Pressured to return to office but cases rising locally. Where is their duty of care?

[Nutsoh]

Despite WFH successfully since last March we’ve been told over the past few weeks that our offices now have to be manned to 50% in a bid to transition back to full occupancy.

Some managers have turned the thumbscrews on their teams to —force— encourage part of their departments back, they’ve pushed the teams that have a lot of static equipment back in FT and allowed those with laptops the benefit of coming and going when they please with their laptops.

Despite the 2m rule we are allowed to sit in the office, anything up to 10 of us without masks, just needing to put masks on to walk around. There is a one way system but the kitchen is a free for all and you can go into the toilet right after someone else has just used it even though ventilation is poor.

So, I didnt have too much of an issue with this but cases are now rising locally and I feel it’s only a matter of time that it’s going to go through the office. We’ve all had at least one jab but I’m starting to feel a little anxious about someone getting it and it running through the whole building.

So, from a duty of care POV, if someone gets Covid through work and it leaves them seriously I’ll or with long Covid where does that leave the company legally seeing as they’ve more or less forced people back in despite the guidance still being to WFH if you can.

Can people take action against their company if this happens?

Sure. I’m just not quite sure what she expected. It was going to happen at some point.

Yes, but not while wfh is still in place.

Which was my point. People are berating the OP for having concerns. People are assuming the management want them back because performance figures show working from home isn't working.

People are assuming they must be failing and assuming this is the right decision. It may not be and there could be real consequences to the business and staff if its not.

Its entirely possible this isn't being driven by any data or any concern for the business.

Nutsoh To me - all these 'honestly , you need to get back to work ' quips , just say ' I can't work from home - So I don't want you to either ! ' A rather illogical unpleasant spat of jealousy that I would of thought was below the average woman.

There are so many positives from wfh. So many in fact that I - as a Civil servant will be WFH permanently as my team has given up their office space to allow those who deal with the public and therefore need to be in - more space.

The positives are huge .

No longer commuting. So that's 52 miles a day - 250 miles a week . Huge financial saving for me but more importantly for the planet - 5 tonnes of carbon not going into the atmosphere.. (and I have a tiny car) .. for my team of 18 that's an average of 80 tonnes a year ..

Better work life balance. My younger staff are able to spend more time with their children. No need for breakfast clubs and after school for those with kids of an age to amuse themselves but not old enough to be left without parental supervision.

Happier staff means increased productivity. Ours has increased by 17% .. our compromise for those who do want an office to work in is to redeploy them to a nearby office within our estate. That way they have human contact if that was missing.

We all meet up face to face once a month at a mutually agreed venue.

The OnLY negative that I can see is the economic effect on city centre business such as sand which shops and coffee bars.. but for me that is balanced by the increased business gained by local shops.

Why on Earth would you want to give up WFH if it has benefited both your own well being and not impacted your business. Especially with the huge environmental benefits. The only reason I can see is the revolting management practice of 'presenteeism' . Not a place I would want to work and saying ' it's what your employer wants' is no longer good enough. Our environmental predicament requires us ALL to do what we can. WFH is a huge win in this regard and should be encouraged where possible .

Yes, but not while wfh is still in place.

It’s not an edict delivered by god though.

The wfh guidance is very woolly, open to wide interpretation, leaving lots of room for companies to do as they please. That’s deliberate.

With things getting pushed back, the OPs workplace decided to go ahead anyway, it’s happening all over the place, I just don’t understand why it’s very surprising. 🤷‍♀️

Why do people keep barking "go back to work" as if OP has just been sitting on her arse chilling for the last 15 months? Do some people not understand what WFH stands for? Strange.

Research has shown that for routine and administrative tasks wfh is effective. However it does not score so highly on the creativity side and can lead to stagnation in approaches as collaboration is often needed to spark invention. Many times this happens not in prevareanged meetings but in the spontaneous interactions which take place in the workplace. This is what employers are wrestling with.

