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.

so the solution to young people in crappy accommodation is forcing everyone to work from city centres full time?

You don’t need to suggest that everyone be ‘forced’ back to the office to acknowledge that WFH is very negative for a lot of people. What do you suggest instead, giving every flat-sharer a spacious 3-bed house each instead of a space in a shared office?

@feckwit

I guess if you are a cafe owner in central London, dependent on office worker trade, that’s the last thing they need? So many people impacted by what might seem a “no brainer” decision.

A question I would ask..why should we base decisions on returning to offices based on cafe owners in the cities. In smaller local areas many cafe owners who have been struggling through for years are now benefitting from people WFH and therefore more local trade rather than everyone commuting and spending money in London. WFH could benefit local highstreets which have been struggling for years.

Slightly o/t but “stay in place” and “run in place” really grates my ears.

one of those americanisms that sounds odd.

I don’t think people are going to local high streets.

Dh has been wfh since March 2020. He has not once met a friend for a coffee or browsed a few shops in the high street. I don’t think most blokes do.

And people buy coffees and sandwiches etc because they are not at home . Why would I drive to the nearest town, park, buy a sandwich, drive home again and eat it ? I might do that if I were out anyway, or buy something for a treat, but I’m not going to get a pricy sandwich from an artisan bakery five times a week.

What I don’t understand is why people don’t get how quickly things change. It’s been the case throughout and no government official or advisor or any form of mind reader knows what tomorrow will hold never mind in 5 weeks for June 21st. That’s why it seems Government is indecisive, changes it’s mind etc.

Yes they should have shut the border with India earlier, but they now have measures in place to surge test, increase vaccinations in hot spots. Yes Boris should continue mask wearing in schools from the 17th, an easy win and I wonder if something will come outlast minute

He has already set us up to start to think actually from June 21st we might not get everything back

The Indian variant is likely far more transmissible that other variants. It’s key we all follow the rules, including at the MNetters who think they don’t apply to them, they have stopped wearing masks, etc etc

As to home working it’s here to stay. Lots of businesses have seen the benefits. Yes some are insisting staff go back to offices but lots are doing hybrid versions now. Some businesses will suffer as people realise how much they can save by not buying that coffee etc. !but other businesses will benefit as money is saved and spent on bigger purchases

I find it a bit weird how it's always one extreme or the other on these threads. Either 'everyone who wants to WFH is a Covid lover and smug middle class fucker' or the other end of the spectrum.

Couldn't we look at moving towards a middle ground as we open up again? More of a phased return? So for those whom WFH is working well( they can continue for the moment, others can get back to the office if they're keen - then you have less people mixing still? Surely that would be a benefit to everyone?

So for those whom WFH is working well( they can continue for the moment, others can get back to the office if they're keen - then you have less people mixing still? Surely that would be a benefit to everyone?

Well that’s fraught with it’s own serious problems as the article I posted upthread outlines.

However in the short term yes, it’s probably the way forward. In any event, most big offices will do a phased return. It won’t be all systems go on the 21st.

unless you entrench it in legislation (i.e. employees rights to ask for it and it be reasonably considered by the employer) it is all just a meaningless discussion circling below governmental powers

I've got no time for people saying they don't want to go back because they are unvaccinated. Diddums - schools, supermarkets, retail, manufacturing etc, all went back without vaccines. Some to work places with no expectation of SD or mask wearing. That's up to work places to make 'safe' (ha) for your return.

Agree wholeheartedly that wfh suits some people down to the ground. Own it and don’t pretend you are making a sacrifice.

That also applies.

I get why it works for some people, but that's a conversation to have with individual organisations, not a rule to be made by a government. Lots of people are working 'better', lots of organisations are not - excuses like 'due to covid...' won't wash forever. My partner works from home ordinarily, but had the option to go to an office when he wanted. He used to go 3 or 4 times a week just for the social stuff. He's started to go back now because he realised that it just wasn't working for his mental health to be at home alone the whole time. I think a lot of people would struggle to do it every day forever.

Personally I've always hated working at home. I choose a job near to where I live so my commute is short, but the upsides are still there.

[quote Lillipops]@SofiaMichelle they have in the company I work for.[/quote]
No, they really haven’t. They’ve decided they can save some money by having less office space.

I'd love to have more a mix of WFH and office long term but that link above about the problems associated with this were clear to me from about May 2020. If you want a mix of working from home and in the office, teams will have to work to the same schedule eg Mon- Weds all in , Thur- Fri all at home or whatever split is decided on. Another team can then use the office space on Thur-Fri. Anything else leads to hot desking which many people loathe, promotion for those less often in the office and chaotic meetings mixing zoom and in person which never works.

Even fixed office days within teams is a nightmare puzzle to work out taking into account team sizes, space available, team work patterns, space for new employees for team expansions, reorganization etc.

A free for all where employees can choose which days they work from home is unworkable and even having some set days for WFH is complicated.

Why would employers make their life much more difficult logistically than it needs to be? I think most companies will go back of all in the office , with a few making the change to all WFH as those options are both easier to manage .

Some employers might allowed a limited flexibility to work form home for some employees in some instances. This happened pre Covid too but maybe a few more employers may be open to this in the future.

