That ship has sailed

[Grooveisintheheartbaby]

My company want us back to the office 5 days a week. As far as I and colleagues are concerned that ship has sailed and we will not be coming back we will leave. AIBU to think that businesses need to accept that things changed in covid forever and they can't reverse it without massive disrest and unhappiness?

Yep!

These threads are replete with assumptions that remote working began in March 2020, and that those who did work in person can just click their fingers and go back to whatever structural support was there 5 years ago. Both are stupid.

Nobody is forcing you to work there.

As OP talks about leaving, I suspect she probably knows that.

WFH is hated on MN, there's a lot of jealousy.

Bu that argument works both ways! Clearly by saying 'many people' you're saying that some are lounging in their PJs and not doing much work.

It's not about just 'doing the work'.

There are many jobs where the best ideas are floated around the coffee machine and chatting over lunch.

And one of the main arguments for being in the office is that younger staff need to be with more experienced staff to use them as mentors.
This has been discussed many times by behavioural psychologists and senior managers. Young employees learn from older ones if they want to advance their careers long term.

Also, just to note. Those saying that they have WFH solidified in their employment contract. There's usually a clause also included in the contract that says a business has the right to renegotiate the terms of the contract should the need arise. So this isn't necessarily set in stone.

A company can create a case for all employees to return to the office due to business need and renegotiate the contract with the employee. If unsuccessful, a redundancy program can be instigated if they can demonstrate a clear need and they run the process properly.

Having WFH in your contract is not bullet proof unfortunately. Businesses have the legal right to adjust to changing circumstances and the budget has just given them the justification to do it.

That's good. It will give you something to read while you're sorting your laundry.

Why would there be jealousy?

It's sometimes obvious that a lot of people who post on MN are supposed to be working and using MN during their working hours.

And one of the main arguments for being in the office is that younger staff need to be with more experienced staff to use them as mentors.
This has been discussed many times by behavioural psychologists and senior managers. Young employees learn from older ones if they want to advance their careers long term.

It certainly gets claimed a lot, yes. With the people making the claims ignoring all the young people who get fucked over by an expectation of work in person and whose opportunities have increased now there are more remote roles. Just like you're doing now.

Productivity is higher after change. The first phase of wfh brought some productivity improvements, but years later people are just idle at home, new employees are poorly trained and don't feel part of the team and productivity is way down. It doesn't matter if some (it won't be many) "vote with their feet". Obviously iff they can, they should. Companies expecting workers back in the office will have a productivity boost, which will wane over time, and they can then use selective wfh benefits to keep the level up. So in the end, all other things being equal, the better salaries and jobs will be back in the office. No point fighting it - save your energy for something worthwhile.

With the people making the claims ignoring all the young people who get fucked over by an expectation of work in person and whose opportunities have increased now there are more remote roles

Could you rewrite this in a way that makes some sense?

People can read while they're sorting laundry? New one on me. Maybe you have more eyes than I do. I was being a bit less ambitious, it'll give me something to laugh at while I wait for my work computer to switch on.

My office doesn't allow WFH, except for one employee who they stupidily let become indispensable & they demanded it because they were moving. They're my manager & have NFI what's going on in the office. I have one 30 min zoom meeting a week & email any questions & that's it for communication & support. I had to lose my sh*t to get training. It's made learning my job very difficult not being able to just drop in with a question or suggestion.

They do not allow permanent WFH as during Covid, a lot of employees' productivity dropped off dramatically, so ruined the opportunity. Other staff, like the manager, their productivity has skyrocketed as they're not longer gossiping with their work wife in the office.

My SIL WFH & seems to find hours to research aged care for her DF, messaging DH pages of notes a few (working) hours after they spoke. Also does the school run in office hours as well.

YABU. Why is it such a problem ? It was the norm pre covid and now people see WFH as a right! It isn't and creates a more divided society between those who can and can't. WFH typically incorporate more better paid, autonomous roles .
WFH also has allowed people to misuse and abuse the system. I went to a birthday party last week and met a lady with a 10 month old baby who WFH for a fixed hours with no childcare! The 10 month old baby required continuous attention (as babies do). How can that possibly be considered OK? At the same time, at my hairdresser appt last week, I met another lady who was WFH.
I rest my case. You should go back to the office, no big deal

When you're replaced by someone who actually enjoys working in office with their colleagues or maybe someone in another country who doesn't expect it all their own way and is far cheaper or even AI then you'll have all the time to do your laundry. Because it's heading that way fast and all you wfh can't see it sadly. So laugh away.