I am fed of hearing ‘I work at home successfully’, ‘less people out and about so reducing contact’ etc. My next door neighbour wfh. They love it because they can take their children to and from school. She can exercise each day. She has more time. Just say you order wfh is easier for YOUR life

I do work at home far more successfully than in the office, we can collaborate far more readily than in a noisy open plan office spread over different sites with limited meeting space. But an equal motivator for remaining wfh permanently is the personal benefits. No transport costs and the lack of commute means I can work compressed hours, having a 3 day weekend which has enabled me to spend more quality time with my terminally ill dad. I do miss the personal interaction and the spontaneous humour of the office however I’ve bonded with a couple of neighbours due to being home more and true friendships have grown. It has definitely made my life better

My partner went back when schools did. I think it's very short sighted of firms and sends some clear messages:

• firm has little sense of collective responsibility and contributes unnecessarily to community spread
• firm is not progressive - more concerned about presenteeism. Partner and most of team are now working fewer hours so things are taking "longer" (12 to 10 hours to account for some commuting time). Firm also taking risk of number of people being "off" for catching covid. No masks etc, no windows
• all those suffering sandwich bars in the city (none were open anyway)
• firm is not bothered about health of employees - why not wait until those that wanted to be vaccinated had been
• there is since not space for everyone to be in at same time (many people used to wfh sometimes anyway and blanket approach hasn't worked).
• people that were struggling wfh were not offered more or less hours in office - blanket approach taken

Workplaces and schools are hotbeds for covid to spread. Fuck all is really being done in schools - wfh whilst can/until vaccinated at this stage of the game should be in place. For those that are saying have you been to a shop/visited someone/eaten out etc - those things are a risk, but not of the same magnitude as sitting in close proximity to a number of people all day when you can work equally effectively at home! If all wfh was cancelled when schools went back, what state do you think the covid numbers would be in now?!

WFH isn't easier for me - I don't have DC and my job means I can't flex hours etc so I work exactly the same as in the office
I'm staying home for the foreseeable though as I'm CEV, so yes it's safer for me to be home and no, I'm not going to restaurants/pubs/socialising. Also in a NW area with high cases

I'm a keyworker and have worked throughout. I agree with you OP that there should be a duty of care, but as long as your workplace can show they are "COVID secure" according to the guidelines laid out for workplaces you won't have much to stand on if you don't want to return. They don't need to do much to "prove" that you need to return, and as long as they have 2 metre distancing in place, masks when closer than 2 metres, and some hand gels available then they will be considered "COVID secure" and in line with guidance.

I personally don't feel this is enough to make a space actually safe, but it is all they need to do to be in line with the guidance.

@Workinghardeveryday

Omg. What is wrong with some of you people?! Seriously. Op has been successfully working from home all this time, if she hadn’t of been I am pretty sure this would have been flagged up by now. We are told to wfh where possible. She doesn’t feel safe going into the office and why would she? We all know how it’s spread, sitting in a room with ten people all day doesn’t fill her with confidence. I really feel for all the people who had no choice than to go out to work, it’s really really shit. Is it op’s fault you had to go to work yet she could wfh? No it isn’t. She is trying to protect her health. For all you know she hasn’t been out to the shop etc. You clearly have a hatred for those who have been wfh and probably think they have had an easy ride wtf. So op she go back to the office and feel unsafe to do a job she does well at home - why exactly? So you lot feel better about the fact you were forced to so now it’s her turn? - Nice.

And this.

It’s not an edict delivered by god though.

The wfh guidance is very woolly, open to wide interpretation, leaving lots of room for companies to do as they please. That’s deliberate.

Who said it was. I just disagree with 'the boss says so everyone has to follow silently, no questions and assume its based on poor performance'.

And regardless of how wooly the guidance is, if they do get alot of cases, or someone's health really suffers from catching it, the fact that they went against the guidebce, will only support and action they could be taken against them.

At this point, after 15 months, it's actually a big risk to take.

