New employee (Gen Z} doesn’t want to meet in person

[outofofficeon]

I took on a graduate for a new position, she’d been job hunting for a few years, I felt good about giving her a hand up into a great career.
She lives about an hour away so works remotely. She bright and polite and reliable and a good member of the team.

The problem I have is that she doesn’t want to visit the office in person or meet her colleagues in person, I offered to put her up in a nice hotel and pay travel costs so that she could spend a few days with us in person. She declined. My latest issue is that she doesn’t put her camera on when we are communicating at work as part of daily work or chats. I understand she might not be very confident but I think that you have to get out of the house / your comfort zone if you want a career.

im not sure what to do- any advice oh wise ladies.

How does having the camera on tell you who else is in the room? 🤔It's not hard to sit/stand out of view of the camera.

The employee is establishing her boundaries - which is fair enough, but they don't work for the OP so the OP needs to make it clear to the employee what her boundaries are. Is it 'fair' to the employee - well no but ultimately this didn't happen on purpose and life isn't fair. The role isn't a good fit if the employee thinks they don't ever need to meet in person.

Personally, an occasional, fully paid, trip to an office an hour away wouldn't be an issue for me even if fully remote in theory. If I had additional costs (eg I needed kenneling for a dog) then I'd raise it with my employer and come to an agreement. I wouldn't just say no because it's not unusual to expect very occasional face time, particularly when new to the role.

I suspect this thread is heavily biased towards the preferences of people who enjoy communicating in writing online, with a disproportionate number of people who are introverted by nature (as is MN as a whole).

For an awful lot of people, spending time in person with your colleagues is fine. It helps build relationships quickly, it gives extroverts valuable energy, and it can improve communication. It's not a big deal for someone whose role is remote to come along for some in-person meetings with enough notice (particularly with the generous expenses the OP is offering). Putting your camera on for team meetings is no big deal and wanting to exist permanently as an icon or photo of yourself is unusual across the population as a whole.

You can change the WFH policy to say cameras on except under exceptional circumstances previously agreed with a line manager. For example, I had a bone graft on my jaw and looked like I had been beaten up, so I went camera off for a couple of weeks.

Changing the policy is not a material change to the contract. You can also add an expectation that staff will attend the office in person at least monthly for team meetings.

I assume the job description has a clause saying “and any other reasonable tasks as stated by your line manager” and this is a reasonable task.

You can't have people refusing to use a camera when they work remotely, at least you know to change that in all future work contracts, because that's taking the mickey.

It seems like working remotely is a privilege which lots of people abuse. If the job involves being in a team you still have to be present, even remotely. If the camera's off who knows what they're up to. In the old days, before Zoom was invented, did people turn up to meetings with a bag over their head?

I would have a meeting with her and clearly and unambiguously set out your expectations (follow this up in writing) - cameras on in meetings, mandatory attendance to in person meetings as deemed necessary and reasonable. Give her a chance to let you know if there are any legitimate why she cannot comply with these expectations.

If she still refuses, you start disciplinary proceedings.

It's this kind of crap that means employers will move away from offering remote or even hybrid roles.

Massive difference between a decent employee who takes an hour away from her desk to manage the school pick up, but still gets the job done - and someone who doesn't want their camera on in zoom meetings ffs! This type of piss-taking risks flexible working policies for those who can and do currently manage it well.

It's the same with geographical location. It's one thing not being expected to commute into a central office five days a week. It's another thing to refuse to ever meet in person. My DH hired someone onto his team who lived a fair distance away - she insisted that she would always be available to come in or attend meetings if needed. It was just post-pandemic so everyone seemed to be getting a bit too comfortable with never leaving their own houses 😂

It ended up being a complete disaster. She was so often 'unable' to come to important in-person events that she was only half doing the job - and was eventually sacked. Now his company specify office location and don't say anything about hybrid working...it's such a shame that people ruin things for those that can manage their jobs responsibly.

I don't know why people keep talking about the contract being fully remote and how that then means you can't ask her to travel. Of course you can! Its not changing the standard place of work if it is a very occasional thing, its just work travel - exactly the same as if you were asked to go to a training course, attend a client meeting, go to a conference etc. The question is more whether the contract stipulates that there might be occasional work travel required.

OP - I would have a frank conversation with her about why she doesn't want to do these things, the impact on the team and the work, and figure out if there is a way forward. If not, and she's still within her probation, then I think simply she isn't the employee for you.

If the contract states remove only, you can't make her come to the office regularly. Im not sure if you can still make her come few times a year. You can however have a chat with her and tell her that she is encouraged to come and meet colleagues.

You don't have to stimulate cameras on in the contract. We sre camera off office (thankfully) but if you are not, you can tell her that the office policy is to have cameras on.

