Page 25 | To think that Boots move to 5 days a week is a step back for workplace equality

Vistada · 2024-03-08T11:54:05+00:00

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 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.

ThisHonestQuail · 10/03/2024 10:55

ZebraDanios · 10/03/2024 10:51

honestly in my opinion the negatives of wfh are far worse than the negatives of office working.

For you. Surely it doesn’t take that much imagination and empathy to see that what is difficult for you is no problem for someone else and vice versa?

If you could be bothered to quote the whole comment I literally said I’ve had no choice but to accept it and agree flexibility is good…

sunglassesonthetable · 10/03/2024 11:03

There is not a black and white answer to this.

ZebraDanios · 10/03/2024 11:09

ThisHonestQuail · 10/03/2024 10:55

If you could be bothered to quote the whole comment I literally said I’ve had no choice but to accept it and agree flexibility is good…

Show quote history

OK sorry. But you’re only really looking at the social aspect of wfh vs f2f - what about the time/stress/money saved on commuting? What about the flexibility? Time/money/stress saved on wraparound care if you have children? The fact that you can work in your slippers…?!

I can’t understand why, if wfh is so detrimental
to people, the argument exists on this thread that no-one should be allowed to do it because it’s not fair on the people who can’t. That line of thought makes no sense either - but it wouldn’t even exist if wfh didn’t have some significant advantages over working f2f.

Alcyoneus · 10/03/2024 11:10

It’s no good protesting about how productive you are because you WFH. The fact is that many are taking the piss. And the pisstakers will take away this privilege for others. That’s how rules and laws work. Everyone has to follow them because a few will break them.

It doesn’t matter what you do, many companies will demand more and more time in the office. They are only just starting to wise up to what a con WFH has been for productivity because of how people skive.

InTheUpsideDownToday · 10/03/2024 11:12

custardcreamed · 08/03/2024 12:15

I’ve name changed, for obvious reasons, but long time user.

I work for Boots, at this office. I am absolutely affected by this and getting my ducks in a row to leave.

Its totally driven by one woman who is stuck in the dinosaur ages, and asks senior staff to fly to Europe from Nottingham for a one hour meeting in person because she refuses to see the benefit of working over teams.

As for us one comment I’ve seen so far about us perhaps not being ‘productive’, considering we’ve worked bloody well remotely and then in a hybrid set up for the last 4 years, and still delivered better-than-expected growth year after year, I’d say that’s not the case here.

And to add to this joke of a company, we’ve been receiving emails all week about IWD and how ‘inclusive’ the company is 😂

They have also removed remote working and compressed hours from the flexible working policy and will no longer allow them to even be requested, let allow given as an option.

The entire office is in uproar, to say the least.

This is so shortsighted.
I've stopped shopping in Boots due to empty shelves and lack of stock. They never have many tills open either.
I go to independent pharmacies instead.

sunglassesonthetable · 10/03/2024 11:13

It’s no good protesting about how productive you are because you WFH. The fact is that many are taking the piss. And the pisstakers will take away this privilege for others. That’s how rules and laws work. Everyone has to follow them because a few will break them.

Oh please, I've been WFH for more than a decade. You really have no idea.

It doesn’t matter what you do, many companies will demand more and more time in the office. They are only just starting to wise up to what a con WFH has been for productivity because of how people skive.

Yep no idea.

InTheUpsideDownToday · 10/03/2024 11:14

Aviee · 08/03/2024 12:18

Tbh on my work from home days I'm much lazier and my friends agree they are too. So it's probably fair enough really.

That is a you problem not a wfh issue.
Do you not have targets or decent management?

I work extremely hard at home and it would show very quickly if I didn't.

CaveMum · 10/03/2024 11:16

It’s yet another example of trying to force women to fit the system, instead of adapting the system so that it is fair to everyone.

Statistics showed that during the lockdowns it was mostly women who picked up the stress and additional work of homeschooling, and countless women were forced to give up work as a result of employers refusing to be flexible.

How many millions/billions are lost to the economy because we refuse to change the system, just because “that’s the way we’ve always done it?” Flexible working allowances mean more women can return to the workforce - IF they want to, of course.

It’s highly shortsighted of Boots to enforce this, they will lose good employees, employees they have invested time and money in training and for little tangible benefit.

InTheUpsideDownToday · 10/03/2024 11:19

waterlellon · 08/03/2024 12:24

Massive backward step for the environment

Absolutely!
This is all being driven by capitalism and buying more stuff that we don't need making shareholders richer.
They also own the offices that are rented to businesses.

Goforitagainandagain · 10/03/2024 11:20

InTheUpsideDownToday · 10/03/2024 11:12

This is so shortsighted.
I've stopped shopping in Boots due to empty shelves and lack of stock. They never have many tills open either.
I go to independent pharmacies instead.