To me - all these 'honestly , you need to get back to work ' quips , just say ' I can't work from home - So I don't want you to either ! ' A rather illogical unpleasant spat of jealousy that I would of thought was below the average woman.

I agree. I said it earlier buy its like the posts last year. Someone would post that they were struggling as they hadn't been furloughed while team mates had. Then a long stream of 'be grateful you have a job, at least you know your job is secure. Those of us furlough will probably be made redundant blah blah.

People posting they were worried about the fact that they were being furloughed were met with 'at least you are getting a break, those of us at work are keeping the business open so you have a job to come back to.....be grateful to those of us who have it harder'

Where op works from, doesn't impact posters. But them seem to be taking it personally, that she doesn't want to go back.

Other peoples jobs or working conditions, really have nothing to do with it. Its a typical race to the bottom.

I think all these people who have worked from home throughout the pandemic need to give their heads a wobble and get back to their usual place of work if that's what their employer requires.

Plenty of people have had no choice but to crack on and work throughout in their usual work places.

We are never going to get out of this nightmare if people are too scared to leave their homes and get back to normal.

It's been over a year. There are vaccines, masks, distancing, adapted workplaces etc...

I just disagree with 'the boss says so everyone has to follow silently, no questions and assume its based on poor performance'

Absolutely no ones saying that though.

My point is that management are in a better place to judge what is right for the business as a whole and ultimately the decision belongs to them.

Sure the OP should be consulted, sure she can ask questions and raise objections, but she has to acknowledge that she doesn’t have sight of the whole business, or responsibility for its P&L, or the plan for future growth.

the fact that they went against the guidebce, will only support and action they could be taken against them.

What would that action look like? As someone else pointed out, the criteria for ‘Covid secure’ is minimal. There will be minimal opportunity for employees to ‘take action’ here as the floodgates would be well and truly open with people who’ve been put in much more dangerous situations than the OP throughout the pandemic.

My point is that management are in a better place to judge what is right for the business as a whole and ultimately the decision belongs to them

Its not what you were saying. You were saying they will have performance figures, to back up this is the right decision. When you have no clue. You kept saying people just have to go along with what the boss says. No one else .

What would that action look like? As someone else pointed out, the criteria for ‘Covid secure’ is minimal. There will be minimal opportunity for employees to ‘take action’ here as the floodgates would be well and truly open with people who’ve been put in much more dangerous situations than the OP throughout the pandemic.

We have no idea. But this is why alot of big businesses are looking into and getting advice. Because they are not naive enough to believe that, because it hasn't happened so far then it won't ever happen.

As I said its bad for optics, so someone only has to post on social media about a company and they can lose corporate customers. Its also Risky to staffing levels and leaves them open for POTENTIAL action.

Potential. Not definite.

Plenty of people have had no choice but to crack on and work throughout in their usual work places.

What does that have to do with anything?

At the end of the day if the Employer wants you back you will have to o back,or hand in your notice.
The Employer will make the decision that is correct for them/the business and doesn't really care about your work/life balance

Its not what you were saying. You were saying they will have performance figures, to back up this is the right decision. When you have no clue.

Performance figures that will be feeding into decisions. There will be multiple factors, many of which aren’t even on the OPs radar.

You kept saying people just have to go along with what the boss says. No one else

Well ultimately they do. Because they’re the boss. What I wasn’t saying was that it was all about poor performance as measured at an individual level, it’s about far more than that. Again, that the OP probably doesn’t have sight of.

As I said its bad for optics, so someone only has to post on social media about a company and they can lose corporate customers. Its also Risky to staffing levels and leaves them open for POTENTIAL action.

I’m sure all that’s occurred to them. And they’re doing it anyway. Things have moved on significantly since last year, people can and will do what’s right for their business. They’re not exactly outliers here, it’s happening all over the place.

