New manager want me in the office. I wfh-help!

[Stressedgiraffe]

We've changed management structure so my new manager wants me in the office. Ideally once a week but might settle for every month.
I've been there over 2 years. I wfh permanently but my contract says HQ.
I live 5 hours away always have done. They knew where I lived when I started. I go into the office about every 3/4 months for a few days .
Could I push for a change in location in my contract or do you think I'm screwed?

Ask her if the commute will be In work time and how she sees this working, as the position was recruited as remote, and attach the documentation proving it.

if it means nearly 2 days a week off travelling, and she can’t demand you do it on your own time, she will back down.

@wutheringkites

''The anti-employee sentiment on Mumsnet always surprises and depresses me.''

Agreed.

Truly is sad how the default setting seems to be that the employer is always right and that the employee has no agency whatsoever over what happens to them and should just blindly obey. Seems to be a 'master and servants' view of the world where work rules your life and where no employment laws exist.

I think that on this WFH threads there are either a lot of people who are bitter because they are not able to work from home and resent anyone else who might have that opportunity or a lot of really shitty, dinosaur managers....

Frankly Covid showed that remote working was perfectly possible in many jobs and gave employees a better work-life balance.

Many people now expect flexible working and employers who just dig their heels and want to turn back the clock just because they can't accept that people don't have to be glued to an office chair to do a decent job will simply find that people vote with their feet and seek more enlightened employers.

But they advertised the role as remote, gave her equipment to work remotely and have paid for her to travel to HQ as that isn't her place of work.

So yes, the idiotic 'you knew where you lived when you applied for the job' posters are being anti employee.

What always gets me is the way so many people who disapprove of remote working will try and give legal advice based on their preferences. There have been multiple gleeful posts telling OP she'll have to suck it up because her contract says so, from people who must know full well that they've no expertise in employment law. It's bizarre.

I don't have expertise in this but I have been offered contracts with place of work as the London office with the expectation (from their side) that I would actually work from home 200 miles away and travel in once every couple of months.

I think this was the norm for some companies around 2021-2022.

Well firstly, after 2 years the contract would have been changed by custom. Have a think about it.

Many people now expect flexible working
The OP is not being asked to switch from home to office though, it's such a straw man argument being raised. Coming into the office just one day each month IS flexible working as most people would understandi t. I'm not expected to regularly go anywhere, and have no office in my contract. It's still reasonable for clients to expect that I will go somewhere on occasion, whether to an office or to another country, if gathering in person is likely to be more effective for meeting their business objectives.

All the arguing on here and it's this simple:

• Have a discussion with the employer and see what they are ameanable to
• If they are not ameanable then get some legal advice on your stance
• Your contract dictates your working terms and you signed it. There may be clauses such as grandfather rights that you can dispute on the basis of however but i'm not an employment lawyer and I can't see that anyone else here is either.
• At the end of the day the EMPLOYER and what they want for their employees (who they pay to do a job as per the terms they set out) is what actually counts here, not YOUR personal circumstances.
• Yes, you may win a legal argument with them or get them to back down for fear of employee action against them, however that does not and will not stop them from using a number of other tactics to get you to leave if you don't do what they want. You can be cut out of major workstreams subtly, you can be made redundant (especially as you are singling yourself out as "I should have what i've always had") and the job can be re-advertised with different terms under a different title legally, you can be managed out.

Qualifications: Senior manager at a very large international corporate who had to do this exact thing when I had problems in my team with people who refused to come into the office because they "were allowed to work at home in the pandemic and why shouldn't they be allowed now".

I'm aware this isn't a discussion around the pandemic and you've been working at home longer than that, however that is not the point, the point is that the company dictate how they want it to run, not you. If you don't like it then be aware of the above points and be flexible, if you aren't then you may well find yourself in a dead end job and have to find a new one which frankly I'd do anyway - at a company who are happy to employ "those" employees who seem to think their personal life should be catered to and employers should be grateful they rolled out of bed this morning.

I'm saying all of this while i'm guess what? Working from home.

The answer is about balance, and asking you to go in once a month isn't exactly being unreasonable, it's perfectly reasonable and flexible on their part so why can't you compromise with them instead of coming here moaning. I would never hire anyone with this attitude ever, and I am absolutely sick of the noise around the home working "entitlement" people have.

Get legal advice basically. I'm not being "anti-employee" - I just know who pays me, and it's my employer who I agreed to work for, nobody held a gun to my head and not everything is about me me me which seems to be the attitude of many people these days. It was the same way with people refusing to get their covid vaccinations because of "their rights". Fuck everyone else though apparently.

What's your qualification for making this statement exactly? It's utter rubbish. Did you read it in the Daily Mail?

Wow, what a hostile comment. I always find it amusing that when someone disagrees it must be because ‘it was in the daily mail’ too. Such a weak insult to hide a lack of ability to debate appropriately. Good day to you.

