nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

If Work From Home becomes a thing...

bilbot79

I'd be tempted to buy a little apartment in the Canaries and spend my winters there, in fact I'd probably

1/ Sell my Dublin gaff

2/ By a cheaper Irish gaff in the countryside

3/ Buy a place in the Canaries

4/ Buy another place somewhere in Europe, Hvar or somewhere like that

And just spend weeks and months in each place.

How would the rest of you exploit work from home if you had it permanently?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

storker

If work from home becomes a thing for me...

More family time
Dinner at a reasonable hour
Money saved on petrol (& possibly fares depending on how many in-office days)
Better diet
Commute time redirected to study
More productivity due to fewer/less frequent work-based distractions

I'm lucky in this regard, because my kids are in their teens and can keep themselves busy, and I have a dedicated man-cave with desk and office chair, although the chair could use an upgrade.

More generally...

Lowered emissions, reduced pollution, and consequent improvement in public health
Less traffic so those that do need to drive to/for work will be able to do so more quickly
Potentially lower costs due to less office space required
General increase in quality of life; less "living to work"
More disposable income

So forcing people to work from home wouldn't be good, but allowing them to do so where possible would have huge benefits for individuals and society (yes, there really is such a thing) as a whole. It's about time work practices caught up with the technology.

.

storker

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

How do you see GDPR requirements being met in a WFH world?

Many companies have client data in private homes at the moment, against all policies. That cannot continue long term though.

Data stored on company servers and not on laptops, with workers connecting via VPN.

Laptops encrypted in case of loss or theft, and auto-locking after a relatively short period of inactivity.

No local printing - if someone needs to mark up a document they print to PDF and mark that up instead.

Not sure about how to manage the possibility of someone looking over the employee's shoulder for a gawk, but I think there are screen attachments available that make it hard to see what's on a screen if not looking at it "head-on".

.

Mrs OBumble

How do you see GDPR requirements being met in a WFH world?

Many companies have client data in private homes at the moment, against all policies. That cannot continue long term though.

[Deleted User]

We've been told by the boss he is ok with us working form home but he just won't get around to organizing it. Very frustrating.

Jim Root

Very interesting debate this & good contributions made by various posters.

Personally I’m finding it very hard to get any “strategic/thinking/writing” work done at home with the kids on top of me and arm wrestling with the wife about who gets to “work upstairs” for some peace and quiet. I’d happily go back to the office 2/3 days a week.

A big plus for me though is no work travel; I’m well use to day trips to London for various meetings. All this type of stuff has continued on fine over MS Teams. Then again, I’ve firm, established contacts already in my industry from putting in the hours both in the office and at conferences / networking. Those coming up through the ranks might find less opportunities available to “get themselves out there”

Surely a 33/66 split is a happy medium for both employee and employer; id have no issue with those reporting to me currently WFH 2 days a week as long as the work continues to get done by the normal deadlines.

uli84

The very last line of your post:

“How would the rest of you exploit work from home if you had it permanently?”

should help you understand why it’ll not ‘become a thing’

Technocentral

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/0511/1137694-remote-working-survey/

"Overall, 83% of respondents say they would like to keep working from home after the restrictions are eased."

Sounds about right, it will surely be the future of work. The environment, peoples mental health and life satisfaction will benefit hugely. Not having to listen to colleagues inane conversations particularly about sport is a big one for me.

Stan27

If people could (job depending) work in the office 3 days a week and home for 2 for example, would be great for reducing traffic.

Also some people would want to go to the office still now and again, just to get out if the house.

beauf

GreeBo wrote: »

I'd still rather 60 mins a day than 1 day having a 4 hour commute.
I also reckon your employer wouldnt see it as their problem that your commute was 4 hours and they would still expect you to be in the office for your normal hours...

Thats personal choice. I think you'd be in the minority though.

[Deleted User]

GreeBo wrote: »

It doesnt have to be, but people need to be clear what they mean by rural. Some people are clearly talking about a significant change from the outskirts of Leinster.

There aren't many places in Leinster that would require you to leave at 5am to be in Dublin for 8am. I reckon you'd get from Cork City to most of Dublin at those times preCovid19 tbh.

GreeBo

gnf_ireland wrote: »

I think that would still be fine if it was a regular, say every Tuesday, in the office. The big problem I would see is if the employer decided at will they wanted you in the office tomorrow, and you had to change all your plans to accommodate it

Driving for 2 hours 'consistently' is still easier than 60 minutes stop/start in heavy traffic !

You will have the same heavy traffic to deal with, you will just have spent 1.5 hours driving to get to it

GreeBo

Augeo wrote: »

Rural is a mile or so outside of Staffan, Rathcoole, Newcastle etc. It's doesn't have to be 3 hours away.

It doesnt have to be, but people need to be clear what they mean by rural. Some people are clearly talking about a significant change from the outskirts of Leinster.

[Deleted User]

GreeBo wrote: »

Going rural would only really work if you were 100% from home.
If you need to be in the office on an adhoc or even 1 or 2 days a week then it would be a total pain in the arse to have to travel for 3 hours each way IMO.