Belladonna whatever the Gov/DofEd decides! I wrote it partly tongue in cheek, as I may not agree with it - but in Sept whilst the NHS may have assessed and kept CEV staff away from a patient focused role, that was not the case for teachers/staff in school.

@Meredithisgrey

Plenty of people have had no choice but to crack on and work throughout in their usual work places.

What does that have to do with anything?

Well why are people like the OP so different that they can stamp their feet and demand to carry on working from home?

It's been over a year. People need to get on with it abs take necessary precautions in the workplace.

Performance figures that will be feeding into decisions. There will be multiple factors, many of which aren’t even on the OPs radar.

You don't actually know that. For some businesses, it will. For pots of businesses they want people just because.

Well ultimately they do. Because they’re the boss. What I wasn’t saying was that it was all about poor performance as measured at an individual level, it’s about far more than that. Again, that the OP probably doesn’t have sight of.

But they don't. You don't even know what job they have. And just because the Boss says, isn't a good enough reason. Which you accepted.

I’m sure all that’s occurred to them. And they’re doing it anyway. Things have moved on significantly since last year, people can and will do what’s right for their business. They’re not exactly outliers here, it’s happening all over the place.

Why are you sure? I work with smaller companies all the time, when pur company acquires them. Lots of company's haven't thought this through and wouldn't be able to answer ops questions. Again, you are presuming you know far more about this company than you actually do.

Besides which, op could have a job that has visuals on all performance. I do.

Well why are people like the OP so different that they can stamp their feet and demand to carry on working from home?

But other peoples jobs or working conditions or site of work, has no impact on the OP or vice versa.

Do you believe no ones flexible working request should be accepted because other people, in other jobs in other buildings can't working flexibly?

Besides which, op could have a job that has visuals on all performance. I do.

But that isn’t a holistic view.

What about how they train people up? What about how they innovate for the business? What about how the build company culture? What about how they optimise processes and operations?

It’s reasonable to suggest all those things are better done F2F. Or other things that I don’t know about.

Perhaps some departments aren’t working well, so they want them back, but also can’t be see to be discriminatory.

There’s a whole lot more to running the business than the OP holed up at home meeting her targets. So many on here don’t seem to understand that.

And equally, maybe there isn’t any justification beyond what management prefer, but ultimately the OP can’t do much about that either. I’m sure they’ll note her concerns and show her their policies. She may buy herself a few weeks. But if they want staff back, they want them back and then staff are free to leave if they don’t like it.

@wednesadaayaddams

"Well why are people like the OP so different that they can stamp their feet and demand to carry on working from home?"

It is not a competition. We should all want everyone to be able to work in a safe environment. Personally, I think the guidelines for "COVID-secure" workplaces are ridiculous and given what we know about airbourne spread etc are not enough. I am saying this as someone who has worked throughout the pandemic in a very high risk work environment, so I am not one who has been sheltered away from the virus. But I can acknowledge that the guidance is minimal and should be improved for everyone rather than accept that everyone should suffer because I am in a shit situation.

Well why are people like the OP so different that they can stamp their feet and demand to carry on working from home?

OP isn't "so different". Lots of people are working from home and many will continue to do so after the pandemic. How exactly does it negatively effect you if OP works at home?

It's been over a year. People need to get on with it abs take necessary precautions in the workplace.

People are "getting on with it". Why do you assume that working at home means not doing anything?

I think a lot of people are hiding behind covid and 'feeling unsafe' because they just prefer the work from home life and don't want to go back to their office or original work place.

Of course there is nothing wrong with that, but the reality is that these jobs were never work from home jobs and they rightly should return to their original work place when the employer has made all the necessary adjustments.

This has nothing to do with flexible working requests. Anybody can and should be able to make a request to work flexibly. But it was never going to work for certain businesses to allow their whole workforce to stay at home forever off the back of a pandemic 🤷🏼‍♀️

If the employer wants staff to return to the workplace they should go providing it has been deemed covid safe. If they don't want to that's fine but they will probably need to find a new job that meets their preferences.