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?

I agree but I think those people are in the minority. I’m not sure that they are all that relevant to this debate and, in fact, they muddy the waters because they are talked about so much, yet it’s very easy for employers to police such behaviour.

The vast majority do what @Plomant does (I am similar, though I also have, by agreement with my employer, a bit of extra flexibility during school holidays when camps start a bit later than school would).

For me, hybrid is important because DH and I alternate WFH and office days. The one who is WFH does the school runs and we both work extended days when in the office. That balances out.

Currently sitting on a train and two managers are discussing (hybrid) wfh - I wish I could record the conversation for you all. Lots of examples how people are abusing wfh - collecting kids from school (mothers and fathers), office not adequately staffed, moved away from the office during Covid and no longer want to travel in (travelled in beforehand ) etc. it’s fascinating listening in. Real world examples.

My experience is that for people who work hard and are trustworthy it is amazing as a manager to be able to give them that freedom to work their days and their lives flexibly.

But unfortunately a minority take the absolute piss. On an individual manager level I was happy to tackle it through HR processes, but once you amplify it across the organisation it was taking a big toll on management and HR time and that's the reason senior management started shifting towards requiring more time in the office from everyone

There was a thread on here a little while back about companies who schedule Teams meetings before 9.30am. The overwhelming consensus appeared to be that this was outrageous practice as that's when "everyone" is on the school run.

I agree but I think those people are in the minority. I’m not sure that they are all that relevant to this debate and, in fact, they muddy the waters because they are talked about so much, yet it’s very easy for employers to police such behaviour

How do you know they are such a minority though? I don’t think they are the majority, but also don’t believe they are such a minority that you and a few others are making out. That’s not my experience anyway and is not lots of other people’s. It is relevant to debate about wfh, why would it not be other than it’s an inconvenient point for you to have to deal with in this context?

As for it being ‘easy for employers to police’, it’s not, and generally that’s what’s driving the move to demand greater office attendance. In order to police it, as a manager, you have to put in time and effort to gather ‘evidence’, then you have to have documented discussions accordingly, all with HR involvement, then further monitoring, HR involvement etc. When workplaces don’t just have an isolated person taking the piss but many spread across the organisation in total, that’s then adding up to a lot of managers time and HR resource when you combine it across all cases. What company wants to consistently have this combined drain as is being experienced? None. So, the fix is to demand increased attendance which then frees up the resource currently being tied up across an organisation dealing with the piss taking. Thats a hell of an easier and cost effective approach for an organisation as opposed to the drain the ‘policing’ creates.

Interesting. I should have clarified above when I said that my husband and I each do school pickup on our WFH days- by school pickup I mean we collect DS from after school club at 6. It’s just easier to work till 5:30 and do that while WFH whereas when we were both in office we had agreement to leave at 5.15 to do it.

We never collect at 3:30 when WFH.

OK @HoppingPavlova perhaps dial down the aggressive

It is relevant to debate about wfh, why would it not be other than it’s an inconvenient point for you to have to deal with in this context?

we’re in an online chat not a debating contest.

Regarding the “policing” let me put it another way:

It is perfectly possible and acceptable to put into someone’s contract that they may WFH on the strict condition that they are not caring for children while working and that they cannot take time away from work duties to drop or collect children from childcare.

If this is stated clearly then people are less likely to push it when they know the consequence is disciplinary or losing their job.

The average employee is not going to take the “ah but they’ll never prove it!” approach leaving employers to waste time compiling evidence and building a case. You’ll always get some piss takers but they exist in all elements of working life.

Oh and the reason that I am confident that piss takers are not in the majority is that I have faith that more than 50% of parents with jobs are reasonable and sensible human beings.

It’s worth remembering that plenty of us who WFH don’t have children!!!

So do I, *TimeandMotion, *because the majority of decent staff just get on with it quietly and accept their own responsibilities

Trouble is, with "good news being no news at all" and the minority of pisstakers being the very first to howl about discrimination and their rights, others can tend to get lost in the noise they make - all of which is why they do nobody any favours, least of all other hardworking parents

Yes, sure, but the OP was specifically complaining about how reducing WFH disadvantages “Mums”.

It should be easy for employers to block out the noise by just looking at their own data/experience though.

Don’t forget that these policies are made by individual employers, it’s not like something g where the government has to act based on the experience of the population as a whole.

No, they are not in the majority. I said that. Read the posts. No, they are not in the majority. But their minority numbers are still such that it’s put a dent in combined resources to address across organisations. So that’s being addressed. What’s the problem with that?

