Civil service 60% mandate

[meagert]

What have your managers said to you? Do you think your department/SCS/line manager will be strict on this? Or do you think it'll be like the last time they tried a departmental push where it was a bit ad hoc?!

Possibly too soon to tell, our SCS haven't said very much yet and will "be in touch soon".

We have had this too in HMCTS.
To be honest us at AO, in my team anyway, are already doing 60% in the office, so it's no different for us, HOWEVER what I will say is that teamleaders and delivery managers felt they were different and could do what they like and of course this meant more home days. As a team we could see the disadvantages of this, leaders couldn't see their teams behaviours, and good work that their team would bring and basically had no clue what we are doing. They just felt it easier at home less distracted from the colleagues that required support. There was no support instead this was put on other colleagues as they were visible.
I feel its the right choice for leadership to be in the office as set out, lots have been 'unseen' because of their 'choices' to work at home.
I only speak for my own team as that is what I know.

@Welshy88 I do understand the problem where there is discrepancy, especially in operational areas. Which only demonstrates why a broad brush approach across 400,000+ people will never work.

I guess if they want this across the board and issues with office space then they will need to find places for people.
It was doable before covid. I do like working at home as less distractions and I do get more done but space issues is management problem to me and for them to sort.
There will always be people working from home so desk share the way forward whoever isn't in the day another is.
When leaders are leading a team they should be setting good examples, they have missed opportunities of poor behaviours and also not seeing in person often they miss those who have struggled mentally, as a leader these things should be seen to help, instead tucked away at home which shows nothing, a message to someone 'are you OK?' Is not good leadership.

It's totally easier for some people than others but, for example, the non Londoners in my team are the ones with mum down the road doing all their childcare and it doesn't hit them at all

@arintingly true but not always, I don't have my mum down the road, I do take your point, this isn't Londoners vs non Londoners I assure you, I just mean it'll be the ones we've been trying to open up the CS to that'll be worse off; women, mothers, lower income, those living in more deprived areas. As I say, there is a subset of civil servants I work with who will have limited impact and they're the ones already highly represented at SCS (NOT all).

@Welshy88 yes but remember you're reflecting your very specific area, my team is a small team of specialists, the lowest grade is G7, there are a handful of us doing a very specific skill across the country and office working genuinely has very limited benefit to us as professionals at an advanced stage of our careers.

But this is my point - generalising is divisive.

Some middle class Oxbridge Londoners are heavily affected and some are not

Some non Londoners have mum doing all their childcare and are totally unaffected and some are not

Let's just not do the divisive thing

@arintingly you've made your point, I've made mine, let's leave it there.

It is difficult to comment as a whole as we all have different roles and I can really only comment on my own.
CS does seem to be tarnishing everyone with the same brush but should look at the big picture really. Seems that some individuals, possibly from the top as I have read spoilt it for the rest (and that rest is a very large number).
Maybe raise your issues with whoever you need to to specify your own needs in your role 🤞🏼

@Welshy88 yes I think that's all we can do at this stage, and hope it calms down and common sense will prevail.

Surely this is political rather than Perm Secs/CEOs, so they will obviously have to convey the message.

@Sisterpita yeah absolutely. Certainly in my organisation's case anyway.

@Sisterpita its the third time in 2yrs that I've been through this nonsense in our dept. The first one, I can't remember who drove it, but the second was by Jacob Rees-Moggy (the insufferable c**t).

Departments still handle it badly - the first I knew of this one was an email from my Union, not notification from my employer.

It's another dog whistle to the Daily Mail reader type, the EDL wannabes who don't like that other people can make a difference or make a living whilst driving a desk, Tory Party donors and the Right Wing of the Conservative Party - just to make it look like they are Getting Things Done because everything else is collapsing around their ears through sheer incompetence and corruption.

The space issue is further exacerbated by the fact that demand is not uniform across the week. The fact is that more people want to attend an office Tuesday to Thursday than do on Mondays and Fridays for lots of reasons. So pretending their is capacity for 60% attendance when it’s impossible to get a desk ok a Tuesday is not helpf

Even more so when you know that you’re the only member of your team based in your hub so you’ll just be in teams meetings all day. Or, worse, you’ll have to ensure the stupidity of multi group room teams meetings.

The inefficiencies of the civil service are really not because people aren’t in office buildings.

@UnremarkableBeasts indeed, TWaT hours as they're called 😂 due to so many doing this (myself included) my school has reduced its wraparound offer on Mondays and Fridays, so I would genuinely struggle to get into the office on those days if DH is working away, id have to leave mid afternoon!

Our council is doing bankrupt and is selling all the offices so slightly contradictory. Now we’re unitary the civil servants are spread across a wide area so even in the office they aren’t in the same offices so sit on teams… which they can do at home. Dh goes in one day a fortnight. So much better for the environment than him commuting an hour each way (his office pre pandemic was hybrid but 10 minutes away - now that’s closed and nearest office is an hour away. He would never have applied for that job with a commute having done a similar commute for 10 years).

@SoddingWeddings it is very unusual for a TU to tell staff before the Dept. This potentially suggests that the Dept may have had their hand forced by the TU before they had decided a response.

