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?

Actually I am also one of the people that is in the process of moving away but I happily took the pay cut to facilitate this. My cost of living will go down and my pay will reflect that, but to me my quality of life goes up

It is not gleeful to call out entitled attitudes (which is what this was) of “my circumstances have changed so work needs to accommodate it but I won’t accommodate any changes to my salary”

Same with my organisation, it's quite common when you're recruiting over a wide geographical range. In some cases now it's essentially the organisational business model. It means salaries can be lower than they otherwise might be as you're not limited to what's often a more expensive than average area, and it also means if you need really niche/scarce expertise you've more chance of getting it.

based on your most recent update OP you will be fine to remain working as you are.

Why is she being entitled? It's not as if she's being paid to sit at home doing nothing. Also, she's mentioned that she has a disability (not that that should be relevant).

Honestly, it's classic MN that workers are expected to doff their hats to their employers and put up with anything that's thrown at them otherwise they're 'entitled'.

You wouldn't have to take a pay cut if employers truly valued employees who work from home. It's not particularly healthy for people or the planet that the best paid jobs either mean living in a massive over-priced city, or doing a ridiculous commute (that you could only afford if you're C-suite anyway). It would do a lot for equity and a fairer society if people can work from anywhere and get paid appropriately for what they do and not where they live. Sorry, but it sounds like you do resent the OP for standing up for herself in this regard. There's nothing 'entitled' about being told you can WFH, and accepting a job on this basis, then suddenly told 'actually you have to come in now.' If anything, it's the employer being entitled.

DH had this a while ago, unfortunately the new manager didn't realise that the entire organisation changed most of the contracts to remote worker until DH and other team members threatened to resign.

If the position was advertised as remote then I think the manager is on dodgy ground.

@roses321 if you read OP's latest message the job was advertised as remote with occasional office visits , there are further emails backing this up so I think OP is correct that despite offical address being HQ this was not their intention on her employment so it is a substantial change and also she has been working as agreed from job description and emails for more than 2 years in fact since she started job

You agreed a contract based in HQ so they are well within their rights however the fact the role was advertised as remote (unless clearly for Covid period not permanently) is something you could reasonably raise and see if you can agree a change but I would think there is no guarantee if they now want the contract honoured.

Is the job spec saying the same as what the contract says?

People are a bit crazy on this thread today.

Why do people assume WFH is less productive? My partner says they get more done on their one day at home per fortnight as there is no talking/quiet to concentrate etc

Once a month can be classed as occasional though no?

I really do think that negotiation will resolve this issue. Most companies are reasonable and I don't see why that can't be the case here, but occasional visits still means occasionally OP does HAVE to go to the office.

Depends on the person to be honest, I think it can be great, but I do have a bug up my ass about people who seem to think they're entitled to work from home. It does make a difference y'know when people actually show up and take part in face to face discussion with their colleagues.

I am a bit tired of this attitude from people where they seem to think they can do a job and just never show their faces - it's dystopian and weird in my opinion. I think working from home should stay, but I hate the attitude of "oh well I just work here, it doesn't mean i have to actually TALK to my colleagues socially" - I just wouldn't hire anyone with that attitude and find it really anti-social and really kind of rude.

Could you not manage once a month, you would probably need to stay over so maybe a hotel stay could be put on expenses

Wow, you really do have a bug up your ass. I can do my job and never show my face because that's what my contract says. I've never been to the office for my current job. Previous job, didn't go to the office for the last 5 years. My employer is perfectly happy with that.

OP, I would be making sure that your new manager has the requisite knowledge in relation to your medical condition and also that you are a carer for your DH.

I recently had to bring my employer to a tribunal (and won) and failure to make reasonable adjustments was one of the heads of claim. I had sent an email to my newish manager outlining my medical condition and how it impacted me. That was one of the key pieces of evidence was that despite having knowledge he failed to make reasonable adjustments as well as mounting a campaign of harassment and stalking and trying to get me investigated for gross misconduct after manufacturing false allegations against me

It all depends on how much they need you?

If your contract says you work out of that office they could make you work there full time. You knew this when you took the job so I’m not sure why you’re trying to change your contract.

I’ve worked places that are miles away from where I’ve lived and ended up getting digs or staying in my campervan when at work and going home when I’m not.

Just remember no one is irreplaceable.

Most important is that you had a remote role, so they should pay expenses. Check that with her first. Explain your home constraints as well, so she knows how much notice you need etc.

As long as expenses are paid, you really will need to go in occasionally if asked. Once a month if it's for a specific session sounds fairly reasonable if she will include some travel time in your work hours as well as expenses, but you could explain you expected once a quarter from previous role to see if it can be negotiated. It isn't reasonable if you have a remote contract and there aren't a bunch of people to meet when you are there.

We have many team members who attend something or other every few months from other countries, so I'd be startled if someone UK based couldn't manage that with sufficient notice. We did have one who refused to travel even for a key management meeting, so they had to have a managed exit unfortunately, it just is not the right attitude when there were so many big changes afoot and even the South Africa and New Zealand reps made it. There has to be a little recognition of work needs.

The law does allow for contract changes based on custom and practice in some circumstances

This is true, but then the law also allows employers to unilaterally change contracts if there's a legitimate business reason for doing so

Predictably, "custom and practice" is becoming a bit of a buzzphrase among those with little understanding - not unlike "Poor references are illegal" which also gets rolled out regularly

There are undoubtably cases where it's worth invoking, but I'm not sure being expected to attend an office one day a month is among them

Wfh doesn't mean I do nothing. I spend most of my day on teams in meetings if I went into the office I'd still spend the day on teams as my colleagues are all over the world. Being at home actually helps as I has a 7am call with the China office and I have a 5pm call with the US.

But that's the thing isn't it, your employer is happy with that.

OPs employer isn't!

WFH/hybrid also helps disabled people, parents (mostly mothers let’s be honest) and those with caring responsibilities stay in full time work.

It could also bring positives of levelling up areas outside of the main cities and reducing carbon footprint. And god forbid - people can spend more time with their families!

But let’s all get to the workhouses for below inflation wages, hot desking in usually terribly maintained offices and pay the lovely overpriced substandard train fares and Pret coffee shops because that’s the way it was always done. Those landlords and elites need their rents paying and everything must revolve around London and the big cities that no one can afford to live in comfortably now.

Why do you care? What do you mean - 'people who think they're entitled to work from home'? Why shouldn't they work from home? What's entitled about wanting what's best for your own personal situation?

WFH doesn't really doesn't make a difference in terms of productivity - if anything, it improves it. There's been a lot of guff about how working together in offices is good for collaboration and creativity but there's not a lot of data to back that up. The bottom line is that managers, particularly those in big corporations, think people are slacking off unless they can see what they're doing, even when it's quite obvious that they're not.

It can be lonely being a remote worker, but that's a separate issue.

Her manager, not her employer. Different. Looks like she can get HR on her side anyway if her job was advertised as remote.

OP's new manager isn't. Seems her employer has been happy thus far.

Are you OP's new manager @roses321 😜?

Research implied contracts in employment law.

I believe that even if your contract states that your place of work is office HQ, the fact that the job was advertised as remote, and you have been indeed working remotely for two years, may mean that your employment contract could have been altered.

As far as I remember (from my law degree years ago that I have had nothing to do with since) contractual terms can be implied or altered by fact. I.e what you are actually doing and have always done.