Rural is a mile or so outside of Staffan, Rathcoole, Newcastle etc. It's doesn't have to be 3 hours away.

gnf_ireland

GreeBo wrote: »

I'd still rather 60 mins a day than 1 day having a 4 hour commute.
I also reckon your employer wouldnt see it as their problem that your commute was 4 hours and they would still expect you to be in the office for your normal hours...

I think that would still be fine if it was a regular, say every Tuesday, in the office. The big problem I would see is if the employer decided at will they wanted you in the office tomorrow, and you had to change all your plans to accommodate it

Driving for 2 hours 'consistently' is still easier than 60 minutes stop/start in heavy traffic !

gnf_ireland

Granadino wrote: »

I work in digital marketing, and in theory, we could all be working from home all the time, but it's not the case. I am based between here and abroad and would be in the office, under normal circumstances every other month for a week or so. I'm not sure we will be changing to 100% wfh after this is all over, but in theory, could do.

I think in any collaborative environment, I don't think 100% remote is realistic, at least not for a while. There are benefits in face to face, that cannot be replaced no matter how many zoom calls you are on !!

I think more transactional environments may be easier to be 100% remote

GreeBo

gnf_ireland wrote: »

I am not sure on this - really depends on the location of the employer. Its very easy to spend 45-60 minutes a day commuting each way, even within Dublin. This does add up. If you have to be in the office a day or two a week, it would probably still be ok to come from places within most of the country (maybe not the back end of Cork, Kerry or Donegal).

At one point in my life I worked "officially" out of a London office of a company and would pop over once a week or so, either for a day trip or an overnight trip. Was it a pain - absolutely. Was it worth it to spend the rest of the time at home - absolutely !

I'd still rather 60 mins a day than 1 day having a 4 hour commute.
I also reckon your employer wouldnt see it as their problem that your commute was 4 hours and they would still expect you to be in the office for your normal hours...

gnf_ireland

2lazytogetup wrote: »

And to take it further, i can see new companies/employers deciding to pay per task/project. So say it was designing a website. they are going to just use a contractor a set amount based on how long it should take. so taking the zero contract hours worker to the next level. And if they bring in universal social payment that everybody gets regardless if they work or not, then i think the working world will be for darwins survival of the fittest. I would worry if i was middle management getting paid to do nothing all day in work.

I think we need to be very careful about going down this route in general. While I have no issue with it personally, it is very much a removal of all employee rights and you are basically putting everything up to tender (in effect).

I have been a contractor for over 2 decades and the volatility in that market is very high. I think you would see a lot of people very very nervous about this model, not just middle management. In general it tends to be a race to the bottom in terms of pricing over time, and very quickly will be outsourced to a country with cheaper labour.

Granadino

I work in digital marketing, and in theory, we could all be working from home all the time, but it's not the case. I am based between here and abroad and would be in the office, under normal circumstances every other month for a week or so. I'm not sure we will be changing to 100% wfh after this is all over, but in theory, could do.

gnf_ireland

GreeBo wrote: »

Going rural would only really work if you were 100% from home.
If you need to be in the office on an adhoc or even 1 or 2 days a week then it would be a total pain in the arse to have to travel for 3 hours each way IMO.

I am not sure on this - really depends on the location of the employer. Its very easy to spend 45-60 minutes a day commuting each way, even within Dublin. This does add up. If you have to be in the office a day or two a week, it would probably still be ok to come from places within most of the country (maybe not the back end of Cork, Kerry or Donegal).

At one point in my life I worked "officially" out of a London office of a company and would pop over once a week or so, either for a day trip or an overnight trip. Was it a pain - absolutely. Was it worth it to spend the rest of the time at home - absolutely !

gnf_ireland

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Be interested to know if ye young people find working from home makes any difference to how much ye get done? One of my sons swears he is doing way more with no colleagues distracting him, a daughter says it is making no real difference.

Not sure I fall into the "young people" classification, but when I normally work from home I find it much more productive than in the office. Spend 3 days intensive meetings & workshops in the office and then 2 days being left alone to get stuff done at home.

Sadly, since we are now all working remotely, the emails come thick and fast all hours of the day and night and my ability to hide away and get stuff done is diminishing. I don't have that nice clean line of out of sight/out of mind, so I have found productivity has greatly reduced. But this is more a cultural thing than a remote working thing.

Certain people don't work well remotely and at this stage are starting to hit panic stations within my organisation !!

GreeBo

Going rural would only really work if you were 100% from home.
If you need to be in the office on an adhoc or even 1 or 2 days a week then it would be a total pain in the arse to have to travel for 3 hours each way IMO.

GreeBo

gnf_ireland wrote: »

Not to mention you need to pay income tax in the country of residence

Compared to the potential millions you might cost your employer, I think your (likely lower) income tax rate is negligible!
Especially if you work for any of the multinationals.

gnf_ireland

GreeBo wrote: »

Some of you need to go talk with your Financial Controllers before you up sticks and work in another country. There are severe financial implications to your company if you do.
For example, if you decided to work in India, your company is now liable to pay corporation tax in India, just because you live and work there.