Fuck it, here's the full email:

"Cabinet Office announcement on office attendance

Dear Colleagues,

As you may be aware, the Cabinet Office this week announced that it was their intention that "normal" office attendance across the civil service should increase to a minimum attendance level of 60%. Prior to the announcement, Prospect, alongside other unions had been in discussions with the Cabinet Office and engagement will continue.

From the figures shared by the Cabinet Office, current attendance levels are running at around 40%. We know that amongst Prospect members attendance levels can vary significantly:

Many of our members, due to the nature of the work that they do, have never been able to work from home, even during the pandemic.
Many members have operational requirements that mean that they spend significant parts of their time on site visits, inspections or liaising with stakeholder and clients.
Some members, at the demand of their employer, are home based to support operational delivery
Some have become home workers, not at their request, but due to the shrinkage of the government estate and office closures.
Against that backdrop, Prospect believes that the 60% figure chosen by the Cabinet Office is an arbitrary measure set across a very complex workforce. Prospect has never advocated exclusive general home working and similarly the notion of 100% office attendance was always a misnomer given the nature of the jobs many of our members do.

In some areas, the pandemic accelerated the move to hybrid working and Prospect has been keen to ensure that the benefits and flexibilities it has afforded are not lost. At the same time we know that many staff have missed the opportunity to engage with colleagues, collaborate and problem solve together. Prospect recognises that younger members, those new to organisations and those on development programmes have particularly welcomed the return to regular office attendance and interaction with colleagues. Prospect believes that a balance needs to be struck which reflects the operational demands of the work of members whilst giving staff a level of flexibility which is valued.

We know that this will be a controversial issue within organisations and amongst many members. We have been pressing hard for the Cabinet Office to recognise the benefits of hybrid working and the flexibility it provides to staff. At no point have the Cabinet Office sought to suggest that time spent working from home is less efficient or productive and we know also that some staff struggled during the Covid period where they were required to work exclusively from home.

Any process of increasing office attendance will need to be carefully and sensitively managed:

In many parts of the estate, the space and facilities provided are simply not adequate to accommodate all staff attending workplaces at the same time.
In a number of areas teams themselves are geographically dispersed so even when attending workplaces members continue to have to engage with colleagues online.
The work of many members in some areas demands deep concentrative work- which many have found to be more effectively and efficiently delivered from home as opposed to busy office environments.
We recognise that commuting costs during the cost of living crisis have also been particularly challenging for some.
The Cabinet Office and the Civil Service more generally has always highlighted the benefits of flexible working, and that offering staff the opportunity to work flexibly supports the recruitment and retention of staff and supports a diverse and inclusive workforce. Similarly, there are real benefits to office attendance in terms of supporting colleagues, building teams, gaining knowledge skills and experience and building careers.

The challenge will be finding the right balance which reflect the work people do, the organisation they work for and individual circumstances.

Technically, the Cabinet Office does not have the power to "instruct" departments what to do - though they have written to employers setting out their clear "expectations" in terms of attendance levels.

As a matter of urgency, we are seeking meetings at employer level. Our key priorities are to ensure that any changes to current arrangements are as a result of trade union engagement and agreement and any changes are thought through, reflect the nature of work undertaken by members, provide staff with the opportunity to work flexibly, supports those with caring responsibilities and those who may require workplace adjustments.

We will be in touch again shortly to provide an update.

If you have a colleague who is not a union member please encourage them to join. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to get in touch with your local Rep or Branch."

@SoddingWeddings you have just proved my points.

Cabinet Office = MCO = political
CO announcement to all CS
TU email to all members prempting your depts individual response.

2024 will see a General Election this is a gmt tactic to get good press headlines.

I don’t meant this disrespectfully but are you in a regional office or fairly new to CS? The CS has always had bad press that doesn’t reflect reality sadly some MCOs play to the press and we end up with cynical political announcements that sensible Perm Secs/ CEOs etc. work out the minimum they need to do to show willing.

@Sisterpita that's very weird take on what I've written. I agree it's political. I literally said it's a dog whistle for Tory interested parties. I'm not a fool or a naif - not sure where you're reading that I don't understand things? I've also been in the public sector and civil service for over 20 years 😂 hence why I can solidly say that departments handle this sort of thing badly, because they absolutely do.

The thing about referring to it as ‘attendance’ is that it (intentionally) implies that people WFH are not attending and, by extension, not working.

It’s pure presenteeist logic.

Before I left the civil service (to earn considerably more money - I almost doubled my salary - and do the same kind of work, still in the public sector, but without being subject to this shite), I can absolutely say that I got almost no work done on the days I was required to attend the office for so many reasons. Going in 2 days a week just meant I had to try to actually do my work in the other 3.

@UnremarkableBeasts what part of the public sector did you go into? I'm wondering if I should try local government again, but I think I hated local government politics more!

I went into consultancy. I get paid nearly twice as much and my employer charges a truly ludicrous day rate to public sector departments for my services.

It’s bloody ridiculous. Even more so when client teams insist on wasting the time their department is paying silly money for.

No, not local although DP's city recently did follow suit so I wouldn't be surprised if you see others do the same.

As for ours, we had been best endeavours 3 for a while because our exec wanted it and some weeks I'm 4. But I'm 10 min walk away so it's not far for me.

DV is a level of security vetting that is not automatically granted, vetting is conducted up to the level of the role that the role requires

Unconfirmed vetting status should not be a sifting factor
An external applicant has no clearance prior to application

Security checks come later in the application stages