Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Civil Service - Post Lockdown - Blended Working?

1246756

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,066 ✭✭✭HerrKuehn


    I think the issue with Miesian Plaza was that OPW mis-measured the floor space and have ended up overpaying rent as a result. In light of that I wouldn't have a lot of confidence in the "experts" at the OPW to save us money in the long term.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I assume by @AndrewJRenko's refusal to answer this means he is not getting reimbursed for his commuting costs. In fact, I'd say he did not even ask for his years of commuting expenses to be reimbursed. So for the past year, he has been posting like the Internet hard man stating the employer should cover the employee costs WFH. But of course in real life, he will not ask his own costs of getting to work be covered.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,922 ✭✭✭SouthWesterly


    The opw got a lot wrong with Miesian but they weren't the only ones who got thing wrong.



  • Registered Users Posts: 42 Rasher_Sausage




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,437 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Do you need someone to explain to the difference between commuting costs and basic office provision costs for you? Employees were always responsible for their own commute - employer didn't care whether you were walking five minutes round the corner or driving for 2.5 hours from Roscommon. It was the employee's problem. Employer was always responsible for providing a safe work environment, appropriate furniture, heating the environment and powering the environment. That's the difference with WFH.

    Employees have one chance to make sure that they're not lumbered with the basic costs of providing a safe place to work.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Oh, so you were happy enough to pay your costs of getting to work. Then those employees who are making substantial savings in not commuting can afford to pay for the extra light and heat.

    That way both the employees and the employer can benefit if wfh becomes the normal.

    I still find it strange that you are not as persistent in real life that your employer pay your commuting costs.

    What did they say when you persistently asked them to cover your wfh costs?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,437 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    I've no idea which bits you are struggling to understand. Let me repeat again:

    I don't expect my employer to pay my commuting costs. My employer has NEVER paid my commuting costs or anyone else's commuting costs. Commuting costs are the responsibility of the employee, and therefore savings in commuting costs are ALSO the benefit of the employee.

    It's a preposterous idea that you could have three employees working on a team, one of whom is getting zero towards their out-of-pocket WFH costs because they used to walk or cycle to work, one of whom is getting €4 a day towards their out-of-pocket WFH costs because they used to get the Luas to work, and one of whom is getting €40 per day towards their out-of-pocket WFH costs because they used to drive from Roscommon to Dublin every day.

    Commuting costs are the responsibility of the employee. Savings in commuting costs are the responsibility of the employee.

    Out-of-pocket WFH costs like heating, power, broadband, furniture absolutely should be the responsibility of the employer, just like any other out of pocket costs necessarily during employment. Employment starts when you get to the door of your workplace. It doesn't include your commute.

    Employees and trade unions have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to ensure that savings in office accommodation costs aren't entirely snapped up by employers as additional profits, while employees are left carrying the can for providing extra space, power, heat, networking and furniture.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You've identified what I can see will be the biggest sticking point in forming a CS wide policy (due Q1 2022) and I can understand why, in fairness.

    Depending on what department/office someone finds themselves assigned too could really impact on someone's opportunity to WFH or not. We already know that some locations are much less flexible then others, less work-sharing friendly, staff can't get SWYS approved, and so on. In those places, WFH will be the same. That will trickle down eventually to the numbers of staff who will want to transfer from, or take up appointments / transfers to, these less flexible departments. (Particularly amongst new recruits or current staff awaiting mobility for whom WFH is a consideration).

    In my own Department, (which is very flexi / WS / SWYS / WFH friendly) we've been asked to go back in 1 day a week from the 27th. WFO days will be strictly managed so only one section or team will be in at the same time, which will allow the staff to distance themselves widely over the open plan spaces. We already have department issued laptops and no one will have an assigned desk going forward (we've already been told that). Single occupancy offices will also no longer be guaranteed (which is going to piss some people off big time!)

    Having said that, I still believe a full unrestricted 5 day return to offices won't happen until sometime next year - not with the unavoidable surge we all know is going to happen arrives this winter.

    If anything, I can see an announcement at the end Sept/Oct maybe it's not such a good idea after all. (But TPTB have to be seen to be trying).

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Registered Users Posts: 377 ✭✭ThumbTaxed


    I'd have serious reservations about the motives of those with young children and their desire to work from home.

    Creche cost gone.

    Work effectiveness gone.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You don't give a toss about the employee's out of pocket WFH costs. If you were, you'd be calling for the paltry tax reliefs from Revenue to be vastly improved. Why are you not calling for the expenses to be reclaimable (in full, with receipts) through the tax system? Worried that the costs of this would have an impact on your own potential earnings in future?


