Return to office - your situation

Return to office - your situation

Author
Discussion

Chainsaw Rebuild

1,997 posts

101 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
50% wfh here, though it could easily be 75%. The problem I think for some people is that some "managers" are believe in institutional presenteeism. These "managers" are stupid.

I would very seriously consider moving jobs if we were forced to return 100% of the time.

RSTurboPaul

10,219 posts

257 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
ro250 said:
nunpuncher said:
crofty1984 said:
... and I don't have to give up a room in my house to my employer.
That got me thinking.

I don't have the luxury of a spare room so initially the dining room was given up as my work space. That proved tricky with the kids home schooling so I set up in a corner of the bedroom. Built a desk I can fold away on Friday and store out of sight. It's working well.

For me it's a small sacrifice compared to 2hrs per day, 40hrs per month, that's almost 2 full days (more if they have faults, which are a regular occurrence) sat (more likely standing with someone else breathing right in my face) on trains. Not to mention the money I have to pay for the privilege.

The commute money could probably go to a bigger house. Or better yet a bigger garage with space for another car and a small office.
Completely agree. Luckily we extended a couple of years ago so that extra bedroom we weren't quite sure what we'd use for is now a home office. I have zero problem with that and I bought my own screen rather than taking one from work so it's my kit.

I commute into London which costs £4000 per year so the change to my monthly income for last 12 months is noticeable.
I got a new job recently and we needed to move because I didn't want to have a two hour commute if we ever actually got back into the office.

Having been working at a friend's house on their dining room table for several weeks (because no space at home), I concluded that I could not bear to do that any longer and anywhere we moved to had to have space for a proper desk and a setup that was not going to cripple me in a couple of months, so we needed at least one extra bedroom than strictly needed or a dedicated study.

The speed at which places came on and were snapped up was ridiculous - places were going on the same day of listing, so it does seem to me that a lot of people are 'upsizing' on the basis of reduced outgoings / increased WFH / better quality of life in a bigger place that's further away / further north.

aparna

1,156 posts

36 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
I hope wfh ends soon from a selfish perspective. I’ve wfh forever, but it feels less of a perk now.

Our Company’s flexible WFH policy of 10 years standing is no longer a usp. There is new pressure on retention and wages and staff churn is up.

Similarly rural properties with offices I was eyeing up are now out of reach….

Feels like I’ve lost an edge.

anonymous-user

53 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
This is a really interesting thread. Good to have an insight in to what different employers are deciding is the way forward.

It seems like it raises more questions than answers though.

My thoughts are that an awful lot of people have jumped the gun and assumed that they will not have to return to the office. They have moved house, moved further away, and so on. Many employers are now seemingly deciding that some mandatory time back in the office is the way forward (in many cases they seem to be asking for 50% or even 3/4 days per week) and clearly this will cause issues to those that have moved away.

It’s perfectly fine for people to say “Let me work from home or I’m leaving” but they may find themselves competing against an awful lot of people for the next job if everyone is thinking this way.

Will be interesting to see how it pans out.

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 14th May 10:04

ro250

2,734 posts

56 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
It's the 50% thing which worries me if my employer pushes for it.

Living in a commuter belt for London, going in 3 days a week costs about the same as every day (if buying annual season ticket) so although it will save time and energy I am not inclined to do 3 days.

I am hoping for 1-2 days (or just ad-hoc which would seem most sensible).

Don Veloci

1,920 posts

280 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
Skimming this thread seems to confirm my situation is very minority... We want to be in the office, properly, full time.

Our very small team is involved in installation and maintenance, therefore can only properly work on site, coming and going constantly for a workload that isn't always predictable isn't practical nor good for mental health. The other 99% of the division are mostly desk based and can work for anywhere.

We had to fight our case to work full time from a space we never shared with other teams.

It seems in many cases that people who want to be in their place of work is an alien concept or grates against current overall policy and thinking.


Edited by Don Veloci on Friday 14th May 11:42

Sporky

6,085 posts

63 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
Pre-covid my team were in the office one day a month (though welcome any time). I was in twice a month.

Our MD is pretty sensible; people who either can't get through their stuff from home, or who will actually be happier in the office, will be back from the 21st of June. I think the rest of us will be working from home, with office days perhaps at the rate they used to be. We've been very productive via Zoom and he's not daft enough to mess with that, nor is he much into presenteeism for people who are getting their work done to the required standard.

Candellara

1,876 posts

181 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all

I work in the office with some of my colleagues. We do have staff working from home and we turn all the monitors on every morning at 9.00am so we can see who is actually doing some work and who isn't :-)

The company has issued a directive that everyone is to return to working from the office on the 7th of June. 90% of the staff have no problem and want to come back to the office. There's only a minority of staff that don't want to come back and guess who they are? Yes, the staff that are barely productive during the course of the day and do the minimum to get by on :-)




Welshbeef

49,633 posts

197 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
I think it’s fair to say many people who have been WFH are actually using some of all of their previous commuting time to work.

Now that additional output is seen as BAU - so forcing back to office will mean something has to give.

