[News] Staff who work from home after pandemic 'should pay more tax'

[Westdene Seagull]

Railways are done for if people don't return to travelling, commuting especially, currently costing around £700 million a month to run empty trains round and that isn't sustainable.

If the railways go that's a hell of a lot of people out of work which may damage the economy and the infrastructure network.

Agreed but it somewhat highlights that the railways should be funded by the government as essential infrastructure - as a vast majority have been calling for for a long time.

 

[Weststander]

Agreed but it somewhat highlights that the railways should be funded by the government as essential infrastructure - as a vast majority have been calling for for a long time.

In the post CV19 UK, I would guess that all railways will be nationalised, in all but name. They already took £7b a year in net public funding, with far more than that on big infrastructure schemes.

With greatly reduced passenger numbers now, it must unviable for Govia, First Group etc.

 

[Weststander]

I don't know about PWC et al but working from home 5 days a week most definitely isn't for me. I've had enough Zoom and Teams meetings to last me a lifetime. All I do is spend all day on "calls" that involve some technically inept pen pusher leaving the mute button off while they loudly slurp their coffee or bring their dog into the room.

In a lifetime first I agree with Albion Dan. The sooner I can start going back into a proper office and seeing my clients face to face the better.

 

[mothy]

I have been working from home flat out (& so has the mrs) throughout this whole thing. Today I popped down the seafront to go for a rare walk to get some fresh air. It was heaving like it was Christmas day. I hope everyones enjoying their furlough $

 

[Justice]

Really? I live in London and have many professional friends, acquaintances, and interact with literary hundreds of agency and supplier staff on our projects and I don't know one single person who's been afforded that luxury. I even work in digital which would be the most likely industry to be implementing that stuff.

Well we’ve wired up a few home offices a number of sheds turned into offices all said the same, guess London is a big place.

 

[dazzer6666]

Due to Covid my last day in the office was sometime in Feb. No big deal on the face of it for me really - I used to WFH 2 days a week anyway and have done for years, connectivity is excellent and my direct reports were spread far and wide so didn’t really matter where I was as long as I was contactable.

As much as the flexibility of full time homeworking was good, trying to ‘get things done’ remotely 100% of the time was difficult. No ‘water-cooler’ chats, much less of the ‘have you got 15 mins’ type discussions that would happen if we were in the office and obviously no direct facetime with my team outside of the UK (most of it) due to the travel restrictions. Things got done, but it wasn’t as effective as it’s in the informal chats that a large % of things get sorted.

The homeworking days also extended. There’s no ‘natural break’ as a commute would enforce, and it was so easy to book a call at 6.30am with Asia and a call at 8pm with Vancouver or Mexico on the same day. If I was commuting that wouldn’t have happened. I could take a break during the day (which I did) but found days drifted with no real structure.

I saved a bloody fortune though. £125 a week on rail fares, probably £15 minimum a day on food and coffees (none of which is going back into the City economy now) and goodness knows how much when I was travelling further afield (1-2 times per month typically) in hotels, bars, airports etc.

The elephant in the room for me - and I have a ton of former colleagues that will want to kill me for saying it - is in the city environment (in financial services anyway) is that there are vast numbers of people stealing a living. Being able to work from home makes that an even bigger issue. As long as they rock up to meetings, and keep on top of their emails, they’ll keep getting their salary and bonus. Not being allowed into the office allows piss-taking on a colossal scale if people are so inclined.

 

[sully]

I will never go back to the train. Driving costs the same, is more convenient and comfortable.

It rather depends where the office is and if you have to pay for parking. Also you have to factor in the real cost of driving rather than just fuel. Also take into account that you have to be alert for the driving whereas I use the train for catching up on news and social media or just relaxing. I can’t do that in the car on the M25!

I’m certainly not missing the commuting, but I do miss the social side of office working, where I can catch up with people I’m not directly working with currently.

I’ve been working two days a week at home for the last couple of years, so the transition was easy for me. I’d probably do less office days in future, though, once we’re back to “normal”.

 

[Justice]

Well I hope you all get back to the office soon the commercial side of my business has all but evaporated since lockdown.

 

[clapham_gull]

I've only been more then 2 miles from my house once since March. Been on a train twice.

I do "get out" though. Luckily I have 3 commons to choose, but I do miss the sea.

 

[BBassic]

It's an interesting idea we do live under a capitalist system that oftern rewards those who have relatively comfortable jobs such as within an office with a kitchen nice toilets carpet under feet air conditioning heating all within a constant location, while others who don't have any of those things are often not rewarded enough.

Take the current pandemic the person working from home not perched on the end of a bed but in a space that has a desk and office chair can control their environment and will be paid the same as somone who goes into the office but without the travel costs and risks associated mixing with others but with the added costs of heating lighting etc.

Now take those who don't have either of these options maybe the cleaner working in the takeaway that the office workers visit lunchtime or the staff working in the corner shop or maybe housekeeping in hospitals and nursing homes on minimum wage should the more fortunate not pay a bit more?

"From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" (German: Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen) is a slogan popularised by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program. The principle refers to free access to and distribution of goods, capital and services.

