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?

But then it's not like you've seen any of the relevant paperwork here, much less know enough about the organisation to opine on what would be a legitimate business reason. So best OP does as a lot of us have advised her and seek advice from an employment solicitor. Showing them not only the contract but the initial job advert and the various emails mentioned.

And frankly, the people who clearly have no idea of the existence of custom and practice are the ones showing the least understanding in this thread. Multiple people have wrongly said something amounting to contract rules ok, which is clearly wrong and would be the most appropriate comparison to the 'bad references are illegal' thing. Whereas those of us who've raised the possibility of a change to the implied terms have mostly said OP needs specialist advice on that point, from someone who's seen all the relevant evidence.

I don't care - i'm just doing what everyone else is doing and stating my opinion on a post on the internet. Why does that bother you?

I never said anyone shouldn't work from home, please explain where I have said that.

What's entitled is the attitude that people should do "what's best for their personal circumstances" - well yes they should in general, we all need to look out for ourselves but that doesn't extend having the right to do your own thing when your employer has clearly asked you to come into the office once a month.

If OP had been asked to do it once a week I'd side with her, but once a month is reasonable and they said they'd be happy to settle with that.

The employer is the one that pays your wages so you can live this life of "what's best for your personal situation" just in case you thought the money fell out of the sky.

As for WFH being a productivity issue - my attitude is that it can be depending on the person, some people are good at home, some are not but at the end of the day there isn't a substitute for simply being a normal human being and seeing your colleagues like we did pre-pandemic which was apparently 100BC according to most people these days who have built their lives on the assumption that being anti-social to their employer is going to be seen as the new norm.

Working at home is a flexibility granted at the discretion of the employer, not a human right as many people seem to think it is. Seeing your colleagues does make a difference actually.

There's also the fact that from her employers POV if they don't like her rigid attitude of refusing to go into the office, it is easy to start excluding her from things that are only discussed in the office, which is fine if that's what OP wants - it's an easy way to get managed out and for what? The insistence that the her right to not do the same as everyone else comes before everything else.

Good luck with that attitude.

We all need to look out for ourselves but that doesn't extend having the right to do your own thing when your employer has clearly asked you to come into the office once a month.

Except when it does.

People are entitled to have their own takes on whether something's a good or bad thing or not, but you're mixing up having an opinion with whether a legal right exists or not.

my organisation is the same, wanting more people back in the offices. I've had to go through an occupational health referral to prove to them that due to my arthritis and autism that working from home is best for me, so they can't make me go into the office now. Sounds like you could have an OH referral if you say you cannot drive due to medical reasons and travelling 5 hours plus even once a month would be detrimental to your caring responsibilities for your DH?

I think you're being a cheeky fucker!

You say "They knew where I lived when I started." Er, so did you when you applied for the office-based role.

I cannot believe you have even thought about if they would cover your hotel expenses. Total Cheeky Fuckery.

My husband now has to do in one day a week in the office, but he wasn't stupid enough to get a job 5 hours away. So he can get into the office in 2 hours. Of course he pays his own train fare, why would his employer pay it? His colleague lives in another country in the UK, and now has to fly into London once per week, in order to keep his job, it wouldn't occur to him to ask their employer to pay for his flight. Would they both prefer to be 100% WFH? Of course, but they are both sensible enough to accept what they need to do in order to keep their jobs.

For goodness sake, stop being so entitled and find yourself a job with a reasonable commute.

In case it wasn't obvious YABU.

You said you had a 'bug in your ass' about people working from home, which does imply that you care. I am just curious about why.

The OP has said a number of times that she took the job on the basis she could work remotely, and it's only now that her line manager is saying that she has to come into the office once a month. She has an email chain to back this up. She's entitled to question that. She doesn't owe her employer anything. They'd be quick enough to boot her out of the door if they didn't need her any more. It's foolish to get sentimental about employment and start feeling grateful for having a job.

It's not like you've seen any of the relevant paperwork here, much less know enough about the organisation to opine on what would be a legitimate business reason

Spot on, OrangeMarmaladeOnToast, and that's why I referred to the principle of what may be allowed rather than claiming any expertise in this particular case

As you rightly say, professional advice would be needed for that

I don't think I am being cheeky.
I've worked remotely for over 2 years.
Any trips up to the office are expensed.
They provided laptop monitor chair etc
In all respects I've been treated as a remote worker.
They approached me for the role knowing I didn't live close by.

You could use your original job spec to renegotiate your contract but I don't know if they will, as it seems it's a top down push to get people back into the office. I imagine your boss might just be following her own orders. I know I've had to as our exec have asked - our contracts and job specs say 2 days a month in the office. We use the 2 days to focus on reviews, forward planning, meeting other parts of the business, team events etc - so it's not a case of people travelling in and spending all day on calls.

