MacronvFrugals wrote: » Agreed, senior managers were shocked in our place when productivity increased during Covid so much that they requested 1/4 of middle managers be diverted to new roles within the company. You're darn right they're sweating to go back to the office!
PropQueries wrote: » If a computer program can monitor employee productivity, it will raise questions at the upper levels on the amount of middle managers they require.
PommieBast wrote: » I suspect middle and lower management actively fear permanent WFH, so they will pour cold water on the idea at every opportunity.
Cyrus wrote: » you are calling bertie an expert then?
PropQueries wrote: » I don't believe listening to lower down managers is the best gauge and it may be better to watch what the big public companies are doing as the smaller companies will definitely start following their lead no matter what they're telling their staff at the moment IMO.
PropQueries wrote: » I don't think it was "commentators" last time. I think we all remember Bertie's quote.
PropQueries wrote: » I think there will be a lot of to-and-fro over the next several months between managers who want to return to the office (no matter what and for personal reasons etc.) and other managers who will be looking at the potential cost savings etc. going forward.
Browney7 wrote: » By the back door potentially - wage subsidy scheme pays staff wages which allows any income afterwards to be used for rent. Can see a Mexican standoff after things settle down where businesses won't be able to pay the pre Covid rent and the commercial landlord may threaten to refuse to budge on rent and shut it down so then the business goes cap in hand to government that "they're a viable business being shut down". If they are shutdown gov lose tax and have to pay welfare etc. Commercial LL realistically won't relet the property for the pre Covid rent to a new tenant then. I'd expect commercial property will eat some of the Covid losses but the taxpayer will invariably foot a lot of it rightly or wrongly. I'm personally dubious about the WFH prospects - too much money at stake with people at home all the time. Loss of people paying into gov coffers with transport costs to cities, vat on purchases and food in the city (resultant jobs created by that), taxation revenue on commercial rents (indeed financial institutions and pension funds who own large office and commercial developments may be in several ears in government circles worldwide). If there are less people walking up Grafton st or Henry st (or Oxford st, fifth avenue, champs Elysées etc) it stands to reason rents and property values will drop. Or else governments rate people's "home office's" which is payable by employers.
Cyrus wrote: » Yes, thats exactly the same, comparing the opinions of commentators on an asset class to what a management team tells its employees about their working conditions. your ability to conflate utterly seperate concepts is astounding, the break doesnt appear to have done you any good.
MacronvFrugals wrote: » I think a more hybrid model will emerge, with the commuter belt around Dublin becoming much more attractiveUnilever workers will never return to desks full-time, says bosshttps://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jan/13/unilever-workers-will-never-return-to-desks-full-time-says-boss
Villa05 wrote: » 10 months ago wfh was been written off by alot of posters. New practices evolve Does anyone know if commercial property owners are being compensated by the state for losses attributable to covid
PropQueries wrote: » Just like taking majority of the experts statements on the future of the Irish housing market in Ireland in 2006 at face value?
Cyrus wrote: » sure, makes much more sense to imagine what they might have meant rather than taking what they said at face value.
awec wrote: They may want to, but they cannot. People should stop talking like this is some temporary thing, or that it's going to change. It is not. Remote work is going to increase but workers will have to stay in Ireland.
JimmyVik wrote: As it happens the lease on one of our floors was up in December. They have renewed, but at a cheaper price than the last lease. I think they are getting the first 6 months free basically.
PropQueries wrote: » But would telling employees that they must return to the office once the lockdown ends be more to do with not raising the expectations of staff until management fully understand what they will do post-covid. For example, Google initially stated that everyone would have to return to the office post-covid (originally July this year), but then changed tack last month and pushed back its return to the office until September 2021, and also added that they will experiment with a hybrid model allowing some employees to work from home part of the week. It's a constantly moving situation at the moment until management fully understand what they will do post-covid and won't want to raise any employee expectations until their final decisions are made IMO I would guess that any company whose lease is expiring or up for renewal in the next 24 months would be more inclined to move more employees to WFH post-covid than similar companies with say a 5 year lease left. They are the companies to watch IMO on the future direction of WFH.
PropQueries wrote: » But would telling employees that they must return to the office once the lockdown ends be more to do with not raising the expectations of staff until management fully understand what they will do post-covid.
JimmyVik wrote: » Our company hired 11 people in the last few months. All are allowed to work remotley, but have been told that that is not an option for them once the company can go back to normal work practices. We are all, including new hires, expected back into the office as soon as it is possible.
Cyrus wrote: » do you have an office in the UK? and if you do are the people working from the UK employee of the irish of the UK operation?
awec wrote: » If we are going anecdotal, I can say that our company, a large employer, has explicitly ruled out any remote work outside of Ireland. I have had a team member have to quit because they wanted to move home to France for some family reasons and were outright refused. HR were willing to accommodate for a very short term temporary arrangement, but not permanent. This is the norm. Our future hiring policies remain unchanged.
MacronvFrugals wrote: » Our company hired 12 people in the last 2 months, 8 are working remotely from the UK and 4 in Dublin. This would not have happened prior to Covid for us specifically as all would've had to be in the commuter belt of Dublin, just anecdotal but interesting nonetheless
PropQueries wrote: » Well if I was a big property developer and I looked at the mortgage approval statistics for November 2020 and they showed e.g. 3,000 were approved for a mortgage of e.g. c. €250k each, I would like to know is that 3,000 unique potential purchasers with mortgage approval or is it c. 1,000 unique people who have been approved but by three separate institutions. It matters in the sense, will I build 500 houses or 1,500 houses in 2021? If I don't question it or seek clarification, it would be the difference in me building too much with no demand and going bust or building the right amount and making a much bigger profit.
fliball123 wrote: » Has he ever backed his opinion with fact. Props can you try and start justifying your arguments pal. Its getting pretty frustrating proving you wrong and then you blanking the fact that your wrong and you going off on a different tangent only to come back a week or w later with the same argument as before.
PropQueries wrote: » So all mortgage approvals still require a face to face meeting during the Pandemic? So, no mortgage approvals are going to be issued in January 2021? So, when the the statistics for mortgage approvals for January are published, they should state "0"?
