Change in Working from Home procedure

[HappyKite2067]

I have a fairly flexible job, I’m expected to be on site for certain meetings and activities but for the past 2 years, outside of this I could work from home. We are now being encouraged to be onsite more and although we don’t have a WFH policy, the procedure has changed. We now can only WFH limited days and we have to seek permission to do so. It feels like my job, which was previously very flexible and suited me, has turned into quite a micro managed job. Am I being unreasonable to think this is something to be bothered about, and raise with HR? Or are most work places now starting to push staff back into the office?

Love it all you like, if you can see people you can see if they're taking the piss.

^

Piss takers will do it anywhere

What matters are results. Is the work done, yes or no?? It's that basic

WFH was great but it was ruined because most people take the piss than don't.

It seems to be mostly women of all ages and very young men.
That's why men do better than women - they don't prioritise housework!

Meetings that need to be held at the begining of the day or the end - can't be due to school runs.
When you ring someone and they're off doing some housework, answering the door.
Lunch breaks that take longer as the dog has to be walked.
Then maybe some work might be done in the evenings as catch up but they then need answers and no one is around. Have the nerve to ask you to finish bits off.

The most that should've been taken from WFH is no commute time and costs.
Everything else should be as if in the office.

A job I had just after the pandemic, one single women ruined it for everyone because she was doing childcare. Don't blame the director putting an end to it.

Except the advantage of reducing commuting, I don't really get the difference unless people take the piss and use the time to do none working things.

Ultimately, the reason many home workers want it so badly are the same reasons bosses are now saying workers need to get back to the office.

I think too many people took liberties. Some WFHers have shot themselves in the foot.

The vast majority of people have to work for a living and they deserve a good work life balance. We are not here to kill ourselves to make profit, for some reason you are fighting for the employers, and clearly for presenteeism, for the few rather than the many it seems
Being paid to do one's laundry, food shopping ordering, dropping off kids to school (and chatting with others mums during that time), baby sitting whilst doing in one day what should take 1 hour isn't right either.

People want to be paid FT to work PT. Having both is not good work life balance, it's being entitled. The only reason businesses are calling their workers back is because it was of no benefit to them and those who moan the most are those who took advantage the most.

@vivainsomnia @Ziplob
People want to be paid FT to work PT.
This sentence - nutshell.

I would tell them. Sounds like a bunch of jobs worth’s!

It takes time and money, which are two things I'd like to have more of. And it would be annoying to have those taken away so that I could go into an office to sit on a video call with people in other offices, rather than have those calls at home.

I don't have an issue with the actual being in the office part - if I could teleport there for free it would be fine. Or even if I could just park there. As it is I would need to pay extortionate daily parking fees in a public car park because I can't get the bus because if I do I can't get back in time before DD needs picking up from nursery.

I know that people who have a job where wfh isn't possible have these issues as well. But my job can be done from home. Different jobs have different positives - the ability to wfh is one that my job has.

You shouldn't tar everyone who wfh with the same brush as whatever you've seen. My employers actually went fully remote during lockdown partly because of the uptick in productivity that came with everyone wfh.

Of course some people take the piss. But your posts imply they're in the majority. They're not.

When DH started at his company 19yr ago they had a 9 day fortnight - if you put in the extra hour most days, you earned every other friday off. Only, what happened is that people ‘wft’ on the interim Friday too. And went to the hairdressers, lunch with friends and got caught out when the boss called them (my DH being one of the bosses who called a team member into a board meeting only to realise she was having her hair blowdried…) and we’re talking senior level employees, not secretaries walking their dogs or whatever - highly paid professionals.

And so the 9 day fortnight was withdrawn. Gutting for people who did not abuse the system and had made commitments/childcare arrangements in the expectation of having that day. Spoiled for the majority by the selfish minority.

It’s usually women, because women do a disproportionate amount of home labour. They also need to work to survive.

Allowing people to work at home so they can balance home labour is not a bad thing, especially considering the decrease in birth rates, women need more flexibility.

I love how these posts never accuse men of doing the above, because men usually focus solely on their careers. Women do take advantage of working from home because it allows them to do the 1000 other things they need to get done. Ridiculous to expect women to work part time so they can pick their children up and do laundry.

‘People who took advantage the most are the ones to moan the most’.

How about those with disabilities? I have a colleague with a disability where remote work allows them to work and they then don’t have to rely on state benefits. You want them to not work and be reliant on a pittance? Never mind how losing that sense of purpose and the impact of mental well-being.

