Wfh and now asked to go in

[ThePlumVan]

Wfh solidly for 19 months throughout COVID - mine is the only role within my subsidiary company that can be done this way. Everyone else needs to either be onsite permanently or needs to make regular visits to site, but not me.

Head Office is maintaining wfh (wherever possible) in line with government guidance. Anyone that needs to work onsite has to have head of service permission.

Subsidiary Manager has asked me to start going back in for meetings initially and then basically back onsite to work.

All my work has been done without complaint, with all meetings over Zoom. I really don’t want to go back in (many reasons!). Union advice is to continue as I am.
Am I being unreasonable to want to continue wfh ?

But we aren't talking about people who dont want to work from home. Its folk who think they are entitled to whether or not the employer wants them in. Employers need to stand up to those entitled cfs. IMHO.

But we aren't talking about people who dont want to work from home.

So the negative comments about people who'd been wfh were only aimed at the people who did want to work from home? Must have missed that ...

Jesus wept.

Most people consider themselves lucky to still have a job after a global pandemic.

Not stamp their feet because they can't work in their pj's anymore

@disco123

Good on you OP. If enough people refuse this nonsense then the companies will work out that they have to adapt if they want to want to attract and retain the best staff.

Come off it. Customer service has hit the floor during the pandemic and medics here are still undertaking video consultations from home. It can be done, but are you really telling me you’d be happy never to see a medical expert in person ever again?!

@BrilloPaddy

Jesus wept.

Most people consider themselves lucky to still have a job after a global pandemic.

Not stamp their feet because they can't work in their pj's anymore

I don’t understand why this issue gets other people so worked up. OP was asking if she was unreasonable to want to continue to wfh, in line with her own company’s policy. Pre-covid, that wouldn’t have been seen as remotely unreasonable - to want to continue with what you see as a perk, as per your company policy.

Of course workplaces can insist people go back, but people aren’t wrong to want to negotiate what they see as better terms for themselves. Employers wouldn’t be wrong to turn this down, but that’s not even what’s happening here. One manager is going against the company and it’s reasonable for the OP to want to know the logic behind it.

Did people have this amount is disdain towards people who wfh, before the pandemic?

I haven't personally noticed any problems with customer service. But perhaps that is to do with people trying to wfh with small children around, which wouldn't be the case going forward.

Some jobs can't be done from home, but some absolutely can. A hybrid or flexible model might be better for others.

Sometimes a medical person has to see you in person, but sometimes a video call would be more convenient and therefore preferable for me. I think it's good if we end up with more options for everyone rather than blindly going back to how things were in some kind of misery competition .

I’m not suggesting going back to the way it was - the hybrid approach seems to be the best of both worlds. And ultimately, that seems to be all the OP is being asked to do. 🤷🏻‍♀️

So have you resigned then as you aren’t going back in?

I thought it was cushty?

@Oblomov21

I thought it was cushty?

That’s a different word with a different meaning - people tend to say it when they’re pleased with something or think it’s good.

Cushy means easy or undemanding.

@disco123

Good on you OP. If enough people refuse this nonsense then the companies will work out that they have to adapt if they want to want to attract and retain the best staff.

Not all “the best staff” want to work from home. It might be better for you but you can’t claim that it makes you better than someone who wants to go into the workplace

Agree with last poster,not always the best staff that want to WFH
When we asked staff to come back I could have selected the ones who would kick off,and they certainly weren't the brightest and best

The audacity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A lot of staff, even the best, would like option of flexible working places, even if they don't use it. Or only use it occasionally.

I have always been able to work where I want, in this role. Even pre pandemic. I usually did work on various offices. But being able to work from home, when it suited was good too.

I do agree, though, its often not the best staff who are kicking off.

However, lots of 'the best staff' could be tempted to change employers, if someone is offering better terms.

Good on you OP. If enough people refuse this nonsense then the companies will work out that they have to adapt if they want to want to attract and retain the best staff.

Not all “the best staff” want to work from home.
It might be better for you but you can’t claim that it makes you better than someone who wants to go into the workplace

I don’t think that poster meant that necessarily all the best people want to work from home. Just that generally speaking, offering something widely seen as a perk (like the choice to work from home if you want) will help with retention and attracting new staff. No one is going to leave a company because they were given the option, some people may leave because they weren’t. Even if I didn’t want to wfh, a company that offered the choice would be more attractive to me as it would imply a higher level of flexibility that I may come to need, along with a trust in staff that I appreciate.

@Knittingupastorm

Good on you OP. If enough people refuse this nonsense then the companies will work out that they have to adapt if they want to want to attract and retain the best staff.

Not all “the best staff” want to work from home.
It might be better for you but you can’t claim that it makes you better than someone who wants to go into the workplace

I don’t think that poster meant that necessarily all the best people want to work from home. Just that generally speaking, offering something widely seen as a perk (like the choice to work from home if you want) will help with retention and attracting new staff. No one is going to leave a company because they were given the option, some people may leave because they weren’t. Even if I didn’t want to wfh, a company that offered the choice would be more attractive to me as it would imply a higher level of flexibility that I may come to need, along with a trust in staff that I appreciate.

You said it so much better than me

That's exactly what I meant

@user1487194234

Agree with last poster,not always the best staff that want to WFH When we asked staff to come back I could have selected the ones who would kick off,and they certainly weren't the brightest and best

Not kicking off doesn’t equal not wanting to wfh though. They may just not be the type to kick off, that doesn’t mean that the fact they can’t wfh won’t factor into any decisions around moving to a different job. I’m not saying they all definitely want to wfh, just that using who isn’t kicking off as a judge of who is happy seems a bit unreliable.

Exactly @Knittingupastorm . Individual people want different things WFH/Office but flexibility in this regard is likely to be attractive to a large number of people. The best staff can have a choice of companies, therefore (all other things being equal) those offering flexibility for WFH will have more applicants and ability to select the highest quality.

Btw my current job cannot be done from home so this doesn't affect me.

However, my previous one could be, and if I was still in that role I would look for a new one if they didn't support WFH. I was good, and I would have had no difficulty finding another job.

@disco123

Good on you OP. If enough people refuse this nonsense then the companies will work out that they have to adapt if they want to want to attract and retain the best staff.

100% this. In my industry most are already offering hybrid or fully remote to attract the best talent. I’ve been fully remote for the last 6 years and wouldn’t ever consider office based work even if the money was exceptional.

Leaving covid aside, if you want to work from home permanently you need to negotiate. This gas become a 'dealbreaker' for me so if my company insisted on me going back, i would let them know the importance of home working to me and look for home based roles.

I do think a lot of the time employees and employers might have a different view about levels of productivity from the office and home.

Formalised full time wfh (instead of pandemic mandated wfh) in our organisation requires regular checks of your home to ensure that you are complying with health & safety regs, working in an appropriate environment with proper desk, chair, storage etc. This is all to ensure the employers duty of care to the individual is achieved. Is this the same for you and can you accommodate this at home?

I do think a lot of the time employees and employers might have a different view about levels of productivity from the office and home
This exactly, and the reason why it is usually left to the manager to decide.

People will say that if the person isn't productive it can be managed, but managing someone not productive enough is demanding of time and effort and this is even harder when their work is remote. It's hard to evidence that the person isn't working their hours and lots of roles are not clearly define by tasks and targets that can be directly measured.

Much much easier for a manager to just have that person in to ensure they are doing work.