Employers hell bent on working in the office full time

[NewDayNewLife25]

Anyone else currently job searching and noticed the same thing?

I'm utterly miserable in my current role which is unfortunate as I've been there for 4 years and use to love it, but a new manager has changed things. I've always worked from home.

Anyway, I've been applying for jobs, mainly remote/hybrid working but also a few office based roles. I always state in my cover letter what I'm looking for, and my address is on my CV too.

A few employers have contacted me, saying that I'm perfect for the role, have all the experience/skills that's required and that they think I would make a great addition to the team. But as soon as I've asked about the working set up, that's it, done. They won't entertain it and decline my application.

I just think it's a shame. I know that they probably have plenty of applications, but surely it's more important to hire the right person, with the right skills and experience. Not just because that person happens to live near the office. Half the time they can't even explain why they need the person in the office. Is it control?

I'm fed up already!

If you actually worked in recruitment then you would know the answer to your question because you would have your ear to the ground in your industry.

Here's my take on it.

When employers go out to recruit, they're unrealistic about how much the right people want their job. They might be used to getting deluged with applicants, most of whom are completely unqualified or unsuited to the job. But the sheer desperation out there in the online job market makes them feel powerful.

So they set the bar at the highest level, which for them probably includes someone working in the office so they can get to see them work.

Once someone has been in post a while, and you've got to know them, you've identified whether they're a worker or a shirker, and then you know what level of supervision they require. You also know whether they are conscientious enough to work from home. Also, they are embedded in the team.

Taking a leap of faith and employing someone remote from day 1 is something you might have bad experiences of. I speak as someone who had two very bad experiences of fully remote workers during covid. One was bluffing his way through, and it turned out his expectations of output were very low. Because he was supporting lots of different individuals in the team, he played us all off against each other "I'm working on this for them".

It only came to light when he lied once too often about transport delays and cancellations preventing him coming in to the office (2 stops away)

Another one breached our security, essentially building an entire remote database.

You could avoid these types of scenarios by very close remote supervision and surveillance. But very few bosses have time to do that in reality, and very few employees respon well to being micromanaged.

There is another factor. When you work from home, all the "watercooler " moments are your own. You put washing on, you do the school run, whatever. When you're in the office, those interactions, like discussing the rugby, are often conducive to team building. The random interactions between people often yield productivity ideas. Time spent talking to colleagues about non work stuff is not wasted.

All in all, I really feel that it's an example of not wanting to see the other"s perspective. If my employers' policy was that I needed to be in the office full time, why would I want someone hybrid, if I thought i could get someone who was right there with me? It's only if i can't get someone optimal that is would go down the remote/hybrid route.

Ironically I am working almost fully remotely because there is insufficient space at my workplace and it's a very long commute (over an hour). If my employer insisted I go in, I'd understand their logic. The task I've just completed would have been 100 times easier if we'd all been in every day.

Let’s also not pretend for a lot of domestic abuse victims, some people with mental health challenges and those battling serious illnesses, the office is a sanctuary and an opportunity to escape.

You sound like you have a nice home environment and that’s where you want to be. Good for you. But it also really doesn’t work for a lot of people.

You keep asking 'why do I need to be in the office?' Because the employer thinks that is important to them. End of. If you were so wonderful and perfect, then maybe they'd offer you it fully remote, but you're obviously not, and it's not the right job for you. They'll find someone else for whom it's perfect.

Oh and that email is 100% a generic recruitment email, I've had it a hundred times and I am not particularly exceptional (although I do work fully remote!) The fact that you seem to genuinely think they are singling you out for this praise makes me doubt your opinion generally.

Pre Covid, 2 days WFH would have been a gift to a lot of us, I think hybrid working is a great thing. I do think employers should be transparent about expectations and I have seen this in many job ads (expectation of 3 days on site for example). It would make sense for all hybrid employers to be open about this in the same way that I think job ads should be open about salary.

Agree - it's only worth applying for jobs where you can fit in with what the employer wants. You can't expect them to change the whole company culture for you.