ElectricSoup

8,202 posts

150 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
Candellara said:
I work in the office with some of my colleagues. We do have staff working from home and we turn all the monitors on every morning at 9.00am so we can see who is actually doing some work and who isn't :-)

The company has issued a directive that everyone is to return to working from the office on the 7th of June. 90% of the staff have no problem and want to come back to the office. There's only a minority of staff that don't want to come back and guess who they are? Yes, the staff that are barely productive during the course of the day and do the minimum to get by on :-)
Do you ever think it's worth considering that people are best judged by what they do, not that they are doing it at 9am on the dot? I'm not surprised people end up being "bare minimum" types in this kind of surveillance environment. Overbearing presentee monitoring is counter-productive.

My (giant IT consultancy) employer has been nearly 100% WFH based since last March. Having previously been nearly 100% office based. Literally today they've just announced surprisingly high operating profits, and they're paying double the amount of bonus we got last year. Treat people like adults, and you get results. Office working is not going to be mandated in the future, our managers have seen clear evidence that it is in fact detrimental to productivity to have everyone office based all the time.

Aunty Pasty

609 posts

37 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
ro250 said:
It's the 50% thing which worries me if my employer pushes for it.

Living in a commuter belt for London, going in 3 days a week costs about the same as every day (if buying annual season ticket) so although it will save time and energy I am not inclined to do 3 days.

I am hoping for 1-2 days (or just ad-hoc which would seem most sensible).
Same here. The whole weekly/monthly/yearly season ticket pricing model just doesn't suit ad-hoc or irregular commuting. I wish they'd switch to something a bit more flexible such as bulk buy tickets to be used more flexibly.

If I was forced to do a 50% in-office routine I'll try to angle for an alternate Mon, Tue, Wed one week followed by a Thur, Fri the other week.

Edited by Aunty Pasty on Friday 14th May 11:52

Sporky

6,085 posts

63 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
Our previous sales director was quite fond of the phrase "work is a thing you do, not a place you go".

Though as a couple of others have said, when we bought our current house (in May 2019) a proper home office for me was non-negotiable. The place we bought is effectively a bungalow, but with a tiny lower ground area that has the utility room, a toilet, and an office. It's really lovely to work from home in a properly organised space that isn't trying to be anything else. Though I might add a coffee machine in the utility room... and a little fridge, and a biscuit tin.

nunpuncher

Original Poster:

3,363 posts

124 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
Lord Marylebone said:
This is a really interesting thread. Good to have an insight in to what different employers are deciding is the way forward.

It seems like it raises more questions than answers though.

My thoughts are that an awful lot of people have jumped the gun and assumed that they will not have to return to the office. They have moved house, moved further away, and so on. Many employers are now seemingly deciding that some mandatory time back in the office is the way forward (in many cases they seem to be asking for 50% or even 3/4 days per week) and clearly this will cause issues to those that have moved away.

It’s perfectly fine for people to say “Let me work from home or I’m leaving” but they may find themselves competing against an awful lot of people for the next job if everyone is thinking this way.

Will be interesting to see how it pans out.

Edited by Lord Marylebone on Friday 14th May 10:04
I'd agree that a lot of people have possibly moved without really thinking about the long term. What happens when and if they are forced back full time is another matter. Like you say, it's a lot easier to say you will move on than it is to actually secure that perfect job.

The flip side is that I do wonder if employers who force people back notice a drop in productivity and subsequently decide versatility might actually be better. My teams productivity is all easily tracked, I'm sure many others are the same. We dropped off a cliff last March but everyone seemed to adjust very quickly and by mid April productivity was about 30% higher where it has remained since. Following our year end appraisals its pretty common for us to have a lot of people switching teams internally. This usually leads to several months of rehiring and people getting up to speed. We seemed to have almost none of that this year and our staff satisfaction survey had it's highest score ever.

Edited by nunpuncher on Friday 14th May 11:57

anxious_ant

2,626 posts

78 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
ro250 said:
nunpuncher said:
crofty1984 said:
... and I don't have to give up a room in my house to my employer.
That got me thinking.

I don't have the luxury of a spare room so initially the dining room was given up as my work space. That proved tricky with the kids home schooling so I set up in a corner of the bedroom. Built a desk I can fold away on Friday and store out of sight. It's working well.

For me it's a small sacrifice compared to 2hrs per day, 40hrs per month, that's almost 2 full days (more if they have faults, which are a regular occurrence) sat (more likely standing with someone else breathing right in my face) on trains. Not to mention the money I have to pay for the privilege.

The commute money could probably go to a bigger house. Or better yet a bigger garage with space for another car and a small office.
Completely agree. Luckily we extended a couple of years ago so that extra bedroom we weren't quite sure what we'd use for is now a home office. I have zero problem with that and I bought my own screen rather than taking one from work so it's my kit.

I commute into London which costs £4000 per year so the change to my monthly income for last 12 months is noticeable.
+2. I’ve invested in making space in my garage for my home office (insulation, desk/chair/monitor, heating etc) to make working from home more comfortable and feasible. Yes, there is increase in cost for heating but nothing compared to fuel/insurance/maintenance/stress for commuting.