^^ I think this is great advice to which I would add:

** how much your employer is prepared to make accommodations for you and to what extent they will bend the rules for you, depends on how good a job you do op, and how much you put yourselves out for them and how replaceable you are. That sounds harsh but it’s been true of every job I’ve had.

Not correct.

My job (that I’ve been in for over 10 years), is field based, so I WFH. My one and only head office is 100 miles away from where I live. I was hired as a remote worker.

I claim expenses (mileage) if I have to go there. Or if I have to travel anywhere else.

It’s not classed as benefit in kind. It’s a reimbursement, not an additional benefit.

WFH is destroying our economy. It was fine before covid to go into the office, and suddenly it's not. Even though you live 5 hours away, you still signed a contract to work at HQ... Why? How did you think you would work? If it's now inconvenient, you should find work closer to home. Your employer shouldn't be held accountable for your lifestyle choice. Sorry, but that's life, and it ain't easy.

Exactly - you are remote and so can claim.. If your place of work is listed as an office and you are paid expenses or provided with accommodation when you visit the office, then it is a benefit in kind.

That was meant for @browneyes77

Speak to your manager and explain your circumstances see if you can get her on board. If not I would speak to HR and look at putting in a request to work from home. Explain all your reasons, tbh with the fact you have worked from home for so long, and that you have a disabled dependent I don’t think they would have a leg to stand on to refuse the request.

You realise jobs WFH have been about well before Covid started?

I’ve been in my field based WFH role for over 10 years. My job requires it because I have to travel places at times to attend meetings, conduct assessments etc.

Those of us have been WFH for many many years have been doing so perfectly fine for all that time. People have only started paying attention to WFH since Covid and seem oblivious to the fact that WFH jobs existed long before.

And the OP says her emails from HR (and the job spec) state the position is a remote position, with occasional visits to the office.

My own contract states that I am field based worker as part of the HR dept in HO and that I may have to visit my HO from time to time. I still get my mileage expenses paid for it, that are classed as a reimbursement not a benefit in kind.

If her role is classed as remote as part of her contract, any travelling she does, can be claimed as expenses, not a benefit in kind.

What's the fine print of the contract. Even a WFH contract usually has an office as your 'base' for meetings and HR things.

We had a lady who was based hours away and her office was London but she worked from home unless needed for meetings which weren't often. Sadly the company scrapped WFH completely even before COVID and she was completely screwed.

If you check the fine print and confirm with HR what exactly is in the contract you will have an answer. It maybe the HQ is the location given for all WFH staff. If there is zero mention of remote working then yes they can force you to attend or leave. However they have also hired you knowing you are 5 hrs away so clearly didn't expect you to be in every day but if did you not read the contract you signed and questioned why it didnt state your correct terms and just signed anyway so then legally - you signed up for this. This would be one for the union/HR/ legal experts I think.

It's also the exact reason I am terrified of getting a remote working position. I really need to work from home as I have health issues and a sole carer but this being told I have to be in at the other end of the country thing seems to happen a lot lately and I physically can't.

Wfh is here to stay no matter what bitter mnetters say. Absent minded, Cos I say so Presentism is dinasaur culture. Wfh is better for morale better for the environment. Office is better for train company profits for pret a manger profits and for canary wharf estate owners. You're being manipulated dear people. Unless you're in a job phsycal work or teaching or service etc is involved, you can perfectly be OK seeing your colleagues once a month. The other category of office advocates seem to be lonely people who want a chat. That's OK but They need to understand not everyone wants to. Those who want can congrogate. Just don't force yourselves on other people for goodness sake.

Once a month doesn't sound too bad. Once a week would be a pain.

I love a nice bit of wfh though I am 99 per cent office based and front facing. However I really don't think it's a great way for young workers to start as so many are already fighting with anxiety and problems with social interaction after lockdowns. I fear they won't learn how to actually be in a workplace and navigate work relationships.

*amenable

Read your contract. Go to HR. Why did your contract state HQ? I was in a similar situation once. My contract stated HQ, but I had emails setting up the contract that stated wfh. The emails won. But I agreed to go to London one day a week - not five. You know if there is a business need to be present and build relationships with people. And you know, whether to co-operate and succeed, or whether you might find your job becomes redundant. Only you know how important your function is for the company you work for. And whether you are valued. If the company is suffering because you cannot be on site - they will re-organise the company and job roles. If you understand your value, I'd start talking to your manager and HR.

Always amazed how little attention people pay to their employment contracts. This is not specifically aimed at OP but there are frequent threads on here where people are surprised regarding terms and conditions like sick pay, annual leave etc.

However, employee has over two years’ service and has worked from home plus paperwork to show she accepted a remote job.

The employment contract or statement of terms and conditions is not necessarily the decider. Custom and practice is equally important (if not more so) in employment law and in this example is in OP’s favour.