Forced to work from home

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Right now, I have one main contract of about 30 hours/week, and a 2nd contract for a smaller, related company for about 10 hours/week. Also have some side-gig website / consultancy work.

Happy now?

No need to provide any of that info.

Still doesn't change the fact the lockdown and WFH only start 16 months ago so no company will have enough data to suggest that employee leaving is because of WFH. Which is what you posted.

Also you live in an apartment which is not suitable for WFH. So go into the office. The constant posts about "WFH fanboys" etc is childish, in reality the only reason you have an issue with WFH is because it doesn't suit you. Nothing about the actual concept which is what the majority of people are discussing.

If you had a larger apartment with a spare room you would be probably on this thread calling people "work from office fanboys"

oisinog

ineedeuro wrote: »

No need to provide any of that info.

Still doesn't change the fact the lockdown and WFH only start 16 months ago so no company will have enough data to suggest that employee leaving is because of WFH. Which is what you posted.

Also you live in an apartment which is not suitable for WFH. So go into the office. The constant posts about "WFH fanboys" etc is childish, in reality the only reason you have an issue with WFH is because it doesn't suit you. Nothing about the actual concept which is what the majority of people are discussing.

If you had a larger apartment with a spare room you would be probably on this thread calling people "work from office fanboys"

Although I agree it is a bit early to see if Chrun is down to working from home I can see that it has had an impact on my own company. As I am based on the North we have people living in Belfast now taking jobs in London as they can work from home. So we have someone earning London money living in Belfast.

As I said earlier people will always see the negative in working from a location but at the same time if the would take the blinkers off they could see the massivae advantages it could have.

GreeBo

ineedeuro wrote: »

Still doesn't change the fact the lockdown and WFH only start 16 months ago so no company will have enough data to suggest that employee leaving is because of WFH. Which is what you posted.

Its not too early to gather stats if you have people leaving any you ask them why and they say its due to WFH.

oisinog wrote: »

Although I agree it is a bit early to see if Chrun is down to working from home I can see that it has had an impact on my own company. As I am based on the North we have people living in Belfast now taking jobs in London as they can work from home. So we have someone earning London money living in Belfast.

As I said earlier people will always see the negative in working from a location but at the same time if the would take the blinkers off they could see the massivae advantages it could have.

Maybe, Im not saying it wont happen but that was always an option. I have family living in the UK, they live outside london and if they have to go to the office they get a train in. They could move to Ireland for the amount of times they need to actually go into an office but prefer to live in the UK

Its the same in Ireland, you had people driving stupid distances to get into Dublin because they wanted "Dublin wages" yet complaining about the time in a car.

At this stage it is far far too early to see a huge shift in focus. We haven't even got out of total lockdown. Majority of offices are still closed because of Covid. So these options hjad always been available, people are just more aware of it now. I know of one company who has hundred of people sitting in Ireland and they look after other european countries, they have zero to do with the day to day business of the irish operations.

GreeBo wrote: »

Its not too early to gather stats if you have people leaving any you ask them why and they say its due to WFH.

The opposite dynamic probably applies too, as many may be unhappy about scarifying a spare room/living room to set up a home office.

WFH is not a win-win solution for all.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

The opposite dynamic probably applies too, as many may be unhappy about scarifying a spare room/living room to set up a home office.

WFH is not a win-win solution for all.

Which has been repeated multiples times and everyone says they are aware

Mastroianni

Mic 1972 wrote: »

The opposite dynamic probably applies too, as many may be unhappy about scarifying a spare room/living room to set up a home office.

WFH is not a win-win solution for all.

and is a win-win situation doing 1-2 hours commuting to an office in where you can do what you are currently doing at home?
win-win situation would be move away from Dublin and live in a better place with more normal rent.

GreeBo wrote: »

Its not too early to gather stats if you have people leaving any you ask them why and they say its due to WFH.

Agreed.

What this company is seeing is that many new hires are leaving. Reasons given vary: got offered permanent, personal, family, none.

But the ones who have stayed are the ones who live in Galway and visited the office once to pick up equipment.

Ones who only got the courier delivery got exactly the same induction - but they still kept looking around for better jobs.

ineedeuro wrote: »

. The constant posts about "WFH fanboys" etc is childish, in reality the only reason you have an issue with WFH is because it doesn't suit you. Nothing about the actual concept which is what the majority of people are discussing.

Constant? I've used that phrase exactly once.

Using personal experience to describe why WFH is not suitable for some people (maybe about a third of the workforce) is discussing the general concept.