Show quote history

But that is probably nothing to do with where the office staff work, Boots has always been a bit crap and the general even more crapness now is more to do with the general state of the high street. You can't really buy anything from Boots that you can't buy at a supermarket or Amazon and it's usually cheaper and easier from these other places

RashOfBees · 10/03/2024 11:24

Psyberbaby · 10/03/2024 09:55

It's so weird reading this as I've been freelance for over a decade and me and my other SE friends have all been massively into our coworking spaces... Anything to avoid the dreaded solo WFH slumps. It's strange to read employees actively want what we spent years trying to mitigate.
It isn't healthy to live, work and sleep under one roof.
If you're at the stage where you would rather lose your job than step outside your house, its time to see a doctor

Firstly, there are people who work fully from home and it suits them perfectly well. But we aren’t even talking about that in the case of this story - this is about Boots ending hybrid working.

Personally, after years of doing it I struggle with being in any one spot without variation, which is unfortunate because I do an office job that involves only infrequent visits to customers, events, etc. Being able to split the week between locations resolved this issue to an extent - I’d started to do it just before covid anyway - and it works very well for me. I don’t want a 100% wfh role but I can’t face the thought of five days sat at a desk on phone calls and driving hours each day for the privilege. It’s disproportionate to the value I get out of it.

It’s not actually about having to leave the house at all for me - if I need to do the commute, I’ll look for something that involves more variety.

OneMoreTime23 · 10/03/2024 11:27

sunglassesonthetable · 10/03/2024 11:13

It’s no good protesting about how productive you are because you WFH. The fact is that many are taking the piss. And the pisstakers will take away this privilege for others. That’s how rules and laws work. Everyone has to follow them because a few will break them.

Oh please, I've been WFH for more than a decade. You really have no idea.

It doesn’t matter what you do, many companies will demand more and more time in the office. They are only just starting to wise up to what a con WFH has been for productivity because of how people skive.

Yep no idea.

I do think there is a difference for those who WFH prior to lockdown (like my husband) and those that didn’t.

standards were lowered during lockdown because of people needing to balance homeschooling etc with work. People in HMOs working in their bedrooms etc. Some have carried that forward into the new WFH. Given next to no management training happened for 2 years during lockdown we also have a whole load of managers unable to deal with it. There are employees where I’ve just moved who think 40% in office means 1-2 days a month and nobody is prepared to discuss it with them. It needs some serious work but nobody can be arsed to do it.

(My other HR colleagues will surely agree.)

OneMoreTime23 · 10/03/2024 11:28

this is about Boots ending hybrid working.

the language used in the article isn’t “ending” it though.

sunglassesonthetable · 10/03/2024 11:30

Some of the answers on here lead me to think some posters don't realise lots of work
is

business to business
not consumer ( public ) facing

InTheUpsideDownToday · 10/03/2024 11:30

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the request of the user.

Do you work?

InTheUpsideDownToday · 10/03/2024 11:36

Vistada · 08/03/2024 12:50

The only green shoot here is that from April the onus will be on the employer to prove why they cant accommodate a flexible working request rather than on the employee to prove why they need it.

And an answer of "because we'd have to do it for everyone" won't be allowed to stand, as everyones circumstances need to be taken in isolation

Will be interesting to see some of the reasons employers come up with for rejecting applications, especially as people with proven high productivity have been wfh for years now.

sunglassesonthetable · 10/03/2024 11:36

I do think there is a difference for those who WFH prior to lockdown (like my husband) and those that didn’t.

I completely agree. @OneMoreTime23

I think there's huge variety across the world of work.

It's these black and white blanket statements ( which seem to often include the word CON ) which come across as so ignorant .

InTheUpsideDownToday · 10/03/2024 11:38

redalex261 · 08/03/2024 12:50

Fully WFH is detrimental in most jobs for most people as far as actual work is concerned. Staff end up isolated, disengaged and unmotivated. People often work in unsuitable surroundings at home without proper equipment - dining chairs, no desk, off tiny laptops instead of full size screens. Distractions like pets, undone household chores and children - how on earth are people working at reasonable capacity with kids around for some or even all of the time?

There is reduced collaboration too, and it is (let’s face it) a lazy bastard’s charter. How often do you call someone (always the same someones) who is green on teams and there’s no reply?

Hybrid is a great balance - around 40% in office is ideal to foster collaboration and engagement, and complex work can be focussed on in peace at home (if you get peace at home).

It will be ruined though. Those who started bleating as soon as asked to return to office a percentage of their working week will ruin it for everyone. You know who they are - all have sudden impediments to coming in two days a week when they managed five a couple of years ago. They have anxiety, have one-legged grannies with dementia requiring care, neurodiverse kids, neurodiverse themselves (recent diagnosis via internet of course) hampering their ardent desire “to come in just like everyone else, it’s not that I don’t WANT to come to the office…..” It’s also hard to manage - folks on my office complain about those who make excuses/just don’t come in. Managers have to discuss this with complainants and perpetrators, and rnd up policing attendance.