Why are some people’s mindsets pro making life difficult and tiring for people? You’ve decided the only way for people to earn a living is to be tired and not have a work life balance?

My place does hybrid. One day a week encouraged into the office but it depends on your role and business needs. One team for example requires three days. However we are pretty wedded to having a hybrid model because we don’t pay as much as other places and it’s a huge perk where other orgs are trying to get people back in.

Whilst some employers are reversing wfh many others are embracing it - they just don't make the news.

If it's important to you I'd raise it with your line manager and or HR and give them the opportunity to address it.

If they fail then you look for another job.

My own work place offers the choice of wfh or hybrid and we have no recruitment or retention problems as a result. It's something we really value.

OP, I think you’ll need to check your contract. If wfh/hybrid is not formalised in that, then I think you either have to comply or seek a change to your contract to meet your wishes. Or find a new job. Do you know why they have changed how things are done? I’m just wondering if there might be a reason for the change, not just management being belligerent (whether or not you agree with it)?

More generally, I think there is a trend in some sectors for a push back on wfh. Obviously, there are some fields or jobs where wfh works well- if people don’t take liberties- but that’s not universal (and I think liberties are definitely being taken by more than “the odd one or two”). I know lots of people prefer it, and defend it on the basis they feel/know they are as productive, but I think the evidence is mixed as to how true it is that wfh is better for employees/employers and productivity/outcomes. There is some research showing that increased wfh is not always leading to better outcomes, and in particular can negatively impact younger employees entering the workforce and new starters less experienced in the field or role type. There can be problems with cohesion in less established teams, for example. I think it depends on your field of work- but ultimately, if you want to mostly/exclusively wfh, have a totally flexible or a hybrid work model l, then you might have to work for an employer that offers that rather than expecting every employer to offer that to every employee. If few people want a non-hybrid/wfh working arrangement, and won’t work for those who don’t offer it, then employers will have to adapt to that if they face staff shortages (to an extent- others may just look elsewhere for employees, for example). I suspect this will be an issue for some, but by no means all, employers.

If that is what you did whilst working from home then it makes sense that you had to be hauled back into 'big school' to be babysat by your managers and cannot be trusted to be home alone. But some of us have outgrown the teen years and matured into functioning adults that can manage a respected career without someone breathing down our neck.

This is so true. I don't have children and it was hard enough commuting so I do not know how women with children cope.

Flexible working is so important for women with children if you want women to stay in the workforce.

Unfortunately, a lazy few have spoilt it for everyone else. And the people who make the decisions are usually men who have never had to cope with work and bringing up children so they haven't got a clue.

@@vivainsomnia Most of what you have mentioned can quite easily be done during a break time. Instead of going to the canteen or wherever you go for a break, you can bob your laundry out to dry.

Regarding food shopping, you mean ordering online? Again that can be done at anytime and if you do wish to do during working hours, then again that's what people can use breaks for.

In terms of dropping off kids to school then surely the employee has some sort of flexible working request in place.

The way our systems are set up, there is no way you can take advantage without your line manager being suspicious and you hauled in to a meeting to discuss performance and productivity.

I know for fact, I am much more productive when WFH, you don't get caught up in the office gossip or tempted to get up from your work station to go browse the latest selection of cakes someone has brought in. Yes when WFH, I might pop a load of washing out on the line and yes I will bob the kettle on in my break time to which I am entitled. I certainly don't take advantage as I am sure many others who WFH don't either.

Nothing has changed for me. I am in 4 days a week this week then it will be every day for several weeks. Last week I went in once. My job has always been flexible but some parts of it cannot be done effectively from home. It’s essentially piecework so when or where I do it is largely up to me. I just need to get the job done.

Meetings at the start of the end of the day are discouraged at my place of work to allow for the school run and have been for years. It doesn’t stop them happening though.

But on the flip side, I once called a member of my team during the working day (I was her manager) who proudly told me that she loved wfh and I’d caught her in the middle of decorating her hallway!

There will always be people who take it to extremes.

There will, but those people also have jobs in offices and other in person environments too. I don't use the term work, for obvious reasons!

I imagine there are different temptations and distractions when wfh though. Taking a turn round the garden, looking out of the window wondering what next door is having delivered, having yet another coffee, Quick Look at Mumsnet, having the telly on while you eat your lunch and maybe having 45 mins instead of 30 - all things you couldn’t do in an office where other people can see you.