Anyone else being forced back into the office after working from home?

[nothinglikemyname]

I work for a small company - the work we do is something that can be comfortably done from home as we have proved since March, although our company has never previously been keen on home or flexible working.

Our boss has just sprung it upon us that he wants everyone back in work from 1st September, 5 days a week - no staggered hours, breaks or anything. No exceptions.

We'll all be working in one room - I think there will be 1m social distancing between desks but certainly not walking past. Because we are in a shared building there will now be no access to a kitchen, water or any areas away from our desks. There is 1 shared toilet for women (5 of us) and 2 for men (10). Cleaning is weekly and they don't seem to have plans to change - unless they expect us to do it.

I'm far from the only one with concerns which we are raising but it's landing on deaf ears. They seem intent on us going back regardless. They're putting together the risk assessment and the guidance seems to be the first questions to ask are is it essential? Is it safe? Is it agreed? No no and no.

I'm at the point of panic attacks thinking about going back in these circumstances and I think what's worse is the lack of consideration for our wellbeing. Even if the office was truly "Covid secure" which I don't think it can be for all of us, the lack of consultation or understanding of our individual circumstances seems to be going against all guidance.

To give some context I've always suffered from anxiety (although not under medical supervision) which my employer has been aware of and I have expressed to my boss that the return to work that has been sprung upon us has meant I've had sleepless nights and trouble concentrating. This hasn't been addressed. I appreciate I'm probably more risk adverse than most but I am in a social bubble with my mum who is vulnerable and been shielding (I provide some care but not officially if that makes a difference) and aside from that I have only interacted with people in an outdoor setting maintaining social distance - all shopping online etc. I feel that going back to the office will mean I won't be able to see her - without intense worry about making her ill anyway.

Due to the role I'm in I have a huge network and do not know a single other business taking this blanket approach to returning if the roles can be done from home - everyone is either shifting to remote being normal or giving people the option to return to the office if they feel that is what they want to do - making smaller groups safer and providing a happy medium for everyone.

But appreciate this might not be the case across other industries - is anyone else in similar circumstances? There is so much conflicting advice online that I don't know where I stand. Can they really make me go back at the expense of my mental health and well-being, and if it will mean I no longer feel I can see my mum? Right now I feel like I would rather quit.

I know I am luckier than most that I have a job right now and have been working all through lockdown but I have also made huge sacrifices to protect mine and my families wellbeing which will just all be undone. The guidance for social interactions is still mixing with only 2 households and avoid using toilets in others houses etc so how am I expected to feel safe mixing with almost 20 others for 8 hours a day?

@KatherineJaneway you just don't get it do you? You think that because some people, who mostly work in isolation at home can do so without much impact then that makes it a right to be rolled out across all workplaces. And all jobs.

And anyone that doesn't agree must be a terrible dictator. A bad employer.

In a world of high unemployment where people are desperate to work. And where companies have tested it out and found there's disruption, as many have said on this thread.

But oh no. You did admin operations so know exactly how it works. For all companies everywhere. No matter how many times people say that the cost of wfh can for some organisations and roles be reduced productivity due to reduced communication and teamwork it can all be done on zoom. Or teamwork. Or slack.

Except it can't. And unlike you some employees are not perfect and aren't trustworthy. I am lucky in that my well treated, well paid employees are (even though their roles can't be done at home apart from in emergencies) can be, but I have had someone take the piss and it affects how things have to be set up because you can't single one person out. Because, like you, they know their rights. And so it has to be all for one and one for all if you have people causing a problem.

But then that never happens because it's always employers being unreasonable bastards.

@DamsonDragon are they doing an identical role to you? If so you can put in a flexible working request and request to wfh (not a Covid thing, but more established rules for employers). They need to consider it, within 6 months, though you need to have been there two years. I don't understand why they would want you there if your roles are exactly the same. It doesn't seem fair, surely they would set it up so you would all come in 1-2 days a week instead?

Because, like you, they know their rights.

There's a telling line if ever I read one.

@Sallycinnamum

My friend who works for a very well known organisation has just been made redundant as her employer has outsourced her role because why pay her £45k when they can pay half the salary to someone else outside the UK?

This is happening. 100%. The more WFH you are the more at risk you are.

I won't do this because I want people who are native English speaking and who understand the UK environment, plus it doesn't sit well with me ethically. But for large wfh workforces who maybe aren't highly skilled, it could happen. That's why if they want you to go in you do. And I'm doing so you demonstrate your extra value.

Without saying too much I had three people wfh part time doing products onto our website and I'm about to change that to one local wfh person and a full time in the office person because it is a ducking nightmare managing them at home. For me. They are happy as larry but things aren't getting done and it's a huge drain. Never again.

My boss announced this morning that, although there is no official word yet, it seems as though we will be WFH for some considerable time yet, at least until the New Year. And that he had been talking to a relative in an equivalent role in Northern Ireland who had been told to expect to WFH until at least next MARCH!! (At LEAST!!)

@unmarkedbythat

Because, like you, they know their rights.

There's a telling line if ever I read one.

Yes it's true. I can't afford to pay someone to not work. Our customers are not understanding when things go wrong because they didn't work. Their colleagues are not happy about picking up the extra work that they didn't want to do. Yet they were very happy to send quasi legal letters the second I asked them to come back (I asked everyone).

What else do you want me to say? That it's ok to not work? That I can say to customers like you 'I'm very sorry this isn't happening but the person who was supposed to do this didn't and of course she shouldn't have to'. Would you be ok with that as an excuse? Or would you say that I should have had better control? Should have known it was happening? Had better systems in place?