Anyway, I digress. People are right. The Boots CEO probably does think some staff are skiving at home and want bums on seats to ensure they get value for money. They will be right in a small but significant number of cases. It’s not fair, but not really surprising.

You're talking about early days of lockdown and forced mandate to wfh.
Companies have now invested in equipment for home working, and many employees are actually more connected using remote meeting technology.

Psyberbaby · 10/03/2024 11:46

CaveMum · 10/03/2024 11:16

It’s yet another example of trying to force women to fit the system, instead of adapting the system so that it is fair to everyone.

Statistics showed that during the lockdowns it was mostly women who picked up the stress and additional work of homeschooling, and countless women were forced to give up work as a result of employers refusing to be flexible.

How many millions/billions are lost to the economy because we refuse to change the system, just because “that’s the way we’ve always done it?” Flexible working allowances mean more women can return to the workforce - IF they want to, of course.

It’s highly shortsighted of Boots to enforce this, they will lose good employees, employees they have invested time and money in training and for little tangible benefit.

Please stop conflating women and mothers. I'm sick of people speaking for "women" when they mean mothers who actively chose to have kids with shit men and then complain life is hard

RashOfBees · 10/03/2024 11:49

OneMoreTime23 · 10/03/2024 11:28

this is about Boots ending hybrid working.

the language used in the article isn’t “ending” it though.

Regardless of the specifics of Boots’ working arrangements, there is a discussion about the future of hybrid at the moment and this news, as well as the thread we’re on now, is part of it. I do see that all the arguments that were employed against FT wfh now seem to have been pressed into action against hybrid: people are skiving, it’s bad for your mental health, it’s bad for young people, what will happen to businesses who need office workers to buy sandwiches and so on.

The point I was trying to make is that the focus isn’t on 100% wfh, but the rollback of what seemed in the aftermath of Covid to be a sensible balance. Working 20% to 60% in an office is not refusing to leave your house as the poster I quoted was suggesting!

RashOfBees · 10/03/2024 11:54

sunglassesonthetable · 10/03/2024 11:30

Some of the answers on here lead me to think some posters don't realise lots of work
is

business to business
not consumer ( public ) facing

Yes. Another one is people talking about being in with ‘the team’. I haven’t physically sat with a team for over ten years now. A situation common to many colleagues in the different organisations I have worked for in that time. Not that I don’t get value from meeting colleagues in the office as I’m obviously working with them, but the concept of everybody sitting in team groups in the same place is really not as standard as it was.

Wexone · 10/03/2024 11:55

Candl3Stix · 10/03/2024 08:51

Good on him.

WFH has been dreadful for my husband’s mental health. If you are doing your job properly you will be doing 9-5 at your desk with a lunch and tea break or whatever hours/ breaks are on your contract. There is zero point to wfh because you shouldn’t be doing childcare, exercise, housework or anything else. It’s incredibly dull and lonely.

As a consumer and user of services I absolutely do not want to be speaking to anybody or for my data to be - in private homes. I know I’m not alone in this. We were working outside of the home perfectly well before Covid and it’s ridiculous lazy staff are still trying to cling on to it now several years later.

when I worked in the office full time you be lucky to get your tea or lunch break. quiet common to be eating at your desk or in the meeting room. now I actually get out for a walk every lunchtime and really helps my head.

Wexone · 10/03/2024 12:00

Candl3Stix · 10/03/2024 10:42

If people are writing code they will be inputting customer data, my data which I don’t want spread round multiple locations with children and other non company people in the background in the same space. I also don’t want to speak to people on the phone with non company/ service employees in the background of non private spaces. I am pretty sure I’m not alone in this.

Show quote history

They are inputting data from a spreadsheet more than likely. its all controlled password etc. its not in a locked dungeon no one can enter. it can be done remotely no issues

InTheUpsideDownToday · 10/03/2024 12:02

Gwenhwyfar · 08/03/2024 14:38

" I have a good working relationship with both my team and the wider team. Some of these people I have never met face to face."

I'm sorry, but this made me laugh thinking of those people who claim to be 'in love' with someone they've never met. I accept that you can get along well with people to some extent online, but it's really not the same as face-to-face. Online meetings are also not the same so the time your mother spends travelling to meet her colleagues, only ONCE a month, is well spent imo.

These are work colleagues not friends or partners!

innerdesign · 10/03/2024 12:44

Psyberbaby · 10/03/2024 11:46

Please stop conflating women and mothers. I'm sick of people speaking for "women" when they mean mothers who actively chose to have kids with shit men and then complain life is hard

Show quote history

Hear hear! 'Statistics showed that women picked up the slack for their male husbands and partners who they allowed to not pull their weight' is not an argument.