I absolutely do think there’s a lot admirable with the stereotypical Gen Z attitude to work. That they are not willing to be doormats to line other people’s pockets. But equally this one sounds like she’s taking the piss and needs some boundaries set, or she can be shown the door.

As she has only been employed for a short time with few rights, can you not simply sack her and start again with a more specific contract and a new employee?

I don’t think there’s anything you can do about it, as it doesn’t seem to have been agreed upon in the contract. However, I have a feeling she won’t stay long. It’s not a sustainable way to work for someone just starting their first career.

I would, if money available, ask a coach to give her 2-3 sessions on self promotion. That way it isn't coming from you. But ultimately she needs to know you can't sit behind a black screen and hope people develop any kind of affinity with you. And if they don't develop affinity then they won't go the extra mile to help you out, do you a favour, promote you etc.

I agree with this - but as a normal person who is neither strongly extrovert or introvert - its not just extroverts who get 'energy' from being around other people. As a social mammal species this is vital for all but a tiny minority of people. Social isolation has worse health outcomes than smoking and is correlated with dementia - and you need more than one strong social connection to reduce your risk of dementia due to isolation.

But as someone who does have a level of social anxiety (though most people would not realise it), going into the office helps me to manage this. By being around people and having positive interactions, my more paranoid or anxious thoughts about how others may perceive me are held at bay. By being able to deal with any unpleasant interactions in person, I stop the discomfort I feel from the unpleasant interaction ( as I have resolved it instead of it festering).

We are social mammals. Being able to hide away at home does not help people with social anxiety. Anxiety requires managing positively by facing up to the thing you are anxious about, rather than by opting out of normal life situations so as to never have to learn how to manage and live alongside your anxiety.

I mean, with the camera off I could get my partner to listen to what was said in a meeting and speak up for me (we sound quite similar, apparently) and no one would be any the wiser. [Oooh, could this be an idea for a novel alibi in a whodunnit?]

This.
So basic.
I would hesitate to keep her on.

OP says this:

I should add that it’s a people business we’re in and the lack of ‘contact’ is starting to affect the team’s progress. I am also finding it hard to foster a team feeling when she’s acting distant

This does not sound like a team who should have hired a fully remote worker. Full remote working is best for people whose jobs are able to be done in isolation - we have translators who are fully remote as all they need is to be sent documents to translate quietly at home, alone. They do not need to collaborate or have a team spirit and their physical absence cannot effect team progress.

I agree. Asking someone an hour away to come in on a one-off basis, or have camera on for meetings is perfectly reasonable.

It’s reasonable to ask people to have their cameras on for meetings. It’s expected where I work. You can ask her to have her camera on as best practice.

You need to check her contract around office days and meetings - even contacts for fully remote working usually specify the need to come to the office ‘if required’ or ‘for essential meetings’ or for a minimum number of days per year or something.

Are you her supervisor/ line manager? If so just tell her when you expect her to put her cam on. Why are you letting her do what she wants

It is unusual, but people like this exist and are entitled to work, albeit with accommodations. I mean how many posts do we have complaining that people like this should be in work and not claiming benefits. We can't have it both ways. If she loses her job that's another person on benefits if no one else will hire her.
If she's doing her job well and these are the only issues, I don't see the problem.

It doesn't have to specify in the contract. It's a team culture issue. Just announce at the next team meeting that cameras on is an expectation in all meetings unless there's a specific reason as a one off and that in erson meetings are 3 line whip as standard and any deviation needs to be agreed with manager beforehand on a case by case basis. Explain to the employee she needs to start being a team player.

She's new make it part of probation, give her a clear objective which is to meet her team in person as this is imperative for working together, understanding each other, maybe even organise a team away day?
Also ask her to put her camera on before a meeting, do you have a conversation with her if there are any reasons why she cannot, for example a disability or neurodivergent condition. If there is no reason make it mandatory if there is a reason put workplace adjustments in place for example she has to put on for the first five minutes you'll safeguarding and wellbeing and then after that can turn it off

They're not entitled to accommodations unless they have a disability, and even then they have to be reasonable. No one is (legally) entitled to work. There's nothing to suggest that the OP's employee has a disability and it's not on OP to sort out the UK's unemployment problem. The employee may have a personal preference to not have her camera on/never come to the office at all, but that's only the OP's problem to the extent that it will take time and money to hire someone new.

Of course if the employee has a legal right to reasonable accommodations, then never coming to the office might be one of those, but it would not be easy to establish absent accessibility issues or a severe mental health condition. I can't see what disability might justify never having to turn your camera on, but I'm sure it's possible.

I say this as someone who does have an accommodation to work remotely due to a disability. I only take advantage of it when I feel I genuinely need it, partly because I don't want to take the piss, but more significantly because I recognize that making connections in person is fundamentally important to my ability to develop in my role, and for me to develop others.