Mums forced into office by big UK company?

[MM90]

I work for a big, well-known company. The bosses are considering plans to force all colleagues to come to the office 3 days a week. They are thinking about checking our turnstile data individually and disciplining anyone who doesn’t come in for 3 days every week, whether they need to be there or not. I thought this was the 21st century where working women have the chance to create a sensible work / life balance so long as they perform in their job. My line manager gave me a great performance rating during Covid. I have two children under 5 and no family nearby. Any thoughts on this?

Well, obviously I can't answer for them, but lots of people can flex their hours and take personal time during the day - it's very normal in lots of jobs. Maybe they'd moved their lunch break around, maybe they could start early because they didn't need to commute, maybe they'd worked the day before and were taking the time back - who knows.

I've worked jobs where you have to be present all day - but now I work for myself and I often pop home during the day to do laundry, or feed the cats, or have lunch. Yesterday I even went out for coffee with a friend mid-morning. I got all my work done, I just don't need to work set hours to do so.

Very goady title OP. Mothers aren’t being targeted. Employees are being expected to be in the office which is quite reasonable. You can’t look after children and work. Too many people have taken the piss so employers are now getting folk back to the office.

Plenty of thoughts @MM90

IMO 3 days a week in the office IS flexible working. It's not 5, is it?
You will need to find childcare for 3 days a week.

There has been a lot of evidence over the last few months that being IN the workplace is better for the company and employees not least because junior staff learn for older colleagues in ways that are not possible when WFH.

You will surely have to do what other working mums do? Use childcare.

My DD is completing her maternity leave and will have to put her child into nursery at a huge cost. She has to be in the office, in a managerial role, and there are no options for her.

Until lockdown, working from home wasn't the norm.

if your contract says you work in the building, that's what you will do.
Or- change your job.

I find that I'm much more productive at home than I am in the office. My commute when we are in the office means that I do less hours and I find myself unable to concentrate when there is lots of noise. Thankfully I only have to go in once a week. I don't think the vast majority of parents are using wfh as child care, especially of preschoolers. I sometimes have my children at home during the holidays (when I do my half day) but they are 7 and 9 so they can entertain themselves for a few hours and I have a separate room for privacy. I'm a widowed parent so it's the only way I can get through the summer holidays because my two don't like holiday clubs and I'm on a tight budget.

Completely normal and reasonable of your employer - unless of course you have a contract that provides otherwise.

So as others have said, you either comply with the in-office days, resign or put in a flexible working request.

Sounds harsh but to expect otherwise is not realistic and 3 days in office is a very long way and huge improvement on flexibility from the norm of 5 days in office that was entrenched until only 4 years ago.

People say a lot on here that increasing numbers of employers are requiring employees back in. But the evidence for that isn't there.

The most recent ONS figures are from early 2023, so out of date now. They showed no clear pattern between the end of restrictions and early 2023. I don't know why they've not published any since.

People think that because they hear about examples of this happening, that means there's a general increase. But the organisations who continue with lots of remote working don't make the news.

Adding to my previous post, it seems a good compromise to allow your TWO days a week WFH.

You are not being forced to go into the office.

That presumably WAS your contract that you signed up to, pre-lockdown.

If you don't like it, leave and find another job that pays just as well, but WFH.

I expect the truth is, you won't find many.

Three days in two days wfh seems fair.

I imagine they are in nursery. But many schools/ nursery’s the hours don’t really match up with an office job. So I can’t drop my dc at school until 8.45 (no breakfast club!), and need to collect youngest from nursery at 5.30. WFH means I can do drop off and be at my desk in 5 mins. And finish at 5.15 and do pick up from nursery and after school club.
It’s widely reported that WFH has enabled many women to return to the work place (as it is normally women who give up their career for the children). If I had to go to the office 3 days a week, I’d need to leave my job.
Google it, lots of article out there explaining the benefits of wfh and women in the workplace.

This happened to me. DM had a operation and my siblings decided I could do a bigger share than them because I work from home. Nevermind that I actually work more hours than them, and am the only one with a child, who has mild SEN to boot so has lots of appointments (3 in the week of the operation alone).

Working from DM's house not really an option, options are working from the hoarder attic, or in view of DM where I wouldn't get a moments peace since DM doesn't understand that working from home actually means working from home. And no, I couldn't just get carers leave (which I am sure is something in DM's imagination only) to ferry her to and from hospital at convenient times for DM only. Not when I just started a new job and had not build any credit yet.

