WFH is dead and buried. Right to WFH bill is pointless

The inability of many posters to understand nuances is quite .. interesting.

I argue that there are many risks with WFH in general, and I'm happy to point them out, unlike some who deny them.

That doesn't mean companies shouldn't do it - but there is a lot of extra work needed by middle-managers to make it successful, and safe The people who say WFH proves that middle managers are not needed are hilarious, and clueless.

IMHO the company I'm working for takes too many risks with personal devices: WFH is via Citrix so technically secure (paint me skeptical, given what I've seen), but teams+email on personal devices is allowed, and personal devices are used for 2FA. Our case-working staff handle a LOT of PII, and some is sensitive welfare-ish and financial data. If I was the compliance manager, I wouldn't be allowing personal devices. But I'm not, and I'm not a caseworker either, so my opinion is pretty damn irrelevant.

It has always been beneficial to me than the company in my opinion to use my phone for work. No job I have been in ever provided work phones so if you wouldn’t use your own phone it would severely tie you to your desk for one, with wfh would make you more difficult to contact and what about being contacted by 3rd parties who need a phone number and of course if you travel a bit for work which I always have you would be very cut off if relying on only having email, teams etc when you could get your laptop out.

Especially wfh and a more flexible approach to working you may not be at your desk when a message or email comes in but having it on your phone means you always get notified instantly.

Across 3 private companies and 2 public sector jobs it was absolutely the norm for everything to have email and teams/google chat/zoom etc on their personal phone.

The argument that managers have to see people at their desks to know that they are working. Is admitting that don't keep and monitor metrics on output and productivity.

Because if people had those they'd know what people are doing (or not doing) and wouldn't be making these daft arguments. That they now see it as "extra" speaks volumes.

My employer provides all staff members with an identical set up in the office and for remote working - Laptop, docking station, dual screens etc. If you need a phone for work use, it is provided, albeit with severe restrictions on social media access!

Having said that there is definitely increasing pressure to be in the office for a minimum of 3 days per week - we're in Financial Services. I personally think that is a good and fair balance!

Amazon dont really have many WFH staff. Seems a lot of middle management will be gone. Overpaid anyway in corporate positions. Just kinda slowly slid up through the ranks as people left. Useless ****.

I do like the bit about ownership. Not enough of that.

HSE has a portal for work phones

https://healthservice.hse.ie/staff/it-support/smartphone-requests/

Good to see at least some noise being made around this at government and union level given this crazy push we are seeing to force people back into offices 5 days per week by some employers. I’m no fan of labour in general but fair play to them here bringing this bill forward, will probably not get too far initially but good to have the idea being talked about at the very least that wfh should be an enforceable right.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2026/0216/1558818-remote-work/

So you can get them.... :)

Any of your companies looking to go back remote with the fuel costs and advice from the IEA to work from home where possible?

One would think fuel rationing is on the way if things continue as is.

Can't see companies rowing back now and allowing staff more flexibility. Companies feel they are winning now and wont let thay slide again.

Shame but maybe you are right.