Covid19 working from home arrangements.

FlubberJones

I'm sick of working from home, it is basically living in work at this stage. Looking forward to having the office to return to , whether it is "different" or not doesn't bother me. Anyone who wants to stay at home can, I have little interest in them. I have no commute as I can walk to the office so that isn't an issue either.

beauf

In our place what restricted WFH before the pandemic was it was up to line managers discretion to allow/ facilitate it. As a result some had it and not others.

When the pandemic is over, I have no doubt that some of those managers who dislike it. Will insist that their team have to work the majority of the time in the office.

qwerty13

beauf wrote: »

Your theory is that they'd prefer to have hassle of 93% complaining than 7% complaining.

It won't come down to staffs opinions anyway. It's not a democracy. I assume.

No. My experience is that some of the 7% are making a lot of very noisy and often unreasonable demands, and that the fear of the 93% is that their demands will become such a hassle for our employer that they’ll just go “forget about wfh, we’re paying for the office space anyway, so everyone will be expected back in the building”.

Some of the 7% are causing havoc. Whereas the 93% are prepared to suck up minor inconveniences in order to gain a better quality of life. Hence my comment that I wish that the 7% (and it’s only some of them really) would just stop.

beauf

FlubberJones wrote: »

I'm sick of working from home, it is basically living in work at this stage. Looking forward to having the office to return to , whether it is "different" or not doesn't bother me. Anyone who wants to stay at home can, I have little interest in them. I have no commute as I can walk to the office so that isn't an issue either.

I think under the pandemic where travel is restricted. No options for holidays or going out for meals and drinks. It has become like living in a cave. It's not really a true representation of WFH in normal times is like.

beauf

qwerty13 wrote: »

No. My experience is that some of the 7% are making a lot of very noisy and often unreasonable demands, and that the fear of the 93% is that their demands will become such a hassle for our employer that they’ll just go “forget about wfh, we’re paying for the office space anyway, so everyone will be expected back in the building”.

Some of the 7% are causing havoc. Whereas the 93% are prepared to suck up minor inconveniences in order to gain a better quality of life. Hence my comment that I wish that the 7% (and it’s only some of them really) would just stop.

Are you saying the 93% won't complain once they are back in the office. That's what it sounds like..

qwerty13

beauf wrote: »

Are you saying the 93% won't complain once they are back in the office. That's what it sounds like..

No, I’m saying that the proportion of the 7% are complaining so much right now that they’ll end up causing full scale wfh (granted, caused by the pandemic) to be scaled down/withdrawn post pandemic - and that will be a bad thing for the 93%, as they’re all in favour of wfh.

beauf

Our office was already re-configured for social distancing in preparation for gradual going back to the office before the latest outbreak.

beauf

qwerty13 wrote: »

No, I’m saying that the proportion of the 7% are complaining so much right now that they’ll end up causing full scale wfh (granted, caused by the pandemic) to be scaled down/withdrawn post pandemic - and that will be a bad thing for the 93%, as they’re all in favour of wfh.

You're still saying the management will decide to keep the minority happy and the majority unhappy. Which still makes no sense. Also I've never worked anywhere where the staff were allowed to choose their working conditions. Even in a unionised workplace. Public or private.

That's before being dismissive of people genuine issues with WFH.

qwerty13

beauf wrote: »

You're still saying the management will decide to keep the minority happy and the majority unhappy. Which still makes no sense. Also I've never worked anywhere where the staff were allowed to choose their working conditions. Even in a unionised workplace. Public or private.

That's before being dismissive of people genuine issues with WFH.

No, I’m saying that the minority are very noisy and being shouty about being heard. Whereas the majority are keeping schtum because they don’t want to rock the boat, as we finally have wfh now, are loving it, and don’t want it lessened or taken away.

As said earlier, there’s outliers with extreme reasons on both sides. Genuine issues wfh, and genuine issues loving wfh and not wanting to return to an office environment. But the minority are currently jumping up and down so much about the lack of perfection re wfh, that I fear that the 12 times majority will end up back in the office, as the employer is paying for the building anyway.

crisco10

qwerty13 wrote: »

No, I’m saying that the minority are very noisy and being shouty about being heard. Whereas the majority are keeping schtum because they don’t want to rock the boat, as we finally have wfh now, are loving it, and don’t want it lessened or taken away.

