Employees will have right to request remote working under new laws - Irish Examiner

16-01-2021 05:18PM

Antares35 wrote: »

Do they leave their laptop on the kitchen table all night? Why can't they bring it into their room (assuming they aren't sharing a bunk bed too).

What do they do every time they go for a pee? Or every time they go for lunch?

If they move away from their device in a shared location, there is a security risk.

The Spider wrote: »

If this is an issue the employer should provide it, just as they provide computer equipment etc.

They should provide it, some will and some won't. And is the employee now required to provide space for a desk AND a chair AND a filing cabinet, for no rent?

Antares35 wrote: »

Indeed. I don't have one for my own work.

We live in a two bedroom house with a child and we make it work.

'Make it work' generally means taking short cuts that wouldn't be acceptable, either with the health and safety of the employee or the security and confidentiality of information.

jiminho · 16-01-2021 05:49PM

I’d like to think most forward thinking companies would be up for WFH post pandemic but it’s great to see that it might be coming into legislation. Like most people have alluded to, I don’t think this will increase labour being exported to the likes of Asia. For the companies who would have seen a cost saving and efficiency, they would have already done it pre-pandemic.

I love working from home. There are so many advantages to it from a personal but also a business perspective. With the technology we have today, it can work really well and there has been a major culture shift that I can’t see ever changing. On top of this, if your employer provides you autonomy to get the work done, this is also great. Meaning that you can set your own hours. For anyone in a projectized sector, this is fantastic. I do think it will always be important to get in the office though and meet your co-workers etc face to face. I don’t necessarily miss the small talk but you get more engaged with one another and that leads to more efficiency working with each other and an overall better working conditions.

I’d be interested to see what people on this thread are planning to do post pandemic. I think I would like to: Work in the office 1 day a week. 3 days a week will be floater days which could mean going to site, meeting clients, or traveling, and at least 1 day WFH. The floater days would go to WFH if I have no places to be so it could be up to 4 days WFH a week.

All for this.

Antares35 · 16-01-2021 06:27PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What do they do every time they go for a pee? Or every time they go for lunch?

If they move away from their device in a shared location, there is a security risk.

They should provide it, some will and some won't. And is the employee now required to provide space for a desk AND a chair AND a filing cabinet, for no rent?

'Make it work' generally means taking short cuts that wouldn't be acceptable, either with the health and safety of the employee or the security and confidentiality of information.

It's just the two of us here, thankfully nobody waiting to intercept my email or steal my files if I have a call of nature

We aren't taking shortcuts when it comes to safety (can't say the same for the at risk woman who keeps coming into the office because she misses the banter and has had to be pulled aside and advised to stay home) and our employers are happy with the arrangement. In fact, mine is more than amenable to people WFH long term. OHs has committed to a WFH system until at least September and to be reviewed then. We're happy

The Spider · 16-01-2021 06:30PM

jiminho wrote: »

I’d like to think most forward thinking companies would be up for WFH post pandemic but it’s great to see that it might be coming into legislation. Like most people have alluded to, I don’t think this will increase labour being exported to the likes of Asia. For the companies who would have seen a cost saving and efficiency, they would have already done it pre-pandemic.

I love working from home. There are so many advantages to it from a personal but also a business perspective. With the technology we have today, it can work really well and there has been a major culture shift that I can’t see ever changing. On top of this, if your employer provides you autonomy to get the work done, this is also great. Meaning that you can set your own hours. For anyone in a projectized sector, this is fantastic. I do think it will always be important to get in the office though and meet your co-workers etc face to face. I don’t necessarily miss the small talk but you get more engaged with one another and that leads to more efficiency working with each other and an overall better working conditions.

I’d be interested to see what people on this thread are planning to do post pandemic. I think I would like to: Work in the office 1 day a week. 3 days a week will be floater days which could mean going to site, meeting clients, or traveling, and at least 1 day WFH. The floater days would go to WFH if I have no places to be so it could be up to 4 days WFH a week.

All for this.

legislating for it means that it’s not in the power of the companies to grant or remove as they see fit.

