Mike Hughes
pfm Member
Think you’ll find the employee is already “at work”.
Flexible and home working and custom and practice
- Thread starter foxwelljsly
- Start date
Darren L
Egalitarian
Not a problem I have working in construction, always site based, though my work is all private houses nowadays, it'd be quite difficult to lay stone cobbles or build stone steps from home. If I don't go to work I don't get paid, it's a no show, no doe policy, lol.
My partner works from a PC , international markets, but does like to fly over to England regularly to work in either the Warwick or London offices, keeps her in touch face to face with her colleagues. Mind you, she's been working from home for a few years before Covid, she's good at her job, works hard and meets the deadlines. Most of her colleagues work in a similar fashion though they did insist recently for those in the London office to come into the office on a regular basis, one day a week perhaps.
My partner works from a PC , international markets, but does like to fly over to England regularly to work in either the Warwick or London offices, keeps her in touch face to face with her colleagues. Mind you, she's been working from home for a few years before Covid, she's good at her job, works hard and meets the deadlines. Most of her colleagues work in a similar fashion though they did insist recently for those in the London office to come into the office on a regular basis, one day a week perhaps.
Looks to me like they're ''at home''.
gez
pfm Member
It should be noted however that the majority of employers (from what I see in job adverts - my role was always a traditional office based role pre pandemic btw) have acknowledged that a lot of people just won't take 100% in the office roles any more. Whilst I'm sure some are only offering hybrid/remote because they've closed or downsized their office space, that can't account for the huge majority (as I said well over 90%) of jobs being posted as hybrid or remote working. Employers simply would not be doing this unless a) they truly acknowledge that hybrid/remote does not impact productivity or b) they are being forced to because otherwise they're just not going to attract the talent they need. Given that I don't believe most employers have their employees best interests at heart, I strongly favour b) as being the driving motivation in the vast majority of cases.
gez
pfm Member
On the flip side, I want to go back to hybrid working. I've essentially been workning from home, or othersise unemployed alone at home since the start of the pandemic, and I am going somewhat mad due to the lack of regular human interaction.
gez
pfm Member
Seriously? The world didn't colapse during the pandemic, no significant company went bust. Why? because people are perfectly capable of being 100% productive in their living room working remotely for all but a small number of office based jobs. It's called technology. Unless you literally have to press a button on a machine etc that's in your employers "place of work" to do your job, you can do it perfectly effectively at home. 90% of people just sit in front of a computer to do their job. That computer can be located anywhere with zero impact. Even meetings can be held virtually. This has actually been true for nearly 20 years, it's only been backward mentalities by small minded senior managers etc that have prevented it happening in the past. Many studies have shown that actually people are more productive when they work from home, because the boudary between work and home becomes blurred and a lot of people work longer hours than they did when actually physically in the office.
Furthermore, 99% of employers don't have the first clue as to how many hours per day their employees are actively engaged in productive activities, because they don't actively monitor all their employees computers etc. They can only go by how much work has been completed over time. Most humans don't spend more than about 3-4 hours out of their 8 hour day actually actively engaged in a task. The rest of their time, they're in a meeting, chatting to a colleague, getting a coffee, taking a piss in the toilet etc. or just sitting there daydreaming/looking out the window or on their personal phone etc.
Yes some people will slack when working from home, but there have always been a percentage of employees that are slackers, where they work doesn't change that.
paulfromcamden
Baffled
Exactly. You can slack off at home or you can slack off in the office (er, so I've heard...).
If you're a line manager and you feel you need to have people in the office where you can see them because can't tell whether or not your staff are being productive working from home that just indicates to me that you don't know enough about the work they're doing.
darrenyeats
pfm Member
People are different. Some people like to work from home and are very productive there, and others prefer, and work better in, the office. I don't see why people should get annoyed about it either way.
As it happens my immediate team (who I work with day to day) are based in three countries (two continents). When I'm in the office most meetings are virtual anyway, and this is actually less convenient in the office due to noise. Also my set up and monitor at home is far better than anything in the office.
Other people might be sitting on a kitchen chair on their laptop, with kids running around, and so home is not a comfortable place where they can focus. Or they have a problem with getting distracted. On the few occasions when I need to do something non-work related, I use my mobi as if I was in the office just as a discipline, but generally I'm at work 100% for my allotted hours, and I do more hours at home than when in the office (saving a 3+ hours commute). It is truly a win-win for me. I accept in some cases things are worse for the person and/or the employer. Just not in my case.
As it happens my immediate team (who I work with day to day) are based in three countries (two continents). When I'm in the office most meetings are virtual anyway, and this is actually less convenient in the office due to noise. Also my set up and monitor at home is far better than anything in the office.
