diversions, accidents, lorries, traffic etc that made it over an hour on the regular and at times over 2 hours each way. I didn't know that before I started the job, nor did I know what impact it would have on my mental health. I had to give up everything else I had going on during the week because of having so little time to get my own stuff done and having to go to bed so early. I didn't get to go out for dinner with my DH any more, all my friends would go to the pub and I couldn't go, I would miss all the industry and networking events important to my career because going to anything evening-based was impossible. I had time to make dinner and do chores and then I had to go to bed.

It was also a job I could do from home, but (pre covid) was allowed zero working from home time despite saying verbally it would be possible, at the meeting to offer me the job.

I loved the role and the people, but 2-4 hrs a day commuting was far too much. If I wanted that I'd have worked in London for a much higher salary.

Knowing people's income doesn't mean you know how much their disposable income is. Offering them a job doesn't mean you get to dictate where they live. I didn't want to move because it would have been to a worse area in a worse house away from all my friends and family and with fewer services, I certainly wouldn't have wanted to move my DH away from all that just for my job. With kids involved it's even worse.

The fact you are calling it "getting away with working from home" and having to "monitor attendance" means that either you don't think they're doing the amount of work they should be, or that they really aren't doing the amount of work they should be. So which is it? If it's the second they need to be disciplined etc/encouraged to find a job that suits them better. If it's the first you need to get the idea out of your head that working from home means people aren't working.

Also actively monitoring attendance is what you do for children at school, not responsible working adults. You're wasting your time doing it or you're part of a toxic culture.

If they are good employees and they take a 5 min extra break working from home for xyz, that still costs the company less than paying you to waste your time on attendance chores that school secretaries and year 6 pupils do.

@sweetpickle23@BlueberryVelvet it is bollocks because these people shouldn’t look for and accept jobs that require to be in the office if they don’t want to go. And yes, more and more companies are starting to require people to go back to the office and lots of flexibility is being removed as people have really been taking advantage.

i’m also an employer and throughout the recruiting process and in the contracts we clearly state 50% work in the office with which I’ve been quite understanding but it’s becoming increasingly important to enforce it due to the nature of the business. And although it’s clearly spelled out people are still taking advantage and moaning they have to do it. Fortunately where I am now it’s an employer’s market.