Work from home if you can should stay in place, surely?

[Ninefeettall]

Just thinking about June 21st and Boris said as recently as yesterday or the day before that 'Work from home if you can' will be scrapped from 21 June. Surely if the Indian variant is a problem (which we don't know for sure yet) then this is a really, really, really easy win? 'If you can' doesn't have to include people who need to be in the office for mental health reasons or who can't work properly from home, but there are vast numbers of young, unvaccinated or partially vaccinated office workers who have now been working from home for a year, doing their jobs perfectly well if not better who could just keep doing that and not add to the commuters or office workers spreading the variant about.

Considering the shit customer service from most companies 'because of covid' their employees must be deluded if they think they are doing a good job. If anyone from O2, Lloyds, Sky etc dared say their customer service hasn't been affected I'd laugh at them.

I am more productive at home. 1 or 2 days pw in office plenty for collaboration. Fits in well with home life.
Dreading the commute and going back. Going to do it or a few weeks then tell employer I want to cut down. They value me so should accept.
Good employees are going to defect to companies who offer this.

@Ninefeettall

Since when has employment ever been fair? This isn't primary school. Some jobs pay more, some have more annual leave, some have nicer indoor conditions, some have more flexibility. That's life, what you do will determine how you can do it. Some people simply can't work at home, nurses, factory workers, supermarket workers, it just can't happen, so what are we do? Penalise those who can? It's a petulant attitude.

Well said.

@Ninefeettall That’s rather amusing given that your whole thread is about how it’s really unfair that people (you?) might need to go back to the office to work and no one should be able to make them (you?). Of course it is dressed up as concern about spreading Covid which makes me smile.

Honestly, I don’t care if you are all having the time of your lives but it is a perk and you aren’t saving the rest of us by doing so. And I would absolutely be looking at ways to make it fairer if it continues. People ‘who simply can’t’ work at home shouldn’t be treated like second class citizens - we’ve seen which jobs are most essential to the running of the country over the last year.

I do not want a further lockdown or restrictions but I sincerely hope to WFH for longer if not permanently.
I have no desire to connect with colleagues in person, I have a far better work/life balance and in our household life is much better.
I appreciate this is not the case for all but as I have argued at work, there are people who WANT to go in to the office so let them and those of us who wish to continue to WFH, let us. Unless there is a performance issue then why force people back? Makes zero sense.

@Iremembertheelderlykoreanlady

So contact them? Surely news of the Indian variant will make them do something.

As a public sector employee, you are very fortunate to have a union to fight your corner. Use them.

@PinkSparklyPussyCat

Considering the shit customer service from most companies 'because of covid' their employees must be deluded if they think they are doing a good job. If anyone from O2, Lloyds, Sky etc dared say their customer service hasn't been affected I'd laugh at them.

Add to that: DVLA, HMRC, NHS, Local councils. I agree that organisations and their staff who think customer service hasn't nose dived due to staff WFH are deluded.

I manage a team of people and we are currently consulting on return to the office. They all tell me they are more productive at home but I see their work and no that that isn’t actually the case. I’m pretty flummoxed that they seem to believe that. They tell me they do longer hrs but I don’t see an increase in output and quality isn’t as great. I think the greater flexibility has resulted in some people thinking they have all the time in the world to do things, so easy to pick it up later but it’s detrimental to our business.

I’m also facing a barrage of people telling me they are simply too anxious about COVID to return. The same people who have/will be out every night/weekend in pubs, restaurants, people’s homes...I’d much rather they were honest instead of this fake anxiety excuse which does a disservice to those actually struggling.

Of course there was a customer service problem when there was no proper childcare but that shouldn’t apply now. I’m not in a customer facing role and I’d say most of the team are more efficient with one or two exceptions who don’t respond quickly to messages. The same people were the least helpful in the office!

I don’t see why work has to be fiendishly unpleasant for the sake of somehow pleasing the people who can’t wfh or keeping open massively overpriced coffee shops. I had many years of difficult hours and travel (and taking in salads because cafe food is unhealthy). If I can work more efficiently and be more creative because I am refreshed and comfortable and can even exercise then what’s the harm? The fact I can be around for my daughter who has mental health struggles has probably saved me from ending up unemployed.

You’d think. But he also said students don’t have to wear masks in schools which again, why not? Doesn’t hurt anyone, hugely reduces transmission, almost 0 students are vaccinated and a large proportion of teachers are in their 20s and 30s, plus it has absolutely no economical impact

Add to that: DVLA, HMRC, NHS, Local councils. I agree that organisations and their staff who think customer service hasn't nose dived due to staff WFH are deluded.

I don’t know about DVLA, but part of the issue affecting HMRC and NHS and local councils is reduced capacity due to people working on covid things beyond their everyday jobs.

Last summer there was one fairly prominent newspaper columnist grumbling that WFH was no excuse for longer waiting times for the passport office and these people were just lazy. Totally ignoring the fact that a bunch of passport office staff had been sent to HMRC and DWP to assist in the huge amount of additional Covid work they were doing, not just sitting around with feet up.

(Although I don’t think I’d want to be sending my birth certificate and old passport and so on to the ‘home office’ of some junior official in a shared flat in London either…)

If I can work more efficiently and be more creative because I am refreshed and comfortable and can even exercise then what’s the harm?

Because we’re not just discussing if you, personally should get to WFH, we’re discussing whether the government should keep ‘WFH if you can’ in place as a national recommendation.

I’m glad that WFH is working for you. I hope you get to continue doing that in your role. But you have to see why making it a national directive affects far far more people than just you? You might not care about eg the fate of coffee shops in cities but the people who work in them do, and probably care more about their incomes than your work-life balance.

@GoldenOmber

If I can work more efficiently and be more creative because I am refreshed and comfortable and can even exercise then what’s the harm?

Because we’re not just discussing if you, personally should get to WFH, we’re discussing whether the government should keep ‘WFH if you can’ in place as a national recommendation.

I’m glad that WFH is working for you. I hope you get to continue doing that in your role. But you have to see why making it a national directive affects far far more people than just you? You might not care about eg the fate of coffee shops in cities but the people who work in them do, and probably care more about their incomes than your work-life balance.

And more people WFH will mean fewer buses & trains for the days you do have to go to your workplace, so your journey may take longer or be less pleasant. The "whole" going to work experience will be worse for all when many people work from home either fully or partly. Less convenient transport, fewer shops/cafes/takeaways, fewer people in the office, fewer office facilities, etc.

Yes coffee shop workers care about their incomes and not about me. And I care about my own welfare and not about them! We are the same.

Let’s not forget Covid is out there too and 30% of the adult population are not immunised so people should WFH for everyone’s sake because even a mild case can mutate. Have people not grasped that yet?

Do I think people who are experienced and good at their job in roles that CAN be done from home should have some say over whether they continue to WFH? Yes, I do. The whole of society can’t revolve around overpriced coffee shops which don’t pay their taxes. The market can adapt. I’d rather support my local economy, shop local and create jobs there.

And I care about my own welfare and not about them!

So presumably you can understand why there is a difference between “I, personally, should get to WFH” and “the government should tell everyone in my sort of role to WFH”? If only because the negative effects on broader society of option 2 will affect you as well, even if your job is great now?

And more people WFH will mean fewer buses & trains for the days you do have to go to your workplace, so your journey may take longer or be less pleasant. The "whole" going to work experience will be worse for all when many people work from home either fully or partly. Less convenient transport, fewer shops/cafes/takeaways, fewer people in the office, fewer office facilities, etc.

So what's the answer? Force people who are perfectly capable to WFH with supportive employers to do so to go into the office in order to maintain underfunded public services and coffee shops? I'm not denying there isn't an issue, but I think you're pointing fingers at the wrong people. The government/country/businesses need to adapt, the answer isn't to take a step backwards and artificially force people to do something that isn't necessary.

The government’s directives are to stop the spread of disease which could lead to a situation like the one in India. But there is no denying home working has a lot of benefits for some people. Commuting definitely caused a lot of harm for a lot of people who didn’t need to do it. The pandemic is hopefully temporary but some changes may remain. The attitude of some here is along the lines of “I would rather use the Encyclopaedia Britannica than look things up on the new-dangled internet”. Technology improves and the economy will adapt. I can order Costa at home and someone can be paid to bring it to me.

Given the overcrowding problems London commuters used to face , more wfh will make commuting nicer not worse

Of course there was a customer service problem when there was no proper childcare but that shouldn’t apply now.

Well it clearly does as these were calls in the last couple of months with a ridiculous message about only holding if you're vulnerable which I ignored.

Technology improves and the economy will adapt.

The economy undergoing massive shocks over a short-term period means that ‘adaptation’ would be very harmful for a lot of people, including a lot of people who are loving WFH at the moment. I don’t care all that much about the personal feelings of commercial property owners, for example, but I’d quite like to not have my pension fund completely tank.

Again, if you personally are happy WFH then that’s great, and I hope you personally get to continue doing this if it’s working for you and your employer. But surely you can see why we can’t make national policy “everyone currently WFH needs to stay there” decisions based on your personal situation?

@JeanClaudeVanDammit

We did a staff survey and it was overwhelmingly "voted" for to WFH across all age groups

We did one and it was the opposite. A hybrid approach was the most popular option but more preferred full time in the office than full time at home.

I think a lot of people will prefer a hybrid, but how many people who may not mind WFH are just sick of the sight of the same four walls and thus would welcome a return to the office? We've been practically locked down for most of the last 14 months. Even the pubs/restaurants have been shut for 6 months.

I expect once we're back in the office properly again and the trains are sardine cans every morning, a lot of people will wish they were still WFH.

Likewise the decision on whether it is 1) safe and 2) desirable for people to return to being crammed into overcrowded trains to work in airless offices should be made for the correct reasons and not because you are personally worried about your own pension fund!!

Why shouldn't people worry about their pension funds? Who's going to pay for my retirement if my pension fund plummets?

Technology improves and the economy will adapt.

My flat won't gain an extra room for an office so technology might improve but my working conditions won't!

@TorringtonDean

Likewise the decision on whether it is 1) safe and 2) desirable for people to return to being crammed into overcrowded trains to work in airless offices should be made for the correct reasons and not because you are personally worried about your own pension fund!!

I’m not suggesting we scrap WFH for public health reasons because of my personal pension fund

I’m trying to explain to you that the economy is interconnected, and so the government keeping “WFH if you can” in place is not actually the “really, really, really easy win” that the OP presented it as. There is a complex cost/benefit calculation here when it comes to keeping that sort of restriction in place.

not because you are personally worried about your own pension fund!!

That’s not a personal issue, a huge amount of pension funds are exposed to commercial property. That’s serious implications for hundreds of thousands of people.

However, that’s just one of the many reasons from both government and business POV, that I expect to see a strong push back to the office as soon as it is safe to do so. I don’t think that process will be quick however, so short term wfh is safe enough, long term I would be doubtful.

The government could start with a 'if you have worked from home no more than two days in an office, and/or a maximum capacity of 50% of normal (easily achievable in many cases). At least until everyone has been vaccinated.

Poor service due to Covid is an excuse in many cases, perhaps brought about by putting too many people on furlough, or as in the case of the DVLA, having many people not working from home and therefore a lot of staff catching the virus.