[Offers] Hybrid working

[Papak]

Not too many TWATS on here it seems, I'm a TWAT, at least most weeks I am although I do try to avoid being a TWAT if I can because I get much more done at home without any distractions.

 

[seagulls99]

I'm in 5 days a week - always been the norm for myself and the team... unfortunately in a regulated role so we don't have too much choice. Although no one really seems to care if we take the odd ad hoc WFH day for a doctors appt etc

 

[Commander]

I work 4-5 days a week from home. When my company had a lot more employees I worked 5 days a week from the office. Forcing companies to allow employees to be able to work from home is ridiculous, companies should be able to decide themselves- some jobs are absolutely more effectively done from an office!

 

[Barham's tash]

London finance worker here - consolidated office space last Feb and moved into a big space near Broadgate Circle but not enough room for us all so we do a 3 office/2 WFH rotation. I let my team get away with murder and realistically only insist on 2 days rather than mandated 3. The big cheeses can swivel like pigs on a honeymoon and pony up for more space if they want us/them all in all of the time.

However, in a month I move overseas where WFH isn't a thing so will be back to 5 days in the office. Going to be surreal.

 

[Audax]

I'm over 90% WFH with my employer. There's an expectation that they see us in the office "at least once a month" but it's not a hard and fast rule. Generally they encourage it by having at least one day a month that's designed around encouraging us into the office, under the expectation that productivity will be low that day but that there are other benefits around the face-to-face time. That's not going to change any time soon - we've invested heavily in making sure we have the tools to be able to work collaboratively while being remote and we've found that if LT back it then remote working works.

My wife's employer has been full WFH since covid as well, then they started the year by trying to wave through a new 60% in-office mandate. The staff rebelled. Been helping my wife with doing a little research to build the counter-argument, as one of the senior team let slip late last year that they wanted 60% because "evidence says it's better for productivity". Which is a load of old bollocks - there's more and more research now that says the opposite. Hybrid (or even full WFH) a) generally improves productivity, b) improves staff retention, c) reduces the number of mistakes being made, and more. Multiple research studies now saying that if you let your staff work from home they'll give you back some of the time they gain from not commuting.

There's a similar shift starting to happen now towards 4 day working weeks - again, there's companies that are seeing better productivity, happier staff, etc. My employer is pretty flexible - I do slightly longer days Mon-Thurs and then a short day on Fri (finishing around 3pm).

 

[luge]

I see both sides of the debate but there has to be a reason for the stance on either side.

A place where I am working at the moment forces people to largely be in full time. However, their set up is not functional for what they make (TV and Films). As a freelance team, their stuff isn't up to scratch so we have done alot remote.

I do see the benefit of people being in together - especially for problem solving, morale etc - and i totally get that businesses have to utilise their offices.

WFH is a useful tool to recruit talented people who may not be able to come into an office. A young mother who's recently returned from maternity leave. Someone with an ailment, someone who is autistic and can't handle commuting etc etc. All of these people have skills that can be used.

On the contrary, there are definitely people who take the piss and don't do enough. You should generally be able to see this in output though.

A hybrid approach seems to be most sensible. Life happens. If you have good employees going through some stuff, you are enabling them to give more to you. I very much respect a client last year who changed my scope of work when i contracted glandular fever - and even though they pay less than many other places - I will happily go work for them again - and do more for them than contracted - because they had my back when i was in a very tricky spot (one income for a family of four).

I also now have childcare issues, and have kids who are unable to attend school so i couldn't work somewhere full time. Most people seem fine with this.

 

[Chicken Run]

Yeah I try to get out for a decent walk at lunch. Plus the frequent trips up and down the stairs to replenish my tea.

Good Too many wfh types taking the piss and heading out to the shops, gym and Amazon returns across the day creating heavy traffic all day long now.

 

[dsr-burnley]

I look forward to the carnage on the trains if we ever do all revert back to 5 days a week in the offices. We won’t. The world has changed.

Train drivers working from home as well?

 

[beorhthelm]

trouble with this discussion is that it get's dominated by those that see benefits from WFH, see it works for them. very little heard from those that quietly skive off, long lunch breaks, walking the dog in the afternoon, watch a boxset, play some golf etc. some say it's more productve at home, then we hear complaints when people contact government and company services that are manned by WFH staff. maybe it's productive for those that are inclinded to be productive, and not for others?

 

[goldstoneseagull]

trouble with this discussion is that it get's dominated by those that see benefits from WFH, see it works for them. very little heard from those that quietly skive off, long lunch breaks, walking the dog in the afternoon, watch a boxset, play some golf etc. some say it's more productve at home, then we hear complaints when people contact government and company services that are manned by WFH staff. maybe it's productive for those that are inclinded to be productive, and not for others?

If you are in a job where output is not monitored then are you really doing a job. Effective line management means, anyone wfh will have their output monitored in the same way as in the office. In other words, there may be quiet periods, there may be very busy periods. If it is quiet in the office, is it better they spend their time browsing or is it better they are able to use their free time productively.

WFH probably is more inclined to those who are already productive but by the same token people who are lazy af in the office, will do nothing at home lol.

 

[timbha]

If you are in a job where output is not monitored then are you really doing a job. Effective line management means, anyone wfh will have their output monitored in the same way as in the office. In other words, there may be quiet periods, there may be very busy periods. If it is quiet in the office, is it better they spend their time browsing or is it better they are able to use their free time productively.