    What's wrong with business making a profit and making savings? Are you just as opposed to other measures helping business such as reductions in insurance claims? Business owners have a legal responsibility to ensure their business is run in a sustainable way. Making profits is what makes a business viable. Its speaks volume of our civil servants to see some are so anti-business.


    So despite all your blow for the past year+ about having to pay WFH costs, you did not even ask to have yours reimbursed!! For the past 18 months, you subserviently paid your own WFH costs and for the years before that you paid all your own commuting costs. Seems you're not quite as persistent and bullish in real life as your posts here demanding this and demanding that suggest.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,421 ✭✭✭✭Rikand


    If the civil service wants to give me an allowance for having to be in the office 5 days a week, I would be open to that :)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭SortingYouOut


    From my experience, those with kids are the ones mainly pushing to get back to the office, not the other way around.

    Beverly Hills, California



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,437 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    The reason why I'm not calling for paltry tax relief to be improved is that I don't want to be getting 20% or 40% of my WFH costs back. That's how tax relief works. I want my employer to pay the additional out of pocket costs for me and other employees, specifically heating, power, broadband and furniture.

    There's nothing wrong with businesses making profits. I'm not anti-business or anti-profit. I'm anti businesses exploiting their employees and making a land grab for space and utilities in their employee's property at zero cost, fuelling windfall profits at their employee's expense.

    You know nothing about what I have or haven't done to get back my WFH costs from my employer, so anything you say on this topic is pure speculation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,670 ✭✭✭StevenToast


    Is this the thread for how you can make your cushy number even cushier?

    "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining." - Fletcher



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭SortingYouOut


    Beverly Hills, California



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭gordongekko


    You can just tell your employer that once the pandemic is over you want to work 5 days a week from the office. I know I'm happier with the time saving and the improved quality of life working from home rather than wasting the best part of 6 hours a week travelling to and from work.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You're right. It's not my place to speculate what discussions you had regarding WFH costs with your employer.

    I do know one thing though, not one cent was given to you to by your employer.



  • Registered Users Posts: 43 CivilServantCP


    Try 4 hours a day, on a good day! There’s no way I’d go back to that though. 2 days a week tops is what they’re saying. But that’s still tough on ppl who wanted to move home and log on through a hub or other dept and attend HQ as needed and the Gov are looking for people to move to rural Ireland too not just a less busy commuter belt.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,437 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    In the ideal world, yeah, that's great. But most back to work plans I've seen seem to be predicated on the assumption that no-one wants to get back to the office and everyone wants to stay home. While my position might be a minority, it is still a valid position. A recent Journal poll had about 20% wanting to get back to their workplace.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,922 ✭✭✭SouthWesterly




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭SortingYouOut


    It is in mine. They want to get away from their children, they can't get a tap done when they're home. When school returns it isn't as bad but it definitely doesn't seem to be a viable alternative to child care if you want to be in any way productive.

    Beverly Hills, California



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,091 ✭✭✭Sarn


    Childcare is a necessity when WFH, and I would imagine future implementation of WFH will stipulate that it is in place.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,607 ✭✭✭caviardreams


    But the issue is, some are fine with not being productive as there are often no real consequences. So you save on childcare and can even pull the "tied up with the kid" / had to pick up the kids excuse no and again, and the lack of accountability / consequences mean you can get away with low productivity.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,379 ✭✭✭SortingYouOut


    During the lockdown we had people thrown into situations overnight, with their children on top of them. There was an understanding that the same amount of work wasn't going to get done by these people, which was completely fair.

    Moving forward where the person might have an option to either work from home or in the office, their choice cannot allow for distraction which impacts productivity. This won't be the same as being forced to WFH. If you decide to work from home, you cannot be spending that time looking after your children and if that is an inevitable consequence of you working from home, you should be in the office.

    Beverly Hills, California



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,922 ✭✭✭SouthWesterly


    We provide daily verifiable stats on our work. Obviously other departments are different



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,607 ✭✭✭caviardreams


    Yes, I would say in other areas it's harder to quantify output, and things like developing projects, growing an area and developing new services etc. are less easy to specifically call out in a way that the unions won't criticise / question.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,960 ✭✭✭billyhead


    Calling people back into an office environment is stupid. If the job can be done just as good as sitting on the toilet or anywhere in the home why is there a need to have bums on seats in an office environment?