As for write it into contracts etc. Doesn't work. We don’t have it in contracts as it would mean redoing everyone’s from pre-Covid, and that’s just not possible, and you have to cover everyone otherwise you are discriminating if you just do it for parents. And what about the odd working grandparent who takes the piss doing the school run in the morning (and I’m not talking 10mins away and then back at their desk by 9 or whatever time their start up is meant to be). Instead, we had all people sign declarations post-Covid, and again if a parent returns from a form of parental leave saying they have suitable childcare arrangements in place and will not be supervising children under 10yo in assigned work hours. Doesn’t work. They come up with all sorts. If challenged, a favourite is my mum/dad is here as childcare, I have it in place (yeah, but seemingly that involves them coming over 10-3 and even then not keeping the child seperate from working parent when they want ‘mum/dad’ whenever that may be). Or another one, my DH is wfh and doesn’t have that requirement re childcare so he takes it all on while I work (nope, nope he doesn’t). Or the people that say they have after school care in place yet obviously don’t. I find if called on it, a favourite is a pet had a sudden accident/became ill necessitating an unplanned urgent vet visit. Lots of very busy vets after 2.30pm! People will agree to anything in the belief they will get away with it.

As I also said, I love wfh having always worked in a role that just couldn’t have that in any capacity, it’s enabling me to extend my working life even further and any increased work in office will disadvantage me in this respect. But, even so, I’m not so blind as to not acknowledge the difficulties it’s now presenting for organisation in different forms and why they are trying to swing the pendulum back somewhat. It’s not all about me so I’m not going to invest time and energy into making up bs and getting everyone to pretend there are no problems with it to benefit myself.

Please, no need to be so aggressive!

@TimeandMotion if you find that aggressive there is something wrong. That’s very polite. It’s factual and putting points across, without aggression. Just because you don’t like the actual content of something, doesn’t make it aggressive.

She said, aggressively!

It should be easy for employers to block out the noise by just looking at their own data/experience though

That's very true, @TimeandMotion, but unfortunately it doesn't stop the noisemakers making it, which is why I suggested it's a shame if the more hardworking staff have to suffer because of this

You're also correct about it being done on an individual employer basis, but then up to a point that's how it has to be, because beyond some basic guidelines it would never be possible to create a "one size fits all" variety

I can't see anything aggressive about @HoppingPavlova 's posts.

You're not being forced to, you are welcome to find another job with a better work format!

My initial thoughts are that this is a troll post....

Hi ladies

I'm a 52 year old guy who thinks it's likely he's always had undiagnosed Asperger's because it would explain a lot about his life and also because I may need or want to work in the future and I may get cut a bit of slack.

I would say don't worry about the wait. I don't know how it works in schools these days, but if an assessment is deemed necessary rest assured your kid will get it.

I don't want to give away any trade secrets but remember it's not just a case of getting a diagnosis it's also about understanding how it manifests. I would think this might help parent, child, school, employers, and state services work out the best way to help said child lead the best life they can, bearing in mind Asperger's can lead to some highly capable people but also cause them to experience problems.

Demanding in-office attendance when you've been performing your job to a high standard while working from home is unreasonable.

Many, many employees stepped up, responded flexibly, worked incredibly hard, and kept companies afloat during covid, while forced to work from home. It blows my mind that that has just been forgotten.

Everyone should be entitled to flexibility, but return-to-office policies affect mothers with young children disproportionately. As well as plenty of other groups, such as disabled employees, chronic illness, etc, etc. It's laughable (or it would be, if it were not so depressing) that companies pay lipservice to inclusivity, but then demand return to office when employees delivered great work and excellent results while working from home.

Badge scanning to track attendance seems so dystopian to me. What is it they are actually tracking/measuring. Really? Why focus on attendance over performance?

I also find it super strange how so many users on Mumsnet jump to the defence of big corporates, as if working from home or flexibility is equivalent to laziness of somehow not taking life seriously. Wouldn't everyone be better off if we had more autonomy, more flexibility, and more inclusive work spaces?

For everyone saying 'just get childcare' ... what? most jobs are 9-5 or 9-6. Nursery if you are lucky is 8-6, but the majority of childcare where I live is 9-3. Factoring in a full day commute, nursery drop offs, doing your job, and everything else just means you're having to juggle and stress so much more. And for what, when you have been doing your job successfully from home for years.

My two cents.

Get a childminder and get back to the office or find a new job.

Have you investigated this situation by looking at the Equalities Act 2010? You have a right to request flexible working, and a large company would have less reason to refuse than a small one. If you are a member of a union, they might be able help. Alternatively if you could log the work you do at home and compare that with the actual work that you do on office days, there would be something tangible support WFM. Good luck.

That is a sad comment. I’m thinking about all the children who must be sitting on their iPads all day. There is no way you can work AND supervise an under 5 at the same time unless you have them hooked up to a device. All the evidence suggests that this is just not good for them. Children need to interact with those around them, so good quality care is essential. Your children will thank you for it.