WFH probably is more inclined to those who are already productive but by the same token people who are lazy af in the office, will do nothing at home lol.

Probably correct, however there are more non work related distractions at home like cutting the grass, picking up the kids, collecting deliveries, nipping out for a quick haircut, etc …….. then taking a break for lunch!!

 

[goldstoneseagull]

Probably correct, however there are more non work related distractions at home like cutting the grass, picking up the kids, collecting deliveries, nipping out for a quick haircut, etc …….. then taking a break for lunch!!

Lol but that’s what I mean re productivity being monitored. Whilst wfh is more flexible, I couldn’t get away with doing all that stuff but then it might be an exception where my time is billable so that is day to day or month to month obvious accountability.

I feel that if you can do all of those things and do your job then they should probably be giving you more work!

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I work 4-5 days a week from home. When my company had a lot more employees I worked 5 days a week from the office. Forcing companies to allow employees to be able to work from home is ridiculous, companies should be able to decide themselves- some jobs are absolutely more effectively done from an office!

Company I used to work for spent 6 months looking into WFH v being in the office for certain departments and it was proven that office work was better for the business by a large margin.

So they called people back to the office for more days

Some of the complaints HR received included it was unfair as it would cost more in child care as they would not be there to look after the kid, pet care, wouldn't have time to go to gym during the day etc etc

Just proved the company was right to call people back

 

[Surrey Phil]

Company I used to work for spent 6 months looking into WFH v being in the office for certain departments and it was proven that office work was better for the business by a large margin.

So they called people back to the office for more days

Some of the complaints HR received included it was unfair as it would cost more in child care as they would not be there to look after the kid, pet care, wouldn't have time to go to gym during the day etc etc

Just proved the company was right to call people back

I like this. I ran my own business for 18 years but sold up in 2021. Prior to Covid, all staff worked from the office and the teamwork, business ethos and communication amongst staff was excellent. After Covid, we moved to hybrid and whilst some staff were good & productive, other were not and as well as attitudes, teamwork & communication suffered. I'm glad I got out and sold up!

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I like this. I ran my own business for 18 years but sold up in 2021. Prior to Covid, all staff worked from the office and the teamwork, business ethos and communication amongst staff was excellent. After Covid, we moved to hybrid and whilst some staff were good & productive, other were not and as well as attitudes, teamwork & communication suffered. I'm glad I got out and sold up!

They have gone one step further in cancelling WFH for those not hitting targets/goals

I cant recall all of the tests they used, but basically it was LCR/revenue/tasks achieved/employee development and training and they were all higher in the office.

What also rang alarm bells was staff saying they hadn't seen certain managers/team members in months.

Some office jobs just can't be done from home without service/standards dropping

 

[beorhthelm]

If you are in a job where output is not monitored then are you really doing a job. Effective line management means, anyone wfh will have their output monitored in the same way as in the office. In other words, there may be quiet periods, there may be very busy periods. If it is quiet in the office, is it better they spend their time browsing or is it better they are able to use their free time productively.

WFH probably is more inclined to those who are already productive but by the same token people who are lazy af in the office, will do nothing at home lol.

i have a view much "monitoring" is generated by management to justify their existance. plenty of jobs have real outcomes of value that dont get measured and monitored to anything more than saying it's needed/in progress/done.

 

[Chicken Run]

i have a view much "monitoring" is generated by management to justify their existance. plenty of jobs have real outcomes of value that dont get measured and monitored to anything more than saying it's needed/in progress/done.

I have a view that ‘monitoring’ is expected by the ownership and executed by management

 

[Chicken Run]

Anyway it seems more and more companies are expecting their staff in place of work, for some reason many staff after only 4 years seem to see WFH as an entitlement and my guess will at some stage be weaned off this practice whilst the new generation of younger workers slowly evolve

 

[PeterT]

I’ve got used to working from home now and go into the office only when I really have to. Saves me about 3 hours a day in travel time, etc. Most of my team and those I need to contact most are not based in my office anyway, so Teams works just as well at home as it does in the office.

I’m at an age and stage where if they started enforcing/insisting too much around office working, I’d be tempted to leave. It wouldn’t be the only factor but would definitely be something to consider.

 

[FatSuperman]

New Govt. worker's rights will make it increasingly difficult for employers to mandate days employees
have to come in.

I suspect a lot of back-to-work (which is an insult) bollox is driven by the owners of
the office space and don't want to see their precious income from office rentals disappearing.

I am very confident that the reason we are being pushed back to the office is solely because WFH and flexible working makes the workers happy. And if they are happy about something, then it must be bad for the company. It must be because they aren't really working, and therefore we need to put a stop to it.

It is absolutely not about productivity - which is 99% of the time the reason they quote - because if that were true, they'd actually have some measure of productivity.

It's basically shit management. For me, the only sensible model for workers that don't physically need to be in a location, is to say to them "you are all adults, we pay you for this outcome, you should be wherever you need to be on a given day, to best deliver on that outcome". I have no doubt that people who work in teams are mostly more effective when they are co-located. But to enable that you should create an environment that makes it really easy for people to do so. For example having absolutely boatloads of meeting and collaboration space, having a nice physical environment, etc. Most companies have a shit office, totally open-plan and insist everyone comes in for 'productivity'. LOL idiots.


Rant ends.