The government will never and I mean never get a better chance than this to legislate for working from home, after the pandemic a lot of companies (or should that be managers) will drip staff back into the office and the opportunity for major change in the way we work will be lost, this is one thing the government have done that I can get 100 percent behind.

The benefits for individuals, communities, children, the environment and the abandoned areas of rural Ireland, far far outweigh any negatives around team building or water cooler chat. This is an opportunity to reset and rebuild our lopsided society with Dublin acting as a black hole sucking everybody into it and in the process damaging lives and the city itself.

Granted there’s a few management types (you can see them comment in this thread) who are worried about how relevant they’ll be if there isn’t a physical team in an office with them sitting at its head, those fears are unfounded unless you’re someone who doesn’t do much but steps in to take credit for the teams work, few of those around.

WFH means people don’t have to share horrendous accommodation, don’t have to commute horrific distances, people have the time to participate in their communities whether that means coaching the local kids football team, joining the local theatre group, or even participating in the tidy towns competition, all of these were beyond the people commuting three hours a day.

Work will become something you do for part of the day rather than being your life, it’ll also remove a lot of politics from work, hard to be political when none of you are in the same location.

I do agree though that it’s beneficial to go to the office, meet up or whatever I was doing two days a week before the pandemic, I’d be happy enough to go back to that, but I only live an hour away from Dublin, might feel differently if I lived two hours away. I don’t think there’s a necessity to have people in every week twice a month’d Do just as well.

Antares35 · 16-01-2021 06:30PM

jiminho wrote: »

I’d like to think most forward thinking companies would be up for WFH post pandemic but it’s great to see that it might be coming into legislation. Like most people have alluded to, I don’t think this will increase labour being exported to the likes of Asia. For the companies who would have seen a cost saving and efficiency, they would have already done it pre-pandemic.

I love working from home. There are so many advantages to it from a personal but also a business perspective. With the technology we have today, it can work really well and there has been a major culture shift that I can’t see ever changing. On top of this, if your employer provides you autonomy to get the work done, this is also great. Meaning that you can set your own hours. For anyone in a projectized sector, this is fantastic. I do think it will always be important to get in the office though and meet your co-workers etc face to face. I don’t necessarily miss the small talk but you get more engaged with one another and that leads to more efficiency working with each other and an overall better working conditions.

I’d be interested to see what people on this thread are planning to do post pandemic. I think I would like to: Work in the office 1 day a week. 3 days a week will be floater days which could mean going to site, meeting clients, or traveling, and at least 1 day WFH. The floater days would go to WFH if I have no places to be so it could be up to 4 days WFH a week.

All for this.

Me too. I don't understand why some people are so determined to get everyone back in. My understanding is that any legislation brought in to promote a WFH culture would simply bestow the option to do so, if the person so wishes. I haven't seen anyone mention WFH being mandatory, so if someone really wants to go back in, that's their prerogative, but if someone is happy WFH then I don't understand why others would want to force them back because they don't have a shredder or an ergonomic chair etc.

The Spider · 16-01-2021 06:43PM

Antares35 wrote: »

Me too. I don't understand why some people are so determined to get everyone back in. My understanding is that any legislation brought in to promote a WFH culture would simply bestow the option to do so, if the person so wishes. I haven't seen anyone mention WFH being mandatory, so if someone really wants to go back in, that's their prerogative, but if someone is happy WFH then I don't understand why others would want to force them back because they don't have a shredder or an ergonomic chair etc.

That’s exactly it, it’s not mandatory you can take it up if your job can be performed from home. But that’s not the issue, the issue here is that there are some people who feel disenfranchised because they see themselves as the boss, and if everyone’s not in the office to see you as the boss how do you let them know you’re the boss?

Also and they know this, the percentage of people that will avail of it will far outweigh the percentage that won’t, I know of one particularly large IT company that carried out a survey to gauge interest in going back to the office, only 10 people in the entire organization expressed an interest in returning to the office full time.

irelandrover · 16-01-2021 07:05PM

Antares35 wrote: »

Me too. I don't understand why some people are so determined to get everyone back in. My understanding is that any legislation brought in to promote a WFH culture would simply bestow the option to do so, if the person so wishes. I haven't seen anyone mention WFH being mandatory, so if someone really wants to go back in, that's their prerogative, but if someone is happy WFH then I don't understand why others would want to force them back because they don't have a shredder or an ergonomic chair etc.