And how do you imagine one does that when people who don't wfh suddenly do? The options to monitor people's work at home are intrusive and insulting. I wouldn't inflict them on my staff.

And then the second you try to get things in hand the legal letters start. Because it's all terribly unfair expecting them to come in.

It's all sorted now of course but my experience in the past of bad apples is that they are the very first people to tell me what I have to do.

Good staff don't work like that. In fact I'm about to give one an un asked for pay rise because she has been a star. She's paid fairly already (the others are paid more though) but this reflects her value and her amazing attitude. A as if I've never once heard her talk about her rights.

I'm not breaching anyone's rights and I'm all for employees not having to put up with shit.

So no, it's not 'telling' at all. Don't project your crap bosses into me.

@BiddyPop

My boss announced this morning that, although there is no official word yet, it seems as though we will be WFH for some considerable time yet, at least until the New Year. And that he had been talking to a relative in an equivalent role in Northern Ireland who had been told to expect to WFH until at least next MARCH!! (At LEAST!!)

I was thinking Easter tbh, unless winter goes very well (dream on), I'm confirmed WFH til Jan but only to be reviewed if anything has changed.

What byallmeans said. WFH can be great for the employee - but for the employer? Think long term - when redundancies happen The people wfh will be at more risk than people busy in the office, who are ‘part of the team’. And if you’re paying someone to wfh, it doesn’t matter where they live so you’ll be competing with people from all over the world to keep your job! And with best will in the world your home life isn’t anything to do with your bosses.

All of these Covid precautions are overkill anyway. People need to stop being so hysterical and get back to normal ASAP!

@DailyFailstinks

All of these Covid precautions are overkill anyway. People need to stop being so hysterical and get back to normal ASAP!

Yep. Definitely. All these companies, including leading science and health research bodies, just doing it all for no reason.

'get back to normal' = the definition of insanity is doing the same thing twice and expecting a different result.

"I won't do this because I want people who are native English speaking and who understand the UK environment, plus it doesn't sit well with me ethically. "

You wouldn't necessarily need to recruit overseas though. People can't expect to wfh on London/SE wages indefinitely when there are people who need the work, say, in the NE who can live well on much less.

I didn’t say they were doing it for no reason. However, we were told that the reason for lockdown was to protect the NHS not this unachievable goal of eradicating the virus entirely. We will all have to learn to live with it and it is completely ridiculous to put normal life on hold until a vaccine is developed!

@DailyFailstinks

I didn’t say they were doing it for no reason. However, we were told that the reason for lockdown was to protect the NHS not this unachievable goal of eradicating the virus entirely. We will all have to learn to live with it and it is completely ridiculous to put normal life on hold until a vaccine is developed!

But going 'back to normal' will just mean the NHS will get overwhelmed and deaths will go back to where they were.

I have learnt to live with it. I distance and wear masks and things have changed at work.

It sounds like you are struggling to live with it.

Don’t be so fucking patronising
There is no reason why the sensible people in society should have to pander to the scaredy cats - they need to grow up and stop being so hysterical.

@DailyFailstinks

Don’t be so fucking patronising There is no reason why the sensible people in society should have to pander to the scaredy cats - they need to grow up and stop being so hysterical.

But I don't think you are sensible, as you get very angry very quickly?

I am pretty grown up btw

But I don't think you are sensible, as you get very angry very quickly?

Nope, my anger has grown steadily over a period of six months...

@DailyFailstinks

But I don't think you are sensible, as you get very angry very quickly?

Nope, my anger has grown steadily over a period of six months...

Ok, well hopefully you can feel better soon.

But your approach, calling people hysterical, and scaredy cats, and presumably including yourself in the group you describe as sensible, that doesn't come across as measured or adult really.

Well, we’ll see whose laughing in years to come when it’s shown that the world lost its collective sanity over something that was of minimal risk to the vast majority of people 🤷‍♀️

*Who’s 🙄

There will soon be massive unemployment. The days of bitching about going into work and not being able to be sat at home because you feel 'safe' there are going to be long over. There will be plenty of people desperate enough to be happy to go in.

@InDeoEstMeaFiducia

There will soon be massive unemployment. The days of bitching about going into work and not being able to be sat at home because you feel 'safe' there are going to be long over. There will be plenty of people desperate enough to be happy to go in.

This is true enough. And with a government as shit as ours, no attempts to raise standards or create new jobs. Race to the bottom is coming.

"This is true enough. And with a government as shit as ours, no attempts to raise standards or create new jobs. Race to the bottom is coming."

And yet those determined to wfh indefinitely don't think they should play a part in creating/supporting other people's jobs in transport, hospitality, lunches etc.

@FinnyStory

"This is true enough. And with a government as shit as ours, no attempts to raise standards or create new jobs. Race to the bottom is coming."

And yet those determined to wfh indefinitely don't think they should play a part in creating/supporting other people's jobs in transport, hospitality, lunches etc.

The likelihood is that soon enough far more people will be forced into such jobs via UC - the sanctions are back. Higher unemployment = more people forced onto UC and on UC you can't just say you don't want to take what's offered because you don't feel 'safe' from C19.

I don't think individuals are responsible, in a free market economy, for the changes this is bringing. I think we need a national strategy of some sort, way beyond short term measures like subsidised meals out.

We've a lot of stored up economic mess to either unravel sensibly or risk being unravelled by. Things like property prices, pensions, transport costs, childcare costs - all have been discussed long term as big issues in the UK.