Asking a work colleague to share the workload

[Pandersmum]

I work in a business which is struggling financially and it’s significantly behind budget. It’s a business that supports its employees well and has a generous sickness policy (6 months full pay.)
One colleague WFH although the business would rather they are in the office. The WFH colleague does the bare minimum in their job but on the whole gets their job done but at a minimal level an is occupied for approx 50% of their paid for hours. Management would like the WFH colleague to come into the office so that they can do additional work to help the business turn things around. The WFH colleague has now gone sick and has stated that they shouldn’t be asked to do anything but their core job.

Is the business being unreasonable expecting an employee with ‘spare work time’ to do other work outside of their core job to help turn the business around?

Or it is ok that an employee only works for 50% of their paid for hours whilst WFH and get their core job done even though the business could do with their support.

Is the additional work in their job description? Were they ever office based? If they’re getting their job done I don’t really see why they should have to come in to do additional work that isn’t theirs.

I would have thought that if their contract states hours per week then they should be available to work for all of those hours. I would be surprised if their contract doesn't also have a line or more about the duties stated not being exhaustive or the need for flexibility to meet the needs of the business.

If her contract requires her to come into the office, then she should. If she won’t then they should start the process of getting rid of her.

If I only had work to occupy 50% of my hours I’d be expecting the axe to fall on me

Yes they were 100% office based pre Covid.
Extra work is not specifically in their job description.
The business is struggling for resource in the office.
The extra work is well within the WFH capability but must be done in the office.
WFH employee contract is 100% office based.

It does but employee does not want to come into the office. Has now gone sick with stress as a result of being asked to come back to the office for part of the week.

Employee believes as they are getting their job done it doesn’t matter how many hours they do. Management have a different view. Now employee is sick with stress it’s difficult to do anything for 6 months.

Employee has gone sick so difficult to do that.

How infuriating! You're going to have to find a way to let this go, unfortunately, as there's nothing that can be done I guess for the foreseeable.

Good luck with that though - it's annoyed me just reading it!

I hate slackers. I have never seen a contract that doesn’t have some kind of “and anything deemed reasonable by the employer” clause in terms of responsibilities. Going off sick is clearly a way to try and get out of returning to the office, time to start performance management.

This is piss poor management.

If they are a struggling business they should review processes and find colleagues role redundant, since they only need half the hours to do it it probably is genuinely redundant. Pay someone else in a new role to do the other stuff colleague doesn’t want to do, and anything similar you and others do, so you and others have capacity to take on the little work colleague did.

Employee is taking the piss. I would review their contract and suggest their hours be reduced if the role doesn’t require full capacity. Otherwise the full time role is essentially redundant and would be re advertised as part time. Use extra funds to pay overtime or hire part time.

It depends entirely on their job description and agreement re working from home. If the company has agreed on wfh days, they can’t just go back on that without proper negotiation. And if the person is sick you have to take that at face value and go along with the sickness policy.
FWIW I think the person sounds lazy but at the end of the day, the employer has to follow employment law and be very careful. Perhaps there’s a lesson here about setting clear expectations from the outset.

If the company is in financial crisis then they need to make some roles redundant, reduce costs another way or bring in more business that makes a profit. Not stand around wittering about whether someone can continue to take the piss out of them.

Feel your pain op. We’ve just had someone go sick after being asked to increase their presence in the work place to 60% of the week from 40%. It’s honestly pathetic.

Poor management and lazy employee

The company could make the post redundant given its financial situation though this would have to be done very carefully. I’d seek advice from an employment/HR specialist. You cannot sack them because they are off ill, but equally you need someone to do a different job and the current job role no longer meets the needs of the business. I’d stay away from hours/capability if you can.

What do the managers say about this? I assume as a small business they don’t have HR capability but it is probably worth them getting some via online agency just to manage this. TBH it’s a fairly easy one from what you’ve said. The employee is not doing their contracted hours and not attending office and that is not reasonable for the business. They have to follow procedures properly though and correctly document things. It can take a while but they need to start!
Not much you as an employee can do except feed back about the workload and the effect on you. Protect yourself.

Most job descriptions include a general line about "performing such other tasks as might from time to time be beneficial to thr business and commensurate with the postholder's skills and experience" which covers being given additional tasks as needed. Is that not in there?

If not, and if only 50% of her time is needed to perform her job then she should be made redundant and a new job role created which covers that 50% fte task plus a bunch of other responsibilities. Obviously under redundancy consultation she'd be welcome to apply for that new role but would then actually have to work full time for her pay

You don't know the whole picture.

In your shoes I would let management and the other employee discuss things between themselves while you make sure you do what is right for you.

Difficult but not impossible

Is her job actually needed or not?

If not they could still look to make her redundant

It looks like she is taking the piss, however I don't think she's necessarily unreasonable to refuse extra work, it depends what it is. I wouldn't like being asked to man the phones or scrub the loos because my employer can't afford a receptionist or a cleaner. It's too far removed from my job description.

It is everyone in the company's business if they are paying someone for not working for half the week. Especially when the company itself is in financial trouble.

Thank you everyone for your responses. So varied which has been interesting to read.

For the business I work in, Covid changed peoples mentality to work and personally I don’t think it’s in a good way if people want to have well remunerated jobs for the long term in the UK private sector.

I’m a colleague, who recognizing the company situation, has returned to spend more time in the office and do ‘additional work’ (but still within my FT paid hours) and I feel really p’d off. Some of the responses on here make me feel really stupid for trying to do the right thing for the business and to prolong my job for the long term.
The management is actually good. The business has new overseas owners , what is expected of them financially has increased and the UK management team are trying really hard to grow the business to avoid future redundancies / reduce the generous benefits package.

Colleague has openly telling people they are ‘going to go off sick’ if they are made to come back to the office and they don’t care if the business is in trouble’.
I do not believe they are sick. I do however think they are p’d off and trying to teach management a lesson.

Also interesting to have so many people say it’s a management issue and that they should spend more time dealing with an employee taking the piss rather than putting their efforts into sav8ng the jobs of many.

So what is likely to happen in the future …. the business reduces its generous benefits to new entrants, make some redundancies, worst case it shuts down it UK operations, 50 people are made redundant and more people end up claiming state benefit support - as they are unlikely to find new roles similar to their current one. Maybe that’s great if you are in your 50’s but less great it you are in your 30’s.

Its a mess and it’s getting worse in the UK to employee people.
This is isn’t good for the long term employment prosperity in the UK