To think that Boots move to 5 days a week is a step back for workplace equality

[Vistada]

Boots HQ, a predominantly female workforce - has been told they are to be back in the office five days a week from September with no debate and no real solid reasoning (in my view)

https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/boots-to-end-hybrid-working-for-office-workers/

I think the move to hybrid working is amazing for everyone, not just women, in terms of helping to achieve the work/life/parenting balance that has eluded us for so long, but we can't deny women shoulder this juggling act more.

I think this move, and any move back to 5 days in the office (where its really not needed) is a huge step back for workplace equality - and for a male CEO to enforce this just shows how out of touch he is.

The problem is, it seems to me, that people starting working longer hours during Covid, and not really fully “logging off” in the evenings due to the blurring of work and home.

Now people are being asked to go back to the office, and somehow work the same extra hours as they did working from home. And still have blurred work and non work time. So in total work places are taking a lot more from people.

I think we really need to work towards a four day week as near universally as possible (including for teachers as I’m not arguing everyone would have the same nwd).

@Vod That’s a very fair point. If I’m totally honest my objection is more emotional than financial: the cost of after-school care bothers me less than the fact I see my kids less, they have a really long day, they miss out on after-school stuff with friends, and I don’t get to go to school events unless they happen in the evening.

(I would argue, though, that I don’t know what sick pay in teaching is like, because teachers are guilted out of being ill anyway. I’ve been putting off elective surgery for a chronic condition for years, and I was told to take “as little time off as possible” after surgery I couldn’t put off for a miscarriage years ago.)

It is a bit a women’s issue though because when relationships break down, it’s nearly always the woman who ends up with most if not all of the caring responsibilities.

Obviously it happens in relationships too, but it’s starkest when the parents are no longer together.

The latter is appalling and I'm sorry that happened and continues to happen to you. It's also something that happens in a lot of sectors with worse/no sick pay.

I respect your honesty though, fair play. Like you, I think jobs that have to be done in a set place and time are going to have to pay more to compensate or we're going to have to accept that we won't fill them. That's just the workings of supply and demand, and we can't argue our way out of that.

It is galling though that uneven access to flexibility is talked about so much more than uneven access to so many other aspects of T and C. Not least because everyone thinks higher pension payments and annual leave entitlement from an employer is good, whereas some people don't like working from home at all. It's a whopping great double standard.

No separate rooms in my office open plan meeting rooms like gold dust.the background noise is unreal yet that's us being collaborative
at home I listen to the radio however its through my laptop so when a call comes in I have it set to disconnect so you hear absolutely nothing. the peace and quiet at home is unreal

Have you considered many of us work for companies that see the benefit of providing flexibility?

last week it was an event at my sons school at 215-315. Instead of having my lunch break at 130 like I tend to do I took it at that time. I did work until later that day to do my hours.

my son had his mum there when needed
my company didn’t lose

other days I don’t do the exact 7.5h but another days I might have worked 9h instead.

I think you’ve mentioned you’re a teacher. Apologies if not. But then you’ve the benefit of the holidays. My teacher friends spend all the half terms with their kids whilst mine are in holiday clubs and sometimes are there for the whole term because we don’t have enough days between his dad and myself to cover it

A stunning chart shows the true cause of the gender wage gap - Vox

This is a women's issue, because it will affect the women more than men. Much more. Yes, we would like men to do their fair share, but we all know this is not happening, and it not going to happen anytime soon. It's not a people issue, as it won't affect all people equally. It will affect women and disabled people people far more then men.

Allowing women to work from home when possible and when they need to is really the very the least these big companies like Boots, who want to profit off the back of those same women, can do.

Boots owner faces shareholder call to ensure all employees paid real living wage | The Independent

Have a guess if Boots did decide to pay the living wages to it's (largely female) employees.

Let's not forget this thread is about Boots screwing women over.

I suspect the NHS pension isn't as great as you think. They changed the terms in 2015, before that yes it was excellent, but now it's not really. Because it's tied to state pension age, I'll be tied into work until I'm late 60s (realistically, given I'm early 30s now it'll likely be 70s, if the pension exists in its current form at all). So no, something that may benefit me in 40 years (if I live that long) doesn't make up for current crappy conditions. Paid sick leave is only a benefit if you're ill, most of us don't actually benefit from that, although it is psychologically nice to know it's there.

You're just being so rude. Do you think DH gets up at 5.45am and home at 8.30pm for the love of it? Or because we have a mortgage to pay? Spreading misinformation that healthcare staff do it for the love of it just gives ammo to the government to keep wages low, and given most nurses are female it actually is a potential equality issue, unlike WFH.

That's a good point you'd hope companies who are expecting people back in the office would factor this in. Probably not but that's a problem with the employer unfortunately.