As said earlier, there’s outliers with extreme reasons on both sides. Genuine issues wfh, and genuine issues loving wfh and not wanting to return to an office environment. But the minority are currently jumping up and down so much about the lack of perfection re wfh, that I fear that the 12 times majority will end up back in the office, as the employer is paying for the building anyway.

FWIW, I get what you're saying. A potential scenario is that there is a risk that the 7% might "weaponise" EHS legislation or similar to say that if WFH becomes a permanent thing, the Employer needs to provide x,y & z to the Employee at home. In which case the company are within their rights to say we won't pay for that when we are paying for an office already etc. and now because they are aware of the potential exposure by not providing it, they now have to "ban" wfh.
Where as the 93% were happy to not raise these issues and keep the head down.

beauf

crisco10 wrote: »

. ..
Where as the 93% were happy to not raise these issues and keep the head down.

That's only true for now. Once back in the office it flips to 93% complaining.

It's still cheaper to have less people in the office. Less wear and tear, less electricity. All sorts of stuff.

qwerty13

crisco10 wrote: »

FWIW, I get what you're saying. A potential scenario is that there is a risk that the 7% might "weaponise" EHS legislation or similar to say that if WFH becomes a permanent thing, the Employer needs to provide x,y & z to the Employee at home. In which case the company are within their rights to say we won't pay for that when we are paying for an office already etc. and now because they are aware of the potential exposure by not providing it, they now have to "ban" wfh.
Where as the 93% were happy to not raise these issues and keep the head down.

Yes! Exactly!

But in my workplace that carry on started last summer, not even in a conversation about wfh being a permanent option. The rest of us are just aghast. We’d asked for wfh for years. I’d say 8 years or so. And now that we have it, we are loving it and want to keep it. But a v noisy few are causing huge thorns about that.

beauf

Why wait 8 years. Why not move to a company that does allow it.

qwerty13

Because I like my job, I like the progression, I like working for my specific boss, and I get a decent salary and good bonuses.

But for sure, the ability to mostly wfh would be a major plus for me when moving job. And a question I’d ask - probably at interview, but I’d check out the attitude to wfh through contacts pre interview.

a_squirrelman

beauf wrote: »

Why wait 8 years. Why not move to a company that does allow it.

Your responses have been quite strange. The poster is pointing out a real life issue that happens, a small amount of people jumping up and down and making life difficult for the majority.


When it flips to 93% complaining back in the office they are probably the people who will complain once and then get on with life.


I don't understand why you are so dismissive of the poster's position. I have people on my team who are dying to get back to the office and you can be sure they will then complain if they are sitting alone in the office.

TheSheriff

beauf wrote: »

Why wait 8 years. Why not move to a company that does allow it.

This is what I don't understand throughout this thread ? Plenty of companies had some aspect of WFH before all this ?

We had the option of two days per week WFH pre-pandemic?

It's interesting to think back on that, very little actually availed of it, and used it more if they had a trades person coming that day or something.

Can't wait to get back.... Alot if people in my workplace making demands of employer for X, y and z. I don't blame them. We make the company and its shareholders an awful lot of money and they are now getting this done on our electricity , office equipmemt etc.

Kevhog1988

I would be happy to go into the office at the moment as my internet connection and home setup is not as good as it was in the first lockdown. But once we close on a house were interested in and i can have a decent home office setup id love to be 40% office based and 60% wfh

qwerty13

a_squirrelman wrote: »

I have people on my team who are dying to get back to the office and you can be sure they will then complain if they are sitting alone in the office.

These are exactly the noisiest people in my experience! Want to go back to a 5 days in the office routine - but apparently only if most people are doing that. And when are “we all” going back to the office. While the rest of us think ... never!

a_squirrelman

qwerty13 wrote: »

These are exactly the noisiest people in my experience! Want to go back to a 5 days in the office routine - but apparently only if most people are doing that. And when are “we all” going back to the office. While the rest of us think ... never!