  • Registered Users Posts: 43 CivilServantCP


    I see the DECC have a survey on sustainable goal development (SDG’s). Short few questions with a comment section. Good chance for anyone who likes WFH’s impact on their carbon footprint to make their feelings known. Only open till tomorrow though. Should be in everyone’s inbox.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,424 ✭✭✭Aisling(",)


    No sight or sound of a return to the office in my department.

    Usually after a Taoiseach's lockdown measures announcement we'd get an email from the heads of the department saying what it means for us but they've stayed quiet since the reopening timeline was announced.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,922 ✭✭✭SouthWesterly


    We're looking at volunteers to the end of the year.and blended working by q2/2022



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭gordongekko


    Have they defined what they think blended working means? How many days do they expect ye to be in the office?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,922 ✭✭✭SouthWesterly


    Not Been worked out yet, hence the need for volunteers. Number of staff in the building will be reduced I assume.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,437 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Asking for volunteers is great for those staff for whom WFH isn't working



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 946 ✭✭✭gauchesnell


    Im public service and one area in my workplace some staff have been asked to return to office 4 days a week from Monday. We have no union agreement re return to workplace but some managers seem to do what they please. Thankfully been referred to Union as that seems extreme



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,677 ✭✭✭Happydays2020


    perhap a good idea but the flip side of that is that your home should become a place of business, be subject to rates, the need to comply with workplace health and safety laws including record keeping, and so on. If you sell your property a proportion will of course be subject to capital gains as a business premises should be.

    I suspect that if you insist on this as a condition of your employment you may need to seek another job as many employers will not sign up for this. You may also find that these demands increase scepticism from managers about the motivations and merits of WFH.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 636 ✭✭✭Absolute Zero


    Do you mind saying which department you are with?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    We've been told that return to work and the blended working policy are two seperate issues, and the return to work plan shouldn't be taken as an indication of what the blended working policy will be.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 946 ✭✭✭gauchesnell


    Public service and education but non front line or customer facing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 946 ✭✭✭gauchesnell


    yeah agree - and sorry my pet hate but its not return to work its return to the office. How the blended working policy is implemented is down to each individual area/manger in my workplace - my own situation is still in discussion. 2m social distancing impacts how many of us can be there at one time etc



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You're right, it is return to office :)

    While each individual department can put in place a return to the office plan for their staff without reference to any other department, there is no official "blended work policy" they can implement yet, because it still has yet to be decided what it will be.

    The official blended working policy for the wider CS will only be formulated only after consultation across all departments has been made and will involve the unions as well, and is due by Q2 2022. Thats basically what our dept said to us.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 946 ✭✭✭gauchesnell


    Yeah agree. Our existing agile working policy is still in place until any new policy is agreed with social partners in line with national policy by Q2 2022. We still have a lot of health & safety stuff to sort out but I work in a large collaborative space which is trickier than a single office.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,960 ✭✭✭billyhead


    You can guarantee it won't be f/t WFH when the policy comes out in the New Year. For Dublin based staff they will want civil servants to return asap to support local businesses i.e coffee shops, pubs etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 946 ✭✭✭gauchesnell


    wouldnt be so sure on that - not all of us are based anywhere near other businesses even if we wanted to use them but I work in third level. I can see your point though. Also my hours have changed and remain changed - flexi time is gone for us for now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,845 ✭✭✭✭Beechwoodspark


    Wifey is in civil service. Is flexi gone?



  • Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 2,289 Mod ✭✭✭✭Nigel Fairservice


    It's suspended for those working at home. It's still in operation for those in the office...or at least it is in my department.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 946 ✭✭✭gauchesnell


    yes sorry suspended while working from home and will remain suspended for us while we are blended. Only available if full time in office but that isnt an option for anyone in my workplace yet. Complicated I know. Thats what I meant in respect of buying your lunch or getting a coffee if you worked near shops etc. Possible with flexi maybe but not for me working set hours even if Im in the office.

    Post edited by gauchesnell on


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    In my Dept we still use the flexi clock, we clock in and out as normal, (we never stopped) so our working hours are recorded. But we can't build up hours towards flexi leave or take flexi leave. Also told this is to remain in place until the new blended working policy is decided, including days in the office.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,600 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Remove flexi then bring everyone back to the office.

    Feels like people will be worse of than before.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 946 ✭✭✭gauchesnell


    oh yeah we still clock in but we cant take flexi leave or build up hours or use flexi leave. So same. Back in office with no flexi (blended working) and if I stay blended no flexi either.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement