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!

Absolutely, I feel you may have skim-read my posts and missed some salient points, as I have been very clear it’s up to the companies, my point is that it seems lots of companies are restricting flexibility for no good reason other than they can’t be arsed to manage their staff properly. And will be shooting themselves in the foot because of it. Most well-run companies will be able to thrive with at least a hybrid arrangement that offers some WFH flexibility.

There can be some downsides to a fully remote set-up for some firms. Some firms will find a hybrid set up works to offset the downsides of being fully remote, with most staff being asked to be in once or twice a week. With some carve outs for staff who find it difficult to commute, eg those with disabilities.

That’s very different to saying everyone has to be in every day because you haven’t got the nous to manage things differently.

😆

As I have stated already, SOME companies NEED a physical presence in the work place. I’m not quibbling with that. My point, as stated several times already, is directed at companies stuck in old-fashioned ways of working for no good reason.

😅😅🤣🤣😂🤣

Thank-you for this intelligent, nuanced and thought-provoking analysis of my post. I will take the points you raise so effectively and give them the consideration they deserve.

Oh dear the 12 year old you is coming out. Are you sure you’re not the OP because you sound remarkably like her

I assure you I am not
maybe not 12 but having great fun 😀

I hope they taught you in business school how to deal with this

Surely you can appreciate this is very role/industrry dependent. It sound like you are thinking of recruiting for roles that are low paid/skilled. Or at the least where there is currently a glut of candidates. This isn’t the case across all industries and roles. In some professions there can be quite a shortage of good candidates at times.

And things vary across time periods. Things go in peaks and troughs. As mentioned upthread, there are times when it’s an employer’s market and times when it’s an employees market. And then employees can pick and choose and employers can find it difficult to fill vacancies with the right people. Of course, if you’re looking to fill a role that pretty much anyone can do, you’ll always find people desperate for any job as a stop gap. But you’ll likely find turnover quite high.

Otherwise known as straight talking. Possibly a new concept for you, maybe you skipped that lesson at business school, missed that chapter in your psychology study or just lucky enough to never attended a board meeting in your senior management career 😂

It wasn’t the skills I learned at business school that I was deploying there, it was basic psychology. Also a useful skill for management. Being able to understand what makes people tick and incorporate that into how you manage can work wonders.

Never underestimate the power of "We've always done things this way" as a justification for doing fuck all.

Then reflect on where we would be if that were treated as gospel.

• No abolition of slavery
• No votes for non-property owners
• Definitely no votes for women
• Burning witches

the list is endless.

One of my ways of working, when involved in strategy was to require teams to objectively justify the reasons for certain positions. It was scary (and highly explanatory) how few there were. The overwhelming majority were "because that's how we have always done it". Which is useless when you want to consider changes.

Much better is to capture the key reasons for a position and then you can regularly see if anything has changed to affect that decision. Because deciding not to decide is still a decision.

That approach can meet some pushback, as the craftier managers cotton on that metrics are the first step towards change.

I had 3 interviews after Covid. All companies had been forced into remote working which wasn't unusual or unexpected. However none of them had the faintest idea whether their productivity had been affected by the move. Again, highly informative (but not in a good way).

No idea what you're now talking about. A diffent poster mentioned that scenario, not me.

My point is that the business decides, which you agreed with.

Ah, ‘I tell how it how it is, me’. 👍

Absolutely. The ‘we’ve always done it like this’ is behind a lot of it. Inertia, lack of imagination, motivation or any real skill makes it much easier to just jog along and not trouble yourself fo innovate.

Ah ‘I like to dish it out, but don’t like to receive it back as I get hurty feelings’ 🤣

🤣👌

Judging by the numerous threads on here with people trying to justify wfh (and often trying to get away with saving on childcare) wfh isn’t working for employers. YOU might want to do it but employers have been bitten before by people who take the piss and to be honest spoilt those people spoilt it for genuine wfh roles.

There was one poster who claimed she would bring her 2 year old onto Teams calls and everyone just smiled indulgently and loved her 2 being on the calls with them. Yeah - right…

So wait. Now we’re ignoring the fact that everyone did adapt during the pandemic and now 5 years after trying WFH and hybrid, a lot of companies are pulling it as it’s not working for them.

Honest to goodness I’d get a refund on those business courses and I hope you’ve got good advisors for your business.

I’m laughing, not hurting! I don’t have any ‘hurty feelings’, none of it makes any difference to me personally, as I don’t have to work for anybody on this thread, thankfully.

Not missed that at all, and we agree it's the business that gets to decide.

You then say:
my point is that it seems lots of companies are restricting flexibility for no good reason other than they can’t be arsed to manage their staff properly.

What do you base that* *on?

Who decides if it's a good enough reason?

OP said:
"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!"

My point has been the same, they get to decide. Doesn't matter why they choose to have people in.

Could be the reasons you've given, OP's reasons or whatever. Bottom line is if a company wants people in, whether the reasons are valid or not isn't up to the candidates.

Only thing a candidate can do is to apply to companies that suit their needs/wants.

Not everyone did adapt, and they didn’t all do it successfully when they tried. If people were taking the piss, that should have been picked up and nipped in the bud way earlier than now.

I’m not sure I understand what you’re getting at, of course management decide. My point has always been that it’s a lazy/incompetent management that can’t cope with hybrid or WFH in many cases.

You seem to be coming from a position that business decisions are always taken on a rational basis. They really aren’t. There’s an unbelievable amount of practice that goes on because it’s familiar or for emotional reasons, or because not enough data is gathered, the firm lacks relevant expertise etc etc.

Not everyone did adapt, and they didn’t all do it successfully when they tried.

As soon as I saw posts on here about "Now I am WFH should I get my employer to up my wages" I knew the UK as a whole wasn't really ready for a grown up conversation around remote working. (I disremember if I was posting under this name then, but I remember engaging).

It's always the few that spoil it for the many.

(Incidentally, if you were in that cohort, then you really need to work on why your self worth is so low)