to find some expectations around constant productivity while WFH unrealistic?

[juststoop]

I work in an industry where the workflow naturally has peaks and troughs. Sometimes it is absolutely manic and I barely stop all day. Other times it is fairly quiet and there simply isn’t a constant stream of work coming in every minute.

Occasionally, during the quieter periods, I might post on Mumsnet more while WFH. Yet whenever I mention I’m working from home, there are inevitably comments saying I should not be posting online, that I should be working every second, that I’m giving WFH a bad name, and that people like me are the reason everyone will be forced back into the office.

I honestly find this attitude bizarre. Do people really think office workers are productive every single minute they are physically in a workplace? Because in every office I have ever worked in, there has always been chatting, tea breaks, people wandering over to someone’s desk for a gossip, scrolling phones, long lunches, staring into space, and generally filling quieter periods.

The difference with WFH is that some people seem to expect absolute nonstop visible productivity at all times, as though you must sit frozen at your laptop waiting for the next email to arrive.

Also, my workplace is not “marching everyone back in”. They have literally sold off large amounts of office space, so there physically is not room for everyone anyway. Hybrid and remote working are clearly here to stay in many industries.
As long as the work is completed properly, deadlines are met, and people are available when needed, I do not understand why someone posting on a forum for five minutes during a quiet spell suddenly becomes something to get judgy about.

I am not saying everyone does this btw.

I suppose it just depends if you added up your time not working would it be substantial? So over a certain amount of time then yes taking the piss but when I was in an office there was time you’d be chatting, getting a coffee etc but that’s minute. Also we couldn’t access internet so even looking on mn couldn’t be a thing

Yes I agree that there seem to be a lot of assumptions that people who work from home are constantly "taking the piss". I work mainly from home and find myself getting really restless and unable to concentrate if I don't get up and/or do something different for a while - usually hanging washing out or hoovering or something. (I am not working today, before anyone asks!)

Same in our office environment as well - the problem is sitting stationary in front of a computer and measuring "work" in hours and minutes rather than what is actually getting done. Is anyone going to tell me off for leaving my desk to walk up and down the stairs or go into the communal kitchen? People need movement and variety in order to focus.

I remember a MN poster once getting flamed for asking if it would be ethical for her to take a 15min walk or something while she worked from home. Totally nuts. Apparently we must all sacrifice our health in order to feed the economy and be productive in front of a screen!! Despite the fact that sedentary lifestyles = higher risk of certain conditions = more pressure on health services etc etc.

This is the thing, I did better at work BECAUSE I took a 10m break to paint the doorstep.

In my office, the equivalent takes might have meant asking a colleague where the paint and brushes were, hunting them down, bumping into someone for a chat, talking about the job whilst doing the job.

As it was, I grabbed the paint and brush on a previous break and wiped the step clean.

Stood up, popped the lid, applied a single coat, propped the door and shut the cat away, put the lid back on.

Back to work, and I worked much better because the entire task was totally contained and left no "mental drag" - like maybe looking up something mentioned in passing by a colleague.

I got straight back to work and was more productive.

Now, the other colleague stuff wasn't pointless - but in terms of productivity, WFH wins hands down.

I'm in a "response to crisis" role, and currently we're having two. And pacing myself is still the best way to be effective.

I also spent years working in offices and it seemed that there was always a few very vocal people (nearly all women) who would spend most of their day flapping around frantically, saying things about having 250 unread emails and being extremely busy. They were usually continuing to flap about until 6/7pm and were always treated as extremely hard working individuals, although they didn't actually seem to DO anything.

@ImImmortalNowBabyDoll I wonder if we've worked in the same place? I've had several office managers who were completely taken-in by this. And another one who judged your competency on how early you arrive or how late you stay. Thankfully those days are behind us!

I'm sure we didn't because I've worked in a lot of offices and they've all had at least one!

I think the secret that no-one wants to say out loud is that very few office jobs actually take 40 hours to do- at least not if the person doing it is reasonably efficient. This has been proven by trials of the 4 day week.

Everyone knows that, but everyone also knows that most people can't survive on a part time salary so businesses need to employ full time staff and the agreement is they sit at a desk for 40 hours and pretend to be doing stuff.

That whole facade falls down a bit when you don't actually need to sit at a desk somewhere.

If I'm WFH I can get to my local gym and back in my lunch break - I've timed it and can fully account for the time out of my standard working breaks and my boss is totally in favour of it and aware.

I guess if you are responsible solely for that project, you have updated your line manager on where you are, and it is agreed that there is genuinely nothing else to do to push that project further along at present, then, no, I guess not every gap would need to be filled. But there has to be that honesty/accountability.

I suppose it boils down to the actual nature of the job. Is it a role that requires intense bursts of activity/response to crises/availability out of hours? Or is it a role with more structured hours, where you are working steadily on a permanent cycle of work and your output affects the organisation’s performance?

I can see how the former would necessitate some recovery time - there would be give and take. However, my job falls into the latter category and I absolutely would not sort life admin/housework etc. in my contracted hours. I work part-time to fit in with my child, so I definitely need to be working during my actual working hours! My company is very flexible and understanding of any personal matters that might eat into work hours, but I would be transparent concerning such matters and I would make up any time taken out (which would be in the evening, once my child is in bed).

My issue is with WFH staff with similar roles to mine who abuse the trust placed in them. These people are not suited to WFH and have done a great deal to create bad feeling regarding WFH! Which is a real shame, as there are plenty of us who actually do their best work when WFH! I see it as a real privilege and will never abuse it!

Of course, workers in an office would naturally go and make a drink and stop to chat to a colleague they bump into on the way, or they’d go and ask a colleague in a different office a question and it would lead onto talk about something else (which, as others have mentioned on here, is great for building good working relationships).

You mentioned 3-10-minute breaks every 25 minutes, which to me seems excessive (only because I’ve never had to take breaks that frequently in an office or WFH to be more productive and think it would actually disrupt the flow of my work to do so - part of why I have never liked working in an office!). But it sounds like it works for you to work that way, and your WFH role also sounds very different to mine.

I’m probably also not taking into account that some people are far more practical than I am and capable of painting a doorstep in 10 minutes 😆

There’s completing a simple household task as a mental switch to boost productivity. And there is using excessive amounts of work time to prioritise life admin/errands/self-care/personal whims simply because you know you can get away with it. That’s wrong, and unfortunately what a lot of people on Mumsnet, and in other places, have confirmed they are doing.

Did no one ever need to take notes?

No, meetings are usually recorded on copilot so you can just grab the transcript after if you need it. We didn't keep minutes for that meeting because it was a weekly team check-in so we all knew where each other was up to and could offer or ask for help with things, rather than, for example, a working group with lots of actions.

This! So many work shaggers on here. Taking the piss out of work should be positively encouraged in my opinion. Work takes and expects so much of us, you bet I’m having a nap on my client’s dollar.

This debate is going to run on forever.
Ultimately people choose their careers for all sorts of reasons. Flexibility to WFH and do life admin / childcare/ run another side hussle alongside is just one factor to take into account.
No one complains when paramedics pop into Starbucks between call outs. Or pop into shop for something they need. Or make a personal phone call. Because when they ARE on a job they’re 100% focussed and may not get home on time.
WFH is a less life threatening and visible version of that. If you like being on the road saving lives, don’t be an accountant. If you’re happy looking at spreadsheets all day and want to choose when you have your breaks, don’t be a paramedic.

YANBU.

There appears to be a prominent belief on Mumsnet that WFH must involve constant typing at a laptop or wiggling a mouse.