It’s hardly professional to conduct a Teams meeting from bed

This is just a standard recruiter email. I get several of these a month - it's just a way to butter you up into applying. It doesn't mean you're more qualified than other applicants or that they will favour your application over the others they will be reviewing. They can't go ahead with vetting for interviews until they have a certain number of viable applications so there will be many others with relevant experience getting the same message being encouraged to apply. Also recruiters are usually somewhat removed from the roles they are recruiting for so all they are really saying is you look good on paper - I had this for one role and they were convinced my experience would transfer - I applied got the job and then three months in because their sector was just completely different and just not a fit for me. Sorry to burst your bubble. Those willing to come in to the office with similar levels of experience will probably stand out from applications like yours. Always treat applying for jobs as a competitive process unless you want to waste your time.

Plus it's a pita for the rest of the family!

There are those of us who have adult children or who live alone. I think an employer who rules out all and any WFH for a job that can be done from home is stuck in the past. Equally I think that demanding to WFH is not reasonable. Wouldn't it be nice if everyone could be sensible and reasonable?

My DD has what started as a hybrid role, but her employers have tried to nibble away at their employees homeworking days and now officially want people in at least 4 days a week. However they know that she works hard, can put in an extra couple of hours a day if she doesn't have to travel and, when she tackled them on the issue, have told her that they're happy for her to only go in when absolutely necessary.
However my DIL has moved from only one day in the office to at least four. She's very hardworking and conscientious, does a very similar job in terms of job description and journey time, but they are determined to exert their power to have her in there. This means that they get less hours worked and less goodwill from her and probably from many others.
Which employer would you rather work for? I applaud @NewDayNewLife25 for making it clear at the outset what she would prefer, even if it means that some employers won't consider her. If you're good at your job you deserves to be allowed to work in the way that enables you to do it best, provided it is a job that suits that type of working.

Who does the employer please, the ones who want to work remotely or the ones who want an office environment.

The customers would be a start.

Wait… are we now talking about customer service? If so let’s not stop there and throw in all stakeholders and suppliers 🙄

I bet that you would consider a bus that never stops, but has a perfect punctuality record a success.

Business are run for the shareholders, but customers do help. Or so I'm told. I may be a bit behind the times these days.

What has that got to do with the price of eggs? Or this discussion about WFH or not?

With the greatest of respect, this is a standard email. I've received many with almost identical wording myself. That's not intended as a put down of your skills, it's a statement of fact. The message you've described is a template message that gets sent to prospective candidates,

... sometimes the answer is no

And therein lies the problem, @Munnygirl
Toddler-like, and often after being enabled at school, some are simply unable to accept the word "no" and react accordingly

Nobody disputes there can be different reasons for refusing WFH - as said upthread the employer may have had awful experiences, found it simply doesn't work for the company or perhaps just be out of step
But since these are places she's applying to rather than already working at OP can't know, and instead just goes for the jugular because of that "no"

if you daughter in law is unhappy with her job and going into the office she could look for other employment . I think it’s quite ridiculous to say people deserve to wfh if they are good at their job. It is the business need that dictates if staff need to come into the office and not what someone deserves.

I am sure there are others on this thread who got the point.

What point? All you did was just stated the obvious to try and be smart. You replied to my comment about employees that had zero to do about customers. Zero.

Aside customer satisfaction is just a given priority for any business. Nobody sets up a business or works for a company thinking… let’s prioritise customer to down the bottom of the chain.

Your argument is a bit like getting smart with someone because they didn’t say they were using eggs when talking about scrambled eggs.

I’ve had loads of these. It’s not standard as such, but it’s super common as a tactic. Most of the time they don’t even read your CV. It’s like phishing basically. I’m a bit surprised the OP thinks they’re after her specifically.

She is, of course, going into her job as required, though sadly the managers who require this are not there. I'm not saying that she "deserves" to WFH, just that she works hard regardless of where she is situated and that previously she has always done a good job WFH and has been regularly commended on her work.

There is no business need dictating the requirement to be there, her managers are overseas so not in the office and only contact her by phone or video which they could equally well do whilst she is at home.

So she is spending more than two hours a day travelling to fulfill a requirement to be in the office for no business need.

‘There is no business need dictating the requirement to be there..’.

There is also no business need for them to let your daughter in law WFH but here we are.

My DD has what started as a hybrid role,

Was it actually contracted as such ?

You don’t own the business, manage it or work there so you have no idea what what the business need is. Just because YOU think there isn’t a need doesn’t mean you are correct. And so what she has to commute an hour there and an hour back? That is life. We seem to be bringing up a nation of namby pambys who want everything handed to them on a plate with little or not effort.