Yes exactly, and many bad managers like zero hassle so will just do a blanket ban.
My first manager in the company I'm in was like that but thankfully my current manager doesn't give a s***e once the work gets done.

irelandrover

I think while WFH is still relatively new that people will put up with a lot. 93% maybe happy now with working from their couch but when it becomes normal they will want proper facilities. People will start getting back pains from 8 hours a day sitting on the couch. They will start getting wrist pains from working on the laptop at weird angles.

A lot of people sacrifice so that they can live close to their office. They have smaller more expensive places as it keeps their commute down and they can have a good work/life balance. Of course they are going to be vocal about wanting to maintain the conditions they agreed when they took the job.

Your employer has a responsibility for a safe work environment so they are going to address that even without the vocal 7% when this pandemic is over.

Mrs OBumble

TheSheriff wrote: »

This is what I don't understand throughout this thread ? Plenty of companies had some aspect of WFH before all this ?

We had the option of two days per week WFH pre-pandemic?

It's interesting to think back on that, very little actually availed of it, and used it more if they had a trades person coming that day or something.

Can't wait to get back.... Alot if people in my workplace making demands of employer for X, y and z. I don't blame them. We make the company and its shareholders an awful lot of money and they are now getting this done on our electricity , office equipmemt etc.

What policies did you have pre-pandemic about childcare during those two days? Were you allowed to be providing childcare at the same time as working?

beauf

a_squirrelman wrote: »

Your responses have been quite strange. The poster is pointing out a real life issue that happens, a small amount of people jumping up and down and making life difficult for the majority.


When it flips to 93% complaining back in the office they are probably the people who will complain once and then get on with life.


I don't understand why you are so dismissive of the poster's position. I have people on my team who are dying to get back to the office and you can be sure they will then complain if they are sitting alone in the office.

Disagreeing with someone is not being dismissive.

Will you upset the majority of your team to facilitate the minority who by your assertion will complain regardless. So nothing you will do will ever stop that minority from complaining. So you will upset the majority for nothing.

Oscar Madison

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2021/0113/1189507-wicklow-appeal/

Are these people for real? Volunteers!!! Pay these people!

beauf

irelandrover wrote: »

I think while WFH is still relatively new that people will put up with a lot. 93% maybe happy now with working from their couch but when it becomes normal they will want proper facilities. People will start getting back pains from 8 hours a day sitting on the couch. They will start getting wrist pains from working on the laptop at weird angles.

A lot of people sacrifice so that they can live close to their office. They have smaller more expensive places as it keeps their commute down and they can have a good work/life balance. Of course they are going to be vocal about wanting to maintain the conditions they agreed when they took the job.

Your employer has a responsibility for a safe work environment so they are going to address that even without the vocal 7% when this pandemic is over.

Exactly. WFH in the pandemic is a emergency situation. Normally there can be a load of conditions required, that have been dropped for the pandemic.

a_squirrelman

beauf wrote: »

Disagreeing with someone is not being dismissive.

Will you upset the majority of your team to facilitate the minority who by your assertion will complain regardless. So nothing you will do will ever stop that minority from complaining. So you will upset the majority for nothing.

That does happen, with bad managers.

beauf

qwerty13 wrote: »

These are exactly the noisiest people in my experience! Want to go back to a 5 days in the office routine - but apparently only if most people are doing that. And when are “we all” going back to the office. While the rest of us think ... never!

Which suggests the 93% don't complain. It's that which is the problem. Not the other way around.

jrosen

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

What policies did you have pre-pandemic about childcare during those two days? Were you allowed to be providing childcare at the same time as working?

My husbands company is a no to that. Anyone working from home has already signed and accepted any children in the home are in the care of another adult.

beauf

a_squirrelman wrote: »

That does happen, with bad managers.

Are you saying yes you to will do that yourself or not...?

beauf

jrosen wrote: »

My husbands company is a no to that. Anyone working from home has already signed and accepted any children in the home are in the care of another adult.

Some places require a dedicated room that can be locked. Some insist you can only use work devices not your own laptop or phone etc.

Antares35

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

If the people you work with are like this then their behaviour during WFH is likely to be similar. The only difference is that you have no idea that they are having private zoom calls to discuss issues behind your back, for example, because you cannot see their behaviour.

Small minds discuss people. I could probably name the ones I work with who do this. I consider it a positive not to have to listen to them anymore. They'll do it anyway.