Yep and it will be the women who get pushed out the workplace.

I think part of the issue is performance is low ... just think every time you ring customer service now and they work from home. You can hear their kids in the background. Slow to help. Nothing is actioned. I'm not saying this is everyone that works from home of course not, but staff are getting lazy. I don't know any company that offers a good service anymore and can't remember the last time I got a reply via email from a company that sounded like they had actually read what I wrote. They just reply any old rubbish now.

Not another one.

OP said nothing about whether she'd been office based before lockdown. People just assumed. All she said was that she was working for this employer during at least part of covid. But loads of people changed jobs in 2020 and 2021. You have no idea what her contract says or how long she's been working there.

How can someone do their job properly at home, if they are also looking after 2 under-5s?

Just as an example, I've phoned call centres - anything from shops to government helplines (DWP/HMRC) where it's quite obvious from background noise that the people are WFH and there are audible interruptions when on the call.

My DD had to view at least 6 nurseries to find one that was open at 7.30am and pick up at 5pm. Her core hours are 8am - 5pm with 30 mins travelling each way.

What did all these people being expected to go into the office for a whole 3 days do before the blessing that was Covid? WFH was a necessity during the lockdown but that's now finished.

How many nurses, teachers, firefighters etc 'work form home' when it suits them? What would happen if your children's teachers decided that for a couple of days a week they'll do on-line lessons?

It's also women who get pushed out of the workplace when there's no/insufficient childcare. Presumably we all know what a mess the childcare sector is in at present? There's often an assumption in these discussions that it's either the women working remotely or the women back in the office, but there is actually a third option. And the UK has had a problem with retention of mothers in the workplace for a long time, even when childcare wasn't as fucked as it is now.

And neither do you! :) (have any idea about her contract.)

If it was a change to an agreed contract, she wouldn't need to complain on here, she'd go and talk to HR. Simple.

Well, she is so irate that it would appear this is a reasonable request and she wasn't employed on the basis of WFH (forever.)

It shows she was a bit short-sighted by not even thinking that WFH could change.

It's very unusual for a contract allowing WFH (outside of the lockdown situation) to change and she ought to contact HR and discuss her contract if it's change to her Terms and Conditions.

I suspect that the reason she's not come back to explain is that she's not got the 100% support here she hoped for.

I work in this field and there is an increase. What's also clear though is that employers who aren't offering flexibility aren't able to hire the best talent, as working 9-5 even three days a week in the office doesn't appeal to a lot of people. With massive skills shortages in the workforce, and ongoing economic downwards pressure on salaries, this is a real problem for a lot of sectors. And lack of flexibility is bad for inclusion, however much some people on here would prefer that it isn't.

I see all these companies with these huge expensive offices - with massive long leases - that are half-empty and think they must be a massive drain on resources. That's the reason a lot of employers are demanding their employees come back into the office. What's the point of having these huge show-offy estates with nobody in them? But I reckon there will be a shift over the next decade or so as companies offload some of those assets. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

The solution isn't just to expect employers to fix this, it's to look at your husbands /partners and make them part of the solution.

I benefit hugely from being a mother who WFH. I can work a compressed week in 4 days as I spend very little time commuting - so I have Fridays off.
However I'm in the most ridiculous situation with my friendship group (who also have primary aged children and WFH) where I'm seen as the bad mother for farming my kids off to holiday clubs all summer. Apparently my 7 and 9 year old should be at home while I'm here relaxing! So it feels like we've gone too far to be honest where if you WFH it's assumed your kids can be around.

Lol. So you're saying women need to solve inequality. Yeah, it's that easy, I wonder why us stupid bints haven't done it already?

Well, I've just talked about a RL situation where someone IS secretly not paying for childcare. Anecdotal, yes, but not a myth.

But yes, I agree with you it's down to employers and management; I said so. I just wanted to make the point that some people DO take the piss, and employers are responding to that. I didn't say they're responding well.

Some of them would've been working at least partially from home anyway. Millions of people did in 2019.

For those who weren't, lockdown started almost 4 and a half years ago. Millions of children have been born since then, aged out of the provision they were at in February 2020 or the provision itself doesn't exist any longer. It's strange that nearly half a decade on, people think go back to 2019 is an answer.

Additionally, parents were often forced out of work or into doing fewer hours due to childcare well before covid. Mostly women. It's hardly as if 2019 was some childcare paradise.

They probably didn’t work. That’s the point

My thoughts are that you are a journalist.