So overall, after Covid is under control , I think we will all be mostly back in the office with maybe a few more companies having most staff WFH and maybe a few more offering a tiny bit of managed controlled flexibilitiy to employees. Some may even try the fixed days in the office and WFH for different teams

What is definitely not going to happen is that we will have a utopia of all office workers mixing home and office working in a ratio to suit the employees, much as my little socialist, anti-capitalist heart would love that

They’ve decided they can save some money by having less office space.

This is so small scale, if it makes them less competitive though. There’s a reason why companies spent money on decent offices and Covid hasn’t made that go away. It’s just temporarily disrupted it.

Exactly bumblingbovine49

It’s pretty obvious if you think it through

I attended a webinar in the week presented by 2 'Management experts' as part of creating our 'back to work' plan.
They basically said you'll have the people who want to go back in to the office and the people that don't. That plus the need to keep a COVID safe Enviroment will probably mean that you have enough people in to make your office viable while also being able to spread people out etc.
They also said whatever plan was put in place now would not be the model forever as this is such a fast changing situation.

They said the evidence is still very much that people wfh are more productive but this depended on resources! So those with space for an office, childcare etc did better at home than those that didn't which obviously makes sense!

@GoldenOmber

There’s MPs there every day. And a ton of parliamentary staff who work behind the scenes

But surely ALL MPs should be back to the HOC? Aren't you worried about their mental health, sitting at home working in front of a screen?

If large numbers of children and staff are encouraged back into schools with inadequate safety measures, why are MPs still largely working from home? Not a single MP has died from Covid that's been proven to have been caught whilst in the HOC. It's safe!

The effectiveness of WFH really depends on the team and managerial ability!
Half my team is in India anyway and we all get along really well - the atmosphere on team calls is lively and energetic.
There are teams however where every call is like pulling teeth, nobody makes any small talk, people are silent until everyone shows up. It's like a morgue.

So it really depends on the job

Also for us 1-2 days a week in office is just fine!

Sorry but why should office based get to stay at home the virus is going to be around for years should no one go into work the all the NHS cleaners shop worker drivers ect as it even less safe for them, I also don't think soft plays ect should open yet but they open Monday and people seem to be dying to send there kids to mix with 30+ household

Why would employers make their life much more difficult logistically than it needs to be? I think most companies will go back of all in the office

All those people who’ve sold up and relocated hundreds of miles from their office on the promise of WFH forevermore are going to have a rude awakening, if indeed that is really what has happened and it’s not just estate agent PR spin. Part of me thinks it must be the latter as surely no one would be that presumptuous stupid.

Firstly WFH is lovely if you have a large house with a dedicated workspace and you enjoy working in your house and you WANT to (if anyone can remember what want and not forced means!!) it’s not so lovely if you live in a house share or a 1 bed flat and have been working from your living room for over a year with very little human contact. (as one of my colleagues have)

It’s also awful for the wider economy which to some people is “just cafes” “just a sandwich shop” “just a city centre gym” but those justs add up to hundreds of thousands of jobs and livelihoods that will no longer exist because people are being scared witless by our incompetent government and have become too accustomed to their new selfish I’m alright at home so everyone else must be attitudes!

People have been going out to work throughout this whole situation without the luxury of sitting around at home all day, there needs to be a choice and if people want to be in offices let them.

@Dddccc

Sorry but why should office based get to stay at home the virus is going to be around for years should no one go into work the all the NHS cleaners shop worker drivers ect as it even less safe for them, I also don't think soft plays ect should open yet but they open Monday and people seem to be dying to send there kids to mix with 30+ household

But it doesn't have to be a negative thing like this. Some people still WFH will mean less chance for the virus to spread. I can't understand this mentality at all - it's like being furious at people who were furloughed.

WFH Forever will for some people put jobs at risk . If your company says you can work from home then equally you could live anywhere so lots of companies will take advantage of this and be getting rid of UK employees and employing people in countries where they can get a cheaper workforce .

*sorry keep posting early
For me 1-2 days in the office would be ideal.. to catch up with colleagues I'd otherwise not see, i.e from other teams. Its impossible to talk to a big group over video calls as only one person can speak at a time.
@TheKeatingFive that article is too much of a blunt instrument. In reality it's more complex.
Where I work there are plenty of 40-something who earn a decent salary and have zero desire for promotion. They'd be happy to WFH all day every day.
Because teams and managers are globally distributed WFH is not the issue. It's how you make yourself visible to the people who matter, for YOUR specific division. My team is on calls all day long with various teams across the globe and execs of various levels. I'm certainly more well known compared to an in-office project manager who spends most of their time liaising with external vendors and not much internally.

People complained about everyone needing to be in office. Now complaining when companies give the choice. They can't win, can they? If you know what you need to succeed in your role - you need to put it in. This 'women with young children' and 'young men' dichotomy does nobody any favours. If anything it might indicate a broken office culture. But not the WFH itself.

*sorry just to add - yes WFH might reduce promotional chances but it depends on the office culture and team. If your office values face time and you want to be promoted go into the office. If you don't want to because of your young children that's your problem not the companies.

@Crowsaregreat

Increase working from home and convert offices into retirement flats so older people can downsize and younger people can have family homes to have families in.

Why on Earth should 'older people' have to go and live in a flat? Fuck that. Flats suck to live in. You always wind up with some cunt as a neighbour, don't have your front door, harder to get things in and out of. People work hard to have a house with their own garden, why the hell should they be beholden to give that up because someone else decided to sprog?