In the (very) long term, we could actually see a shift in the pay balance: so workers on the shop floor could have higher salaries than the WFH office staff.

It really won't do to pretend these things aren't better than what exists in other sectors. They are. That's not a matter of opinion.

The NHS pension, even not being as good as it was, is without question much better than a lot of what's available in the private and charity sectors. And paid sick leave is a huge benefit because, well, people do get ill. If, heaven forbid, you're in an awful accident this weekend and will need months to recuperate, you at least know the bills get paid while you're doing it. The same won't be true of someone who only gets a couple of weeks full pay, or nothing at all. And after all, people are in these situations all the time. It's going to happen to somebody today.

It's therefore a significant double standard to focus only on the things you (general) perceive to disadvantage you, whilst having nothing at all to say about the ways in which your terms and conditions significantly exceed those of some of the people you compare yourself to.

Tbh I think there's also downsides to WFH and there will always be people who want to do other face to face jobs for other reasons.
Sometimes just for the jobs themselves. It's swings and roundabouts.

I very much doubt that this will be the case. Really doubt that someone in boots will ever have the same salary as IT technician for boots. Right now a boots software developer that probably is wfh is earning around 40-50k

https://www.glassdoor.co.uk/Salary/Boots-Software-Developer-Salaries-E327390_D_KO6,24.htm

retail manager is around 25-40k

https://www.payscale.com/research/UK/Employer=The_Boots_Company_PLC/Salary

Can you tell me what the NHS pension is please? Thanks. And if you don't have full sick pay, that's what critical illness cover is for.

I think in person retail jobs will stay poorly paid and the size of the workforce will shrink. There's a thread now about by a shop worker about customer behaviour and how hard they're increasingly finding the job, and it's an interesting read. I'm not sure how sustainable the current model is, in the longer term.

Hopefully you'll find more information at the link below.

https://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/sites/default/files/2023-03/NHSPensions_RetirementGuide_%28V26%29_202303.pdf

Do you know what my employer's pension contribution is? Those of other remote workers?

And really, telling people that they can just pay out of pocket for a benefit your employer gives you is proving my point. NHS workers and nurses can pay out of pocket for childcare too (and unlike with critical illness cover, there's some state help available for this). They can also pay for being around for their DC more by dropping hours and drawing a lower salary. But clearly you don't think just cough up and suck it up is a sufficient answer for those working in person when they talk about their views, or you'd have said the same to them. Rightly so actually, because it's a stupid way to look at the issue. Again though, double standard.

I don't want a link, I want you to actually tell me how NHS staff's contribution and benefit compares to private. Since you think it's so relevant.

You're getting off topic now, my point wasn't anything to do with paying for childcare etc. It's to do with the absolutely shite working conditions in essential f2f roles, when you've got lots of the workforce happily sitting at home for the same money.

Do you think many of those sitting at home are happy ? Because we can be miserable in our works as well.

It's to do with the absolutely shite working conditions in essential f2f roles, when you've got lots of the workforce happily sitting at home for the same money.

Have to agree on this. I can’t remember the last time I ate lunch on a work day, and I have to limit how much and when I can drink because I don’t have time to go to the loo: my sympathy for people who find WFH “boring” is a bit limited.

And before anyone says “if you don’t like it then do something else” - that’s exactly what lots of teachers are doing, and it’s why lots of kids are in huge classes or have had a supply teacher teaching them for entire terms.

I'm 100% on topic, in fact. The post of mine that you replied to was in response to someone talking about remote workers needing less childcare whilst she had to spend a fortune on childcare. That was the root of the conversation.

Which means if you're going to tell people who don't have your access to full sick pay from their employers that they can just fund it themselves so it doesn't matter, either you do the same for those needing to pay more childcare than a remote worker who doesn't need wraparound, or you're applying a double standard.

I'm completely uninterested in whether you want a link or not. The NHS pension scheme, explained in detail at the link below regardless of whether you care to click on it or not, is better than mine. It's really a mark of how good it is that you think it having got worse over the last few years in any way addresses the pension point. All of these employer contribution rates from each of the schemes, see below, are better than mine, and that of lots of other employers.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/nhs-pension-scheme-proposed-policy-changes-for-april-2024/nhs-pension-scheme-member-contributions-phase-2-and-miscellaneous-amendments

I don’t think people should be brought back to offices just because some essential roles in society have to be f2f. That makes no sense. Each workplace needs to decide what works for them.

Worth pointing out that we're also facing recruitment issues in a lot of sectors where people are working remotely and hybrid too. Indeed, sometimes the recruitment problems are why people are able to work remotely. This thread has talked about customer service staff at home, and they're a great example of that.

But what about when no one wants to do the essential f2f jobs?