You mightn't complain but companies still have a responsibility for health and safety of their employees. You working at the kitchen table for 8 hours a day is not good for you. If you don't have a proper workstation at home then your employer is being irresponsible letting you work there. This is obviously ignored at the moment as there is simply no choice.

You say noone is waiting to steal files while you go to the toilet but can anyone overhear conversations you have? Everyone I work with has a non disclosure agreement signed but my wife doesn't. She might not care what she overhears but it's a risk for the company as they aren't maintaining the privacy agreements they signed with a customer.

I couldn't care less about others working from home but you seem to ignore the fact your employer has responsibilities.

When this is over and if that 7% that complained get nice office chairs, a desk and monitors and an allowance to work at home are you not going to expect the same or are you just going to get in with it?

Antares35 · 16-01-2021 07:22PM

irelandrover wrote: »

You mightn't complain but companies still have a responsibility for health and safety of their employees. You working at the kitchen table for 8 hours a day is not good for you. If you don't have a proper workstation at home then your employer is being irresponsible letting you work there. This is obviously ignored at the moment as there is simply no choice.

You say noone is waiting to steal files while you go to the toilet but can anyone overhear conversations you have? Everyone I work with has a non disclosure agreement signed but my wife doesn't. She might not care what she overhears but it's a risk for the company as they aren't maintaining the privacy agreements they signed with a customer.

I couldn't care less about others working from home but you seem to ignore the fact your employer has responsibilities.

When this is over and if that 7% that complained get nice office chairs, a desk and monitors and an allowance to work at home are you not going to expect the same or are you just going to get in with it?

How do you know I'm at the kitchen table???

Do you not trust your wife? Did you ever talk to her about work when you were office based?

It's great that you couldn't care less about people working from home.

Antares35 · 16-01-2021 07:24PM

The Spider wrote: »

That’s exactly it, it’s not mandatory you can take it up if your job can be performed from home. But that’s not the issue, the issue here is that there are some people who feel disenfranchised because they see themselves as the boss, and if everyone’s not in the office to see you as the boss how do you let them know you’re the boss?

Also and they know this, the percentage of people that will avail of it will far outweigh the percentage that won’t, I know of one particularly large IT company that carried out a survey to gauge interest in going back to the office, only 10 people in the entire organization expressed an interest in returning to the office full time.

Sad really. And the whole water fountain thing, I don't get that. I've never had to rely on a water fountain conversation for a promotion, I tend to get mine on merit. Who knew there was an easier way!

Laura2021 · 16-01-2021 07:26PM

I'm looking for home work at the moment until decide to open my own business or go back to working for someone. I think you need home life separate to your work life

irelandrover · 16-01-2021 07:29PM

Antares35 wrote: »

How do you know I'm at the kitchen table???

Do you not trust your wife? Did you ever talk to her about work when you were office based?

It's great that you couldn't care less about people working from home.

You said you didn't have a spare room for your work. It was more an assumption on my part.

Of course I trust my wife. My company don't trust her as she is a third party they can't control and she hasn't signed any non disclosure agreement.

Dempo1 · 16-01-2021 07:31PM

Seems more like an attempt at a good news story from Leaky Leo. So let me try and understand the concept, Employees have the right to request to be able to work remotely and employers have the right to say NO? makes so much sense. Tge harsh reality will be that if companies can operate remotely why in heavens name would they employ in Ireland, particularly if Labour and taxation laws become to much of a burden? If anything, shiny gleaming trophy office blocks will become a thing of the past.

Antares35 · 16-01-2021 07:56PM

irelandrover wrote: »

You said you didn't have a spare room for your work. It was more an assumption on my part.

Of course I trust my wife. My company don't trust her as she is a third party they can't control and she hasn't signed any non disclosure agreement.

I'm working in the kitchen, yes but not at the kitchen table. I got my work stuff couriered home as soon as I was sent to work from home back before most others were. My employers were quick to send home at risk groups first.

I do have a very good and clear knowledge of the requirements set down by the GDPR, in fact it's a big part of my role. What I would say is that your point is valid, but if WFH becomes more permanent/ widespread then it, along with many other things, will need to be addressed. They shouldn't be barriers to WFH.

GarIT · 16-01-2021 08:41PM

Laura2021 wrote: »

I'm looking for home work at the moment until decide to open my own business or go back to working for someone. I think you need home life separate to your work life

My computer has a power button that can be used to turn it off.

GarIT · 16-01-2021 08:42PM

Dempo1 wrote: »

Seems more like an attempt at a good news story from Leaky Leo. So let me try and understand the concept, Employees have the right to request to be able to work remotely and employers have the right to say NO? makes so much sense. Tge harsh reality will be that if companies can operate remotely why in heavens name would they employ in Ireland, particularly if Labour and taxation laws become to much of a burden? If anything, shiny gleaming trophy office blocks will become a thing of the past.

They don't have the right to say no. They have to give a reason and that reason can be challenged in the Workplace Relations Comission.

Whether people are entitled to work from home or not it won't change the company's ability to outsource.

16-01-2021 08:45PM

The point that "if we do this then all the jobs will move" is utterly facile.

1. If its possible to move those jobs, and there is nothing else keeping those jobs here, then whether we do wfh or not is irrelevant- those jobs will move

2. "Poorer countries will take advantage of our enacting quality of life measures" is, and I'll speak mildly, not only historically inaccurate- it's also bootlicking cowardice.

16-01-2021 08:48PM

I definitely dont want to go back to 5 days a week in the office.

Our bosses are public service and seem to want staff in the office. So I think they would fight very hard to avoid staff working 5 days at home. I'd say we would be lucky to get a day or 2 at home a week. But I'd gladly take it rather then being back in full time.

GarIT · 16-01-2021 08:49PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I definitely dont want to go back to 5 days a week in the office.

Our bosses are public service and seem to want staff in the office. So I think they would fight very hard to avoid staff working 5 days at home. I'd say we would be lucky to get a day or 2 at home a week. But I'd gladly take it rather then being back in full time.

The whole point of this law would be that they aren't allwoed to fight it.

runawaybishop · 16-01-2021 08:53PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What do they do every time they go for a pee? Or every time they go for lunch?

If they move away from their device in a shared location, there is a security risk.

They should provide it, some will and some won't. And is the employee now required to provide space for a desk AND a chair AND a filing cabinet, for no rent?

'Make it work' generally means taking short cuts that wouldn't be acceptable, either with the health and safety of the employee or the security and confidentiality of information.

Why are you overcomplicating this? If the employee cannot meet WFH requirements then they cannot WFH. If the requirements include a secure, lockable workspace then they need to have that.

GarIT · 16-01-2021 08:57PM

Something a few people have mentioned are the social aspects.

The way I see it is I have 10 extra hours a week. I can use those hours to visit friends who also have 10 extra hours. I can do a sport two nights a week and still be up time.

The Spider · 16-01-2021 09:30PM

GarIT wrote: »

Something a few people have mentioned are the social aspects.

The way I see it is I have 10 extra hours a week. I can use those hours to visit friends who also have 10 extra hours. I can do a sport two nights a week and still be up time.

Yeah I kind of touched on something similar, people having the time to get involved in the community, whether it’s coaching th3 kids football team, jo8ni g the theatre or whatever, suppose the point I was trying to make is that some commuter towns empty of people for the day except for kids in school etc, more people around makes these places more vibrant and all the rest.

Augme · 16-01-2021 09:41PM

GarIT wrote: »

The whole point of this law would be that they aren't allwoed to fight it.

They will be allowed fight it. If they can argue from a health and safety or gdpr point of view then it will be a fairly winnable case.

I can see office sheds in backgardens being a potential option to overcome this. However as we have already seen there has been an argument that employers should be forced to endure the cost of this.