Your post reinforces my thoughts about reading comprehension.

Mastroianni wrote: »

and is a win-win situation doing 1-2 hours commuting to an office in where you can do what you are currently doing at home?
win-win situation would be move away from Dublin and live in a better place with more normal rent.

My commute was 5-10 minutes for example, instead i now have 0 minutes commute, higher bills and a living room permanently turned into an office.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

My commute was 5-10 minutes for example, instead i now have 0 minutes commute, higher bills and a living room permanently turned into an office.

You should work in the office then
As said WFH doesnt suit everyone and work in office doesn't suit everyone

ineedeuro wrote: »

You should work in the office then
As said WFH doesnt suit everyone and work in office doesn't suit everyone

We don't have the option.

People made arrangements to accommodate WFH during the pandemic, pushing this as a permanent solution seems unfair as not everyone is equipped for a home office

Mic 1972 wrote: »

We don't have the option.

Have you started to look for a new job already?

jakiah wrote: »

Have you started to look for a new job already?

I like my job

Mic 1972 wrote: »

I like my job

Conditions change in lots of jobs people like. Offices move location, departments are restructured as business requirments change, buyouts, merges & takeovers happen, redundancies happen.

Sounds like you are going to like it a lot less if they start making you work from home when you dont have the facilities to accomodate. Why would you not be looking for something else?

jakiah wrote: »

Conditions change in lots of jobs people like. Offices move location, departments are restructured as business requirments change, buyouts, merges & takeovers happen, redundancies happen.

Sounds like you are going to like it a lot less if they start making you work from home when you dont have the facilities to accomodate. Why would you not be looking for something else?

as previously stated, I like my job and I'm not interested in looking for another one just because the company made a decision to put on employees the burden of providing for their own home office.

I do find it unfair tho, this is the point that some people are making

Mic 1972 wrote: »

as previously stated, I like my job and I'm not interested in looking for another one just because the company made a decision to put on employees the burden of providing for their own home office.

Cant be that much of an issue for you if you are just going to accept this change and work from home permanently then.

Mic 1972 wrote: »

as previously stated, I like my job and I'm not interested in looking for another one just because the company made a decision to put on employees the burden of providing for their own home office.

I do find it unfair tho, this is the point that some people are making

A substantial change to terms and conditions, eg requiring you to provide a secure workspace as well as labour, should be negotiated. If you cannot reach agreement, then the employer should be paying redundancy.

If your employer is pressing you to accept unsuitable long term WFH , which causes you to think about quitting, then investigate constructive dismissal.

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

A substantial change to terms and conditions, dg requiring you to provide a secure workspace as well as labour, should be negotiated. If you cannot reach agreement, then the employer should be paying redundancy.

If your employer is pressing you to accept unsuitable long term WFH , which causes you to think about quitting, then investigate constructive dismissal.

But it's not causing me to think about quitting
It's causing me to think that permanent WFH was pushed onto employees with a degree of selfishness from employers and little understanding of employees ability to accommodate

Mic 1972 wrote: »

We don't have the option.

People made arrangements to accommodate WFH during the pandemic, pushing this as a permanent solution seems unfair as not everyone is equipped for a home office

Find a local hot spot to work from, they are popping up everywhere

jakiah wrote: »

Cant be that much of an issue for you if you are just going to accept this change and work from home permanently then.

Not sure what your point is
I have adapted to changes before, were they fair? some were, this one isnt

Mic 1972 wrote: »

But it's not causing me to think about quitting
It's causing me to think that permanent WFH was pushed onto employees with a degree of selfishness from employers and little understanding of employees ability to accommodate

Why would any employer care if you are just going to accept the new conditions?

ineedeuro wrote: »

Find a local hot spot to work from, they are popping up everywhere

that's not the point, I can find whatever solution suits me to accommodate a change, i'm not here for advise.

WHF as an emergency solution had everyone doing their best to accommodate.

Making it a permanent solution is unfair, but nevermind

jakiah wrote: »

Why would any employer care if you are just going to accept the new conditions?

because i may still like the job and my colleagues and I'm happy with my career and the skills i'm developing in my field, I could go on

Mic 1972 wrote: »

because i may still like the job and my colleagues and I'm happy with my career and the skills i'm developing in my field, I could go on

OK. Work permanently from home then.

jakiah wrote: »

OK. Work permanently from home then.

Your point being?

ineedeuro wrote: »

Find a local hot spot to work from, they are popping up everywhere

Who pays? How do you make it ergonomically safe?