to stop extra flexibility after my manager imposed office hours?

[LouuLou]

I work in a small office team of five people. I’m the only full-time member of staff, everyone else is part time. We had a new manager start last year and honestly, up until now, things have been really good. We get on well, I like his management style and he has always said he cared more about people getting the work done than clock-watching.

I work very hard. I consistently hit targets, usually go beyond what is expected, and I won an achievement award last month. I also work very flexibly. I regularly start work at 7am, answer emails early, and will often still be available after 6pm. I usually work through lunch too. That flexibility has suited both the organisation and me because it means things get done quickly and I can also fit other parts of life around work. It is one of the things I am regularly complimented on - how quick I get tasks done.

Out of nowhere, he has now announced that I have to be physically in the office 9–5 three days a week. No actual problem has been identified, no concerns raised about my performance, no suggestion that work isn’t getting done. The explanation was basically that he “wants to try something different”.

Fine. He is the manager and he is entitled to set office hours if he wants to. I’m not arguing with that part.

But my feeling is that if he now wants strict contracted hours and presenteeism, then that is exactly what he will get. I no longer see the point in starting at 7am, replying to messages before work, being available into the evening or working through lunch. I’m planning to work my contracted hours, take a proper hour lunch break and log off at the end of the day.

I know this will reduce the amount I actually get done overall. But another part of me thinks flexibility works both ways. If management removes trust and autonomy, they can’t really expect staff to continue giving unpaid goodwill on top.

And to your last statement 100% agree - flexibility works both ways.

So? People working in manufacturing might dislike a change in their working arrangements, even though that change may be standard for other sectors. It doesn’t mean they have to like it.

I worked somewhere like this, they expected you to do extra hours to get tasks done but didn’t like you taking those extra hours off (it was flexi). We all did it & issues arose with bums on seats in the office (the fact the office manager did what she liked & favoured those with children is another matter!). In our case eventually we were only allowed to build up a certain no of hours before having to take them.

I think it's an issue with someone else, not you.

Either another team member not performing and he wants performing staff around more often to be available to support them; someone else taking the piss or pressure from above.

Absolutely YANBU to think flexibility goes both ways and to stop doing any extra. He might see sense and put things back to how they were.

What on earth makes you think that people working in one sector like more restricted working hours of other people? Do you think they just regard themselves as being worth less than you, or what?

I would bet that someone in your team has grumbled or made a sarcastic comment about you popping out/taking a long lunch and instead of pushing back and saying "LouuLou has been working from 7/ more than covers her hours" etc your manager has decided to take away your flexibility instead.

Because she would be working fewer hours. I can get more done in a 12 hour day as compared to an 8 hour day.

Seems more bother than it’s worth tbh

People in manufacturing will also strike when their working arrangements are changed in a way they dislike.

And really this has no relevance to OP

https://www.reddit.com/r/MaliciousCompliance/s/JyOcb8mbvA

This kind of thing is common

I'd do as you suggest, but I'd give them a heads up. A 'just so you're aware, as I'll be using the time before and after work getting ready for the office / commuting, ans will have to fit in things lime appointments in the evenings now, I wont be as available outside core working hours as I was when I was working from home. So you might want to consider alternatives for urgent / last minute tasks that will inevitably come up, as I will have less availability / flexibility to complete these'.

Question is, can you even find the data that compares your productivity on your WFH days to your productivity on your "presenteeism" days? I can see that being a challenge even if your WFH days are always the same two days of the week, but it would be the only way you could make such a tactic work for you.

It may be simpler to just stick to your hours, whether in the office or at home, and when the drop in productivity is commented on, point out that the hours you have lost to commuting have eaten into the hours available for proper work.

Simple and impactful.

I think it’s a good idea to stop with the flexibility- have a proper separation between work time and own time. It might be a really good thing for you to have proper switch off time. If you can take your work emails off your phone, even better. You answer only when you are at your desk at your computer, be it in the office or home.

It’s possible he’s been complimentary to get you on side and make you feel supported and appreciated, but deep down he still doesn’t get on with your “flexible” working hours.

Autonomy is strongly linked to job satisfaction so I can see why you want to keep it, but you need to see this from your managers perspective. It’s very difficult managing a team of part timers and flexi workers. He never knows who’s in and what where. That makes it harder to plan and stay on top of the team. This isn’t for you to decide, as he’s the manager.

Of course only work 9-5, that’s what you should have been doing anyway! Unless you have an approved flexible working request via HR, he’s been good to allow you so much flexibility on an informal basis. If he needs someone from 7am, he’ll contract that.

It sounds like the flexibility suits you more than the business, else they’d have formalised it. Just work your hours like you should have been all along.

I agree, flexibility does work both ways. Let him try his new thing and see that it won't lead to more productive work but will lead to reduced output.

This.

I wouldn't blame anyone who has their flexibility removed, to in turn decide they won't give flexibility in return anymore.

I'm dealing with the same issue internally right now.

Now there is much to be said for collaboration in person. But if that's your goal and it requires removing flexibility from staff, expect them to be less flexible in return.

It sounds like you may be seen as coming and going as you please, and this is an indirect way of addressing that.

YANBU to do as they ask and just work your standard hours.

Maybe the other staff are complaining that your status has been on "away" for 2 hours in the day, and they don't see that you're making up extra time before/after work?

I don't know. Hard to tell without knowing your workplace, obviously.

I think you've been naive to not keep timesheets all this time as well.

Good luck to you.

Some days at home and some in the office is a good approach - if the 9am start or 5pm end time is hard with school runs then ask for some flexibility there.

its not just about you and your tasks. You sound very individualistic in your thinking - you work as part of a team so should be in the office for some face to face interaction with them and having some predictably on when you are there makes it easier for them to plan meetings etc. Maybe you also need to be able to coach others - it’s harder for people to learn from you if they don’t see you.

Passive-aggressively just working office hours in a weird revenge attempt isn't the way forward. Chances are no one will even notice and you'll just have more work to do.

Talk to him - present the data on why the flexi arrangement is working both for you and the company. Tell him you'd strongly prefer to keep it that way - or formally request it, depending on your usual company processes. If you're a high-performing employee you have leverage.

For me personally, lack of flexible hours would absolutely be a deal-breaker.

YANBU

I would be leaning out and doing the bare minimum.

I would definitely stop ALL extra flexibility.

Why oh why do people feel the need to change things that work exceptionally well.

He can’t have it all ways. Let the idiot learn by his mistake

This is what I find.

Flexi work can be great, but people freak out when management tells them it's not working as well as they'd like. And it's always "I am more efficient at home."

They seldom seem to realise that it is often not about their personal work, but rather about how the group functions, or sometimes about treating everyone the same, which it is increasingly difficult to avoid without some claiming unfairness.

Depends on the job. In most professional roles, it's not 9 to 5

I did jobs for 20 years where I had to be on site. I am in a different role where it is simply not necessary to be at the office so much now.