But realistically, a sealed sperate entity from someone's place of home might be what a lot of people will need to do to win a case.

the_syco · 16-01-2021 10:22PM

I'll use tech support as an example of why this may not go as planned;

10% of people are able to work from home.

90% of people need supervision.

But as the 10% have the knowledge, allowing them to work from home means the other 90% are screwed.

It'd be a nice idea for many, but it may not be workable.

Laura2021 · 16-01-2021 10:31PM

GarIT wrote: »

My computer has a power button that can be used to turn it off.

Obviously dont understand the difference, Enjoy your colouring book.

The Spider · 16-01-2021 10:34PM

the_syco wrote: »

I'll use tech support as an example of why this may not go as planned;

10% of people are able to work from home.

90% of people need supervision.

But as the 10% have the knowledge, allowing them to work from home means the other 90% are screwed.

It'd be a nice idea for many, but it may not be workable.

Well that’s a nonsense argument, all apples tech support in Ireland works from home, I know my sister did it for a while, so if that argument about needing the 10% was brought up in a case brought forward I have no doubt that companies that do have tech support workers working from home would be brought forward as examples of why the job could be performed remotely.

runawaybishop · 16-01-2021 10:47PM

the_syco wrote: »

I'll use tech support as an example of why this may not go as planned;

10% of people are able to work from home.

90% of people need supervision.

But as the 10% have the knowledge, allowing them to work from home means the other 90% are screwed.

It'd be a nice idea for many, but it may not be workable.

I've had new people start completely WFH and no issues with onboarding. You just need proper training and support plans in place.

You could also train them on site and allow WFH later. None of these issues are insurmountable.

Mrs OBumble · 17-01-2021 06:35PM

Antares35 wrote: »

Sad really. And the whole water fountain thing, I don't get that. I've never had to rely on a water fountain conversation for a promotion, I tend to get mine on merit. Who knew there was an easier way!

The sad thing is that you don't even realise what this comment says about your political nous, and likely ability to secure promotions as you rise to higher levels.

WFH clearly CAN work for some people. But there are some who love it, but who really it's not going to work for long-term. It's also likely to harm long term career prospects, unless you're in an organisation which is almost totally WFH - because the people who are seen to be available for stretch assignments are the ones who get them, not the ones who are out-of-sight.

All the giving out about manager-types is funny too. WFH makes a lot more work for managers, because they have to consciously make sure to chat with employees daily, rather than being able to use visual observation to ensure that the employee is OK. They have to work a lot harder at communications, so that everyone finds out what they need to know to feel committed to the comany (not just what they need to know to do their jobs). Innovation, creativity, process improvement are a lot harder to encourage.

Antares35 · 17-01-2021 06:39PM

runawaybishop wrote: »

I've had new people start completely WFH and no issues with onboarding. You just need proper training and support plans in place.

You could also train them on site and allow WFH later. None of these issues are insurmountable.

Exactly. But a lot of people resist change unfortunately. I do feel that the pandemic has brought about a certain appetite for WFH as a culture, at least in part.

Foweva Awone · 17-01-2021 06:55PM

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

All the giving out about manager-types is funny too. WFH makes a lot more work for managers, because they have to consciously make sure to chat with employees daily, rather than being able to use visual observation to ensure that the employee is OK. They have to work a lot harder at communications, so that everyone finds out what they need to know to feel committed to the comany (not just what they need to know to do their jobs). Innovation, creativity, process improvement are a lot harder to encourage.

I have been in contact with my manager literally probably about 6 times since I started WFH last March. And I had only started the job about 3 weeks previous.

Hire the right professionals, and you won't have to be on top of them and chasing them all the time. They'll just manage their own workload and get the job done.

Antares35 · 17-01-2021 07:02PM

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

The sad thing is that you don't even realise what this comment says about your political nous, and likely ability to secure promotions as you rise to higher levels.

You can keep the personal digs to yourself.

I've actually recently been promoted. Delighted

Employees will have right to request remote working under new laws - Irish Examiner

Comments