Not to mention you need to pay income tax in the country of residence

gnf_ireland

Deleted User wrote: »

Broadband is the big problem with this plan. Such a shame. With good rural broadband Ireland could become the country to live in when it comes to a modern office and work life balance.

Love it or hate it, this is where the National Broadband Plan will make a massive difference. The project will be an absolute game changer when it comes to what people are talking about here, and is the true enabler of the remote working across the board.

GreeBo

Some of you need to go talk with your Financial Controllers before you up sticks and work in another country. There are severe financial implications to your company if you do.
For example, if you decided to work in India, your company is now liable to pay corporation tax in India, just because you live and work there.

gnf_ireland

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The money not spent in urban areas won't be stuffed in the mattress. It will get spent, just in a different location. Money saved on fuel will get spent on other basics, maybe on products with more local economic value than an imported product like petrol.

I'm a Dub, but Dublin is overloaded. If more shops outside of Dublin get a bigger slice of consumer spending, that's probably a good thing all round. Dublin rents might drop a bit eventually, rents in rural towns might come up a bit.

I am not sure I said that the money would not be spent

I said it was bad for urban areas and jobs are likely to be lost in the service area, which is a massive employer in Ireland. Just look at the numbers who availed for the special covid payment the minute the bars & food establishments closed their doors.

The money is now more likely to be distributed more across the country, and this is likely to protect jobs in a lot of places rather than generate jobs in others. I am not saying its a bad thing - I am saying that there will be an economic impact to this from the governments point of view.

I am not a Dub, but I do live and work here. I 100% agree that Dublin is overloaded, and we need a migration out of the place before it falls over. This includes everything from infrastructure to schools, to housing to life in general. It would be fantastic for the citizens if this was to happen, but I am willing to bet economically (at least in the short term) it would have negative effects.

And yes, any drive through any town in Ireland and its pretty obvious they could do with any cash injection a migration out of Dublin would give them - as well as making Dublin more sustainable in the medium term

gnf_ireland

krissovo wrote: »

US companies especially any in the West Coast have been working like this for at least 5 years. Having teams based in Ireland is a good choice due to the time zones. I have flexible hours generally, I often start meetings when I am not travelling at 7 am with Engineering teams in Asia and finish at 08:30. I then get kids ready for school and drop them off. I start again at 10>10:30 and work to 12:30. Start again at 13:15 and work until 3pm have another break to collect kids and then start again at 6pm or 8pm after the kids are in bed and have meetings with California based teams.

I plan my weekly schedule and block book slots in dairy, if colleagues need to get me they will book a slot and I am available For them. I have never had an issue with being available as we all work in a similar way. The company trusts us to get the job done. If we struggle to book a meeting slot with the whole team for an important meeting we indicate it in the invite and most will make alternate arrangements for the kids. If they cannot make arrangements then often they will have a child on their lap for the meeting.

@krissovo Absolutely. There of course are companies that allow their employees be flexible today - but mainly because it suits themselves. Having you work from 7am to 8pm with gaps in between suits their business model and its in their interest to do so, as it provides a clean handover between their different time zones.

Its a different story, for a lot of companies, where they have nothing to gain from offering you that level of flexibility. Yes some will be fine with it, but the majority don't today, and I cannot imagine a total change in attitude across the board in 6 months time either.

Working from home will be a major step for a lot of companies. I would not bet on having total flexibility in work hours included in the expectations (as standard)

Companies are definitely on the hook for providing a safe place to work that meets the long term needs of employee, including when they work at home. This requirement can't be waived by the employee making a statement. Employers can use trained h&s expert to evaluate a home office to help discharge liability, but it's not ideal as the work place is outside control of employer.

An employer simply saying "work from home" is leaving themselves wide open for compensation claims, with no way of discharging their liability.

krissovo

Deleted User wrote: »

I work for a large multinational, and even here, WFH is not a straightforward as some would believe it to be. There are substantial insurance implications. If WFH permanently, the organisation will need to assess the workspace being used and ensure that it is appropriately set up. If it cant be appropriately set up, then WFH could be declined. Working from home more than (I think) 40% of the time is even more complicated from an insurance perspective, as both locations need to be insured and tracked as to where you are. Large companies with sophisticated HR and facilities functions will be able to deal with this. Small companies are potentially running a substantial risk if they don't jump through all these hoops and do whatever is needed to ensure that their liability is reduced.

All that to say, its not as easy as an employer just saying "sure, work from home"

This is BS, you perform a workplace assessment and you pass or fail. If you fail then make the adjustments. The insurance issue is complete fabrication.

[Deleted User]

dubrov wrote: »

They do have a responsibility but can get around it by getting you to state that you have assessed your work area and it is suitable for working from home. It exonerates then from subsequent claims.

If you don't make the statement, you don't get to work from home

I’ve never been asked for nor made this statement to my employer.