Absolutely they should but possibly that should start with the obscenely rich rather than me sitting in the corner of my living room with a laptop and a webcam.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Perhaps no party politics is unrealistic but there is something seriously wrong with the system when the SNP has 47 MPs
and the Liberal democrats have 11 with a larger percentage of the national vote.

As for local representatives what do most MPs do when push comes to shove?

Vote the PARTY line .

Yes, you're right. But many (including me) feel that we should be able to vote directly for a person. The 'fairest' system for the PR supporters is a national list. If you do it locally then it is effective local FPTP, or a local mess with maybe 3 elected per constitiency. As for a national coalition government, I still feel that I would never get the government I want because I'm a member of a party and I want them to win. Moreover nobody is a member of he 'coalition' party.

 

[Simster]

Yes, you're right. But many (including me) feel that we should be able to vote directly for a person. The 'fairest' system for the PR supporters is a national list. If you do it locally then it is effective local FPTP, or a local mess with maybe 3 elected per constitiency. As for a national coalition government, I still feel that I would never get the government I want because I'm a member of a party and I want them to win. Moreover nobody is a member of he 'coalition' party.

But we've been voting directly for a person for decades and as far I'm concerned, the benefit of having one point of contact is MASSIVELY outweighed by the fact that most people's vote counts for f**k all - elections are decided in a handful of constituencies.

Let's look at the evidence. Boris Johnson was the MP for Uxbridge and promised to fight tooth and nail against Heathrow's 5th runway. He got elected. His party's government gave the runway the go ahead. Did he vote against it or do you think he made a feeble excuse to be out of the country so that could miss the vote? Now obviously Johnson is an untrustworthy lying toad, but a few years later and enough idiots saw fit to elect him last year to give him an absurd majority - completely out of proportion with the share of the popular vote - so that he can make a huge roaring success of Brexit.

That is the reality of FPTP in action. It doesn't work.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

But we've been voting directly for a person for decades and as far I'm concerned, the benefit of having one point of contact is MASSIVELY outweighed by the fact that most people's vote counts for f**k all - elections are decided in a handful of constituencies.

Let's look at the evidence. Boris Johnson was the MP for Uxbridge and promised to fight tooth and nail against Heathrow's 5th runway. He got elected. His party's government gave the runway the go ahead. Did he vote against it or do you think he made a feeble excuse to be out of the country so that could miss the vote? Now obviously Johnson is an untrustworthy lying toad, but a few years later and enough idiots saw fit to elect him last year to give him an absurd majority - completely out of proportion with the share of the popular vote - so that he can make a huge roaring success of Brexit.

That is the reality of FPTP in action. It doesn't work.

I understand your arguments but to me they are analogous to 'VAR doesn't work' (also true to an externt). Best to revise and upgrade, not bin, shirley?

With sensible people like the Germans maybe PR is good. Not sure it fits in with the 'taking back control' mentality here. And, although I share your views of Boris, he did havea lot of support and probably still does. On what basis is it right to bin him off in favour of, for example, a Corbyn-SNP coalition (which may have been possible last election if we had PR)?

Anyway....I suspect we shall never know. And, if I'm honest, I'm not especially bothered. Either way. Better quality politicians, yes. Better quality electorate might help, too.

 

[Simster]

I understand your arguments but to me they are analogous to 'VAR doesn't work' (also true to an externt). Best to revise and upgrade, not bin, shirley?

Yes, but a revision and upgrade to the dated FPTP system that clearly only serves to promote two party politics is probably to change to fairer voting system. FPTP is clearly not fair.

 

[Machiavelli]

I understand your arguments but to me they are analogous to 'VAR doesn't work' (also true to an externt). Best to revise and upgrade, not bin, shirley?

With sensible people like the Germans maybe PR is good. Not sure it fits in with the 'taking back control' mentality here. And, although I share your views of Boris, he did havea lot of support and probably still does. On what basis is it right to bin him off in favour of, for example, a Corbyn-SNP coalition (which may have been possible last election if we had PR)?

Anyway....I suspect we shall never know. And, if I'm honest, I'm not especially bothered. Either way. Better quality politicians, yes. Better quality electorate might help, too.

FPTP does at least have the benefit of delivering strong and stable government ... oh

 

[beorhthelm]

I understand your arguments but to me they are analogous to 'VAR doesn't work' (also true to an externt). Best to revise and upgrade, not bin, shirley?

With sensible people like the Germans maybe PR is good. Not sure it fits in with the 'taking back control' mentality here. And, although I share your views of Boris, he did havea lot of support and probably still does. On what basis is it right to bin him off in favour of, for example, a Corbyn-SNP coalition (which may have been possible last election if we had PR)?

under full PR, SNP would be relegated to 4th party run-off with Greens and Brexit, their share of national vote is small. a Labour-Liberal coalition would still be a minority government. would need to be Labour-Liberal-Green-SNP to have reached 50%.

but also under full PR voting patterns would be certain to change, probably split Labour and Conservatives into their factions. there would be no certainty we'd always have a coalition of the left as seems to be assumed by proponents of PR. imagine having actual Brexit party members in government, and you cant even vote them out because of party lists?