I was initially working in the kitchen, then the bedroom but needed my own space. I only own a modest home and the garage is detached so that’s the best option. My only regret is that I made the improvement in stages, I should’ve done it properly sooner.

My employer is still allowing WFH, but nothing firm on the horizon for anything permanent.

I am hoping there would be allowance for partial WFH confirmed, but we shall see.

aparna

1,156 posts

36 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
The secret is out the box now. For majority of desk jobs WFH is more productive overall. It will never go back. Money rules ultimately. And numbers don’t lie.

ro250

2,734 posts

56 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
Aunty Pasty said:
ro250 said:
It's the 50% thing which worries me if my employer pushes for it.

Living in a commuter belt for London, going in 3 days a week costs about the same as every day (if buying annual season ticket) so although it will save time and energy I am not inclined to do 3 days.

I am hoping for 1-2 days (or just ad-hoc which would seem most sensible).
Same here. The whole weekly/monthly/yearly season ticket pricing model just doesn't suit ad-hoc or irregular commuting. I wish they'd switch to something a bit more flexible such as bulk buy tickets to be used more flexibly.

If I was forced to do a 50% in-office routine I'll try to angle for an alternate Mon, Tue, Wed one week followed by a Thur, Fri the other week.

Edited by Aunty Pasty on Friday 14th May 11:52
Yep, I have considered that option of buying a weekly ticket over 2 weeks. Great minds...

Annoyingly, the flexible ticket does exist for some operators. C2C do it and it looks great value. Greater Anglia also do but the discount is pennies so not worth it. Guess which line I use...

Candellara

1,876 posts

181 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
ElectricSoup said:
Do you ever think it's worth considering that people are best judged by what they do, not that they are doing it at 9am on the dot? I'm not surprised people end up being "bare minimum" types in this kind of surveillance environment. Overbearing presentee monitoring is counter-productive.

My (giant IT consultancy) employer has been nearly 100% WFH based since last March. Having previously been nearly 100% office based. Literally today they've just announced surprisingly high operating profits, and they're paying double the amount of bonus we got last year. Treat people like adults, and you get results. Office working is not going to be mandated in the future, our managers have seen clear evidence that it is in fact detrimental to productivity to have everyone office based all the time.
Depends on their role. For us, it starts at 9.00 as our customers are active from this time forward and seeking timely responses etc so it's not acceptable that someone has gone shopping or is walking the dog when they have a customer awaiting an immediate response from them. It is, in our line of work wholly inadequate. Some staff can be trusted to work well from home (depending on their role) but unfortunately there will always be a percentage of staff that cannot be trusted to work productively.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/apr/08/w...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56993886






ElectricSoup

8,202 posts

150 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
Yes Ok, customer facing roles are different.

Halmyre

11,147 posts

138 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
Candellara said:
I work in the office with some of my colleagues. We do have staff working from home and we turn all the monitors on every morning at 9.00am so we can see who is actually doing some work and who isn't :-)

The company has issued a directive that everyone is to return to working from the office on the 7th of June. 90% of the staff have no problem and want to come back to the office. There's only a minority of staff that don't want to come back and guess who they are? Yes, the staff that are barely productive during the course of the day and do the minimum to get by on :-)
Your employer seems to be in a minority going by the views in here. I'm not surprised some of the staff are less than motivated.

ATG

20,480 posts

271 months

Friday 14th May 2021
quotequote all
My firm (big global financial services) is sending somewhat mixed messages. Broadly speaking our strategic leadership are saying "permanent change to the way we work, embrace flexible working, reduce office space to save money and improve quality of life", whereas messages from some within the senior echelons of middle management include stuff like "we firmly believe we work better in person". Also the people actually executing our practical response to covid including making office space covid-compliant are all from our facilities management teams, so they live and breath office space. Their whole role is to manage our estate and make the buildings work. Not just out of self-interest, but based on their whole mindset, their answer to everything is "do it in an office". Working from home is facilitated by IT, not facility management, so there's also an organisational chasm that encourages an inconsistent collective response. Those of us at the coal face and those of us with strategic oversight can see what has worked and where we should be trying to go, but the middle tier of the organisation is flailing around to dine extent.

The hallway-house stuff, particularly things like "thou shalt be at thy desk 50% of the time" makes very little sense, and is more managerial bluster than a practical strategy. Unless you have your whole team in the same office on the same day, you're still going to have most communication over phone and video conference anyway, so what's been achieved by the partial return? If you do have teams either in or out, you've got to coordinate with every other team unless you want to increase your office space to accommodate those days when everyone happens to turn up in this new world where you can't cram desks in as tightly as before.

It seems to me it's far better to concentrate on reducing the disadvantages of remote work and then let individuals decide how much time they want to spend in the office. Location shouldn't be about team efficiency, it should be about individual efficiency. Take the opportunity to reduce your building costs. Take the opportunity to be able to hire staff regardless of their location.

Covid has forced a lot of organisations to make changes they should have already been considering. It'd be pretty silly to start frittering away the advantages in pursuit of some badly thought out supposed hybrid strategy.