Since the pandemic i’ve done hybrid then almost entirely remote and also fully remote. What i’ve noticed is the people who want to waste time, not get their work done and dick about pretending to be busy will do it wherever they are.

Endless coffee, cigarette, long lunch, ‘oooops i got stuck in traffic’ or ‘Oh I need to leave early’ breaks / excuses for not being effective in the office - same types have a reason to be afk at home too. If they are lazy, don’t want to be there or just crap at their job - they’ll mess about like a surly teen in the back of the classroom no matter what management does (other than eventually fire their ass which did happen a couple times).

Getting people into the office just to manage the ones messing about doesn’t work - they’ll continue to play up and the others who worked effectively at home get angry and resentful and leave. Seen it play out more than once.

What i’ve found actually works is an engaged workforce who want to be there and care about their work. In my fully remote experience everyone works their bollocks off and there is little to no pisstaking. Because it’s a brilliant place to work where people are trusted to get their work done.

If it’s a bad place to work or you hire the wrong people and don’t have effective systems in place to tackle their poor work ethic people will take advantage and slack off wherever you are, office, hybrid, remote.

Says it all. My neighbour no longer needs childcare as she WFH?????????😀

People who make the claim that you made there only think of young people as those who want to and can work in person. They ignore the fact that young people, just like those of any age, can have barriers to working in an office. That might be disability, neurodivergence, care responsibilities, geographical isolation, chronic health problems. Those young people are better off because of remote working. They count as young people just as much as the ones who do better with everyone in the office.

There have always been people who struggled to work in person because of these factors, whose opportunities were limited because of them. But a lot of people, you clearly included, didn't notice. Whenever anyone talks about people who do better with everyone working in person, they're talking about a self selecting and unrepresentative group.

I'm guessing that when you took the job you had to go into the office full time?
In that case it's not unreasonable for the employer to want that arrangement again.
Do it, or don't- your choice. However don't be surprised if you're replaced.

Oh, I knew you'd pivot to AI! This sort of MNer always does. As though AI isn't going to come for jobs currently done in offices as soon as it becomes cheaper. It's like a comfort blanket.

But I bet you think you sound all modern, which is just as well since the assumption that there's always someone abroad waiting to do a skilled job on the cheap is pretty outdated. News flash, people abroad who speak fluent English and are highly skilled have a lot of options these days. Many of which pay better than the UK!

So yep, laughing. More so with every post.

It depends what industry/profession. It’s really hard to recruit in ours since covid. When o started it was really well paid -but that compensated for a lot of stress, tight deadlines, long hours esp at certain times of the year. Difficult clients, constantly changing knowledge you spend a lot of personal time keeping up to date with. But average salaries haven’t really changed for about 15 years, whilst other professionals (and indeed non- professional) salaries have crept up close.I’m starting to wonder if when factoring in all the additional work/keeping up to date whether some juniors are actually being paid minimum wage. It’s just not worth it.

Do yes if our employer told us to be in the office 5days a week, we could all walk and probably find another job fairly quickly. Meanwhile our original employer would struggle to replace us. So yes, they would very much give a shit!

But what sort of jobs allow people at home to get away with doing not very much? Surely there can’t be all these jobs where companies are paying people to do things that don’t actually need to be done?

Funny that some employers don't think that they're fortunate to have experienced staff and that recruiting and training new ones is an expensive chancey business. And that if some are not performing to standard, maybe get line managers to do their jobs and manage rather than take a sledge hammer to a nut. And that they have had years of holding the power calling all the shots at whim, but the changing environment and new laws to protect employees means this has started to swing around.
But they've had a good run....

Lol. Not many workplaces can cope with lots of their staff leaving at once. Even if there are plenty of people able to do the jobs, recruiting loads of people would be a huge headache.

My manager lets me work from home on the days where my children are ill, as it's virtually impossible to find anyone who can look after them due to their high needs. Even with poorly a child I get more done than I do actually in work, because I get interrupted less. I work part time to fit inside the school day due to the lack of childcare, so I start earlier and if necessary finish later so that any interruptions to deal with the children are covered. I can also sometimes do bits of housework during what would be my lunch break and commute time. My ideal combination would be in work for the teaching element, and to work from home on my admin time; I would be so much more on top of things at home and work. When I'm at work I arrive at 9.15, but if I do the school drop and go home I could start at 8.20, I need to leave at 2.30 to make the school pickup on public transport; if I'm going from home I could keep working until 3.15. If my employer would support WFH for admin time, I wouldn't have had to reduce my contracted hours when the childminder pulled service.