You could use this evidence in a tribunal if they tried to push you out (really depends how in-demand or specialist your skills are, or if easily replaceable)- but if you desperately need the job, I guess it doesn't help. I would try asking it on compassionate grounds that you're DH's FT carer but again I don't think they'd be open to it as it creates an unfair culture for those who do have to come in. But you should ask anyway.

Could you not try to find another job closer to home or fully remote?

Ask your union or ACAS if not in a union but it comes down to how valuable are you, and how easy can you find a job elsewhere? If they want to keep you they'll shift. If you're not that important to them, they won't.

Yes, that's ultimately the message to take from this thread.

OP needs to get the legal position established first. She's subsequently said that once a month would be ok, but since her contract says one thing and the job advert, emails about the role and how she's done things since she started say another, it's still worth getting everything nailed down now. OPs not the only person to have started a new job when everything was in flux due to covid restrictions, but still best to make things clear.

Your contract says you work from HQ.

You say the company knew where you live when you started. With the greatest of respect, so did you. I think going in once a month is a very generous offer on their part.

I hope you can sort it out, OP.

My DH started WFH after lockdown, before that he worked away during week, coming home at weekends. Since lockdown, he is now more flexible, and can have meetings (like yourself) with colleagues from around the world at any time; 7am meetings very common. It makes sense to continue rather than returning to working away so can you emphasise this aspect, OP?

After lockdown he was asked to come back to office on an occasional basis and he did this for one day, driving there (three and a half hours each way) and back in a day. Luckily, never been asked to since. I think if he was asked to return permanently, he would just retire. He prefers the flexibility of working from home (with the cat for company during the day, lol).

1 day a month with travel expenses paid for would be reasonable if they want to see you face to face IMHO.

They should just learn to make it work. And you should get your home working in a new contract.

Oh another thing to consider though - if you change your contract to be remote, it could impact salary? As I know in our company we offer London weighting for those who have London HO in contract. For those roles fully remote or have a regional office in contract, it's a lower pay. Worth checking before you re-negotiate.

Luckily it's not based in London so no London weighting.

Hence why i've said sit down and speak with HR and the manager.

Grandfather rights are a thing. I got a company car in one job which apparently I wasn't entitled to, but because i'd had it for two years they couldn't take it off me and it became part of my entitlement.

Get a legal standing on this, but before you do that just sit down and talk to people about it - perhaps this is worth going into the office over rather than posting on the internet to a bunch of strangers and asking their opinion? I'm aware talking to your colleagues isn't part of your deemed job description but if it means keeping your status as "that person who nobody ever sees because she just works here but doesn't want to actually know anyone" then maybe it's worth the trip.

Or maybe it's not and a new job is in order...

Agree with you, it seems like a lot of MNers here want to beat WFH/hybrid workers with a stick to get them back to work and think they’re all shirkers.

Yes, some WFH workers are shirkers who do little work and get away with it but the vast majority of us actually work, at work. I’m similar to another pp, I’d rather get paid less and do a hybrid model of working.

No, OP needs her own independent legal advice first. Before raising the issue and possibly saying things that don't help her.

No reason to think the new manager understands the law, or that they've had access to everyone's original job adverts and initial emails about how the role would be performed. And HR aren't a neutral party either.

Then once OP understands her position, that's when it's time for a decision about what suits her best strategically.

That's good, one less thing to worry about. BUT contract re-negotiations can also involve paycuts because everything is back on the table. If you're a high performer they're not likely to give you a paycut, but if you're not or there's any negative feedback they can use it as an excuse to lower pay/change job description etc. Take legal advice if you go down this route.

This is tosh. There is no need to go paying solicitors when a perfectly reasonable conversation could be had with her employer to see if they're willing to make an exception for her.

If they aren't, THEN seek legal advice.

but the job advert said remote and HR confirmed it when she started!

Nobody sees their contract until they've been offered the job - you work off the t&c in the job advert. It's not a case of hoping they are correct - if something is specifically advertised they can't then change it. Therefore OP's application was made on the basis that it was a remote job - she could argue she wouldn't even have applied if this wasn't the case.

Same with posters suggesting OP looks for a new, fully remote job - given THIS job was advertised as remote, how on earth can OP work out whether any similar job with the same wording actually means remote or not?

Yes signing the contract complicates things- but I think people are being unfair to accuse OP of being entitled to want to continue with the same t&c as the job she applied for and has been doing for the last few years.

It's a completely different scenario to someone who started being office based, WFH during the pandemic and moved away, and management now want staff back in.

Perhaps you could read the whole thread, or at least the OP's posts, before you post nonsense.

Good luck OP.
you seem to have very good grounds.

We have staff who applied innlockdown and live 5 to 6 hours away.

They come in 4 times a year and maybe the odd in person.meeting.

It is understood and accepted.
There performance is just as good as those who chose to come in every day.

If you always worked like this then you should be protected . Look customs and practice .
why the sudden change anyway ?