Other people might be sitting on a kitchen chair on their laptop, with kids running around, and so home is not a comfortable place where they can focus. Or they have a problem with getting distracted. On the few occasions when I need to do something non-work related, I use my mobi as if I was in the office just as a discipline, but generally I'm at work 100% for my allotted hours, and I do more hours at home than when in the office (saving a 3+ hours commute). It is truly a win-win for me. I accept in some cases things are worse for the person and/or the employer. Just not in my case.
paulfromcamden
Baffled
Over lockdown I noticed it was the younger members of staff who were desperate to get back in the office. When I saw them on Teams meetings and realised that they were working from their bedrooms in house shares I understood why.
I understand why I have to be in the office for a lot of what I do but I frequently find I'm spending two hours of my day riding across London in the rain to sit in an office and work from my laptop all day doing stuff I could just as easily be doing at home...
CTank
pfm Member
I won’t even interview for any jobs that are five days a week in the office. This may change when my youngest goes to secondary school. But until then, it’s a non-negotiable.
My current employer is fairly flexible, which is surprising as we are an office landlord. But they understand that it’s become a requirement for many employees.
My current employer is fairly flexible, which is surprising as we are an office landlord. But they understand that it’s become a requirement for many employees.
robs
should know how this works by no
Assuming there is an employment contract, it should clearly state place of work. If that states the office address then that is that. I don't think there would be any case fighting what is in the contract, irrespective of historical practice.
The legal requirement to consider flexible working is just that - employee can apply, employer considers if suitable, decides. Entirely at employer's discretion.
Our contracts all state office. During covid people worked at home. A year or so ago it was stipulated 'loosely' that you should be in the office 50% of the time. More recently, must be 3 days a week. It feels to me that the vast majority don't object and actually prefer it - the social and face to face is a big plus. Those that are a long distance away and hired during covid obviously have a different view...and several have moved on, quite rightly - one should do what is right for you.
Personally it is ideal - 2 days at home to focus and get stuff done, 3 days in the office for meetings, one to ones and some laffs which you simply don't get on Teams. Probably depends/varies on the work environment to some extent.
If you are sitting at the kitchen table with kids running around, or on your bed when working at home, then I'd imagine you'd much prefer to be in the office unless a long/expensive commute.
paulfromcamden
Baffled
Ironically perhaps I've seen plenty of middle managers (the same ones who were screaming for everyone to get back in the office) who have built entire careers on looking busy but not actually doing very much.
I once worked for a medium size investment bank who let go great swathes of managers during a downturn. Pretty much zero impact to productivity except there were a lot less meetings.
Darren L
Egalitarian
I'm sure that's very true, it's well known the only thing that comes out of meetings is empty cups, empty plates and people.
I've always worked 'on the tools', even when in a supervisory role I work with the men, I'd never ask anyone to do anything I wouldn't do myself.
It doesn't matter if you're an engineer, plant operator, tradesman or labourer on any of the jobs or sites I've worked on or in later years run (on the ground) there's no skiving, one thing working men hate is carrying dead weight, everyone pulls their weight or it's bye bye.
Luckily I've only ever had to sack one person, a Manc on a job in Liverpool, he showed a very poor attitude to his work and whinging and complaining but the final straw was he came into the canteen, kicked someone's bag across the floor and was shouting '**** this ****ing shit' etc, because it rained and he got wet, I had 20 odd men working away from home and as their foreman was responsible for their well-being to a certain extent, I didn't need anyone displaying this type of disruptive negativity, that was his last day.
Mike Hughes
pfm Member
Where I work (publuc sector) the pressure is such that when in the office most needed at least an hour time out each day. Much harder working from home and I’ve now had 4 years of being contracted to do just over 7 hours a day but in practise doing 8 or 9 hours that are non-stop, relentless and exhausting and it’s still imposdible to get through the volumes. 30 minutes for lunch is the only break and I’m one of the few who insists on that. No other breaks at all.
It’s not an attitude. it’s a psychological necessity in many roles. I’ve sat in social work teams where the offloading about one case might be an hour and once you’ve sat through it and heard what they’ve had to deal with you won’t hear anyone arguing about the need to sit down; have a brew and offload. The macho attitudes in some professions are hilarious. They couldn’t and wouldn’t last 5 minutes in a front line public facing public sector role cos they’d bottle it up and think stopping wasn’t working as opposed to being the difference between good mental and physical health and the exact opposite.
Last edited:
Cav
pfm Member
Blimey, when was this? 1950s?
No worries and I do get that, I wasn't denigrating anyone that wants to not solely work from home, just in the case of the OP who seems to have been doing the job perfectly adequately at home I can't get my head round the mentality of the employer... there's no logic/forward thinking etc.
Bananahead
pfm Member
For me, it is the interaction that is important. I think that management teams understand this. Anyone who has been through agile training will have learned that the most effective communication method is face-to-face conversations. I don't see how new people can be trained and integrated effectively if everyone works remotely.
I was lucky enough to be able to work flexibly before Covid. I found the mix of part office, part home, and part wherever a good balance but if my employer had mandated 5-days a week in the office, I would have had to comply. I suspect, even with precedent set by Covid, the same outcome awaits the OP.