Working from home dies a death - remote switches to hybrid... lots of people in trouble because of unworkable commutes

[spyguy]

11 minutes ago, cbathpc said:

Come to the office for 50k per year, or get a remote only job for 30k per year.

 

Welcome to capitalism mother******er

Sadly for companies, capital is cheap and easily resourced.

Its the peoples with skills that are  the bottle neck.

[spyguy]

3 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Pretty much Tyrannosaur.

Ive never done that in ~30 years of work.

When I started, I was the only person under 25. Everyone else was raring to go home - bar a couple of 50yo divorced blokes- and theres no way I was going to the pub with them.

Since then, when Ive been employed, few if any people worked i nth same area and everyone drove, so drinking is a nono.

 

 

Congrats to the HPC aggressive ad engine. After entering 'Tyrannosaur', my browser is now flooded with Jurassic World ads.

Lets see - Naked ladies in lingerie.

 

[dugsbody]

7 hours ago, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

Fair enough bud. We just operate our tech company differently I guess. No one is forced to attend the office or unnecessary Zoom meetings. We judge everyone fairly on ability and performance. 

That's the correct way. Some want to go in, some don't.

From what I'm hearing of the new place (job acquired through networking with ex colleagues), they really mean it with remote working. Some people are going to their office now, those who want to. But others are working full time remote, many not even in the UK.

I don't see why you'd force people to go in but each company must make its own choices, as I will make mine.

[hurlerontheditch]

11 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

That's the correct way. Some want to go in, some don't.

From what I'm hearing of the new place (job acquired through networking with ex colleagues), they really mean it with remote working. Some people are going to their office now, those who want to. But others are working full time remote, many not even in the UK.

I don't see why you'd force people to go in but each company must make its own choices, as I will make mine.

are there not tax implications for the company if they do this?

[dugsbody]

9 minutes ago, hurlerontheditch said:

are there not tax implications for the company if they do this?

Presumably they are doing it above board. I'm sure it's not unique to have workers in several countries.

[iamnumerate]

2 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

Presumably they are doing it above board. I'm sure it's not unique to have workers in several countries.

I heard this program 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000v2qd

 

And there are tax problems if your employee decides to live in another country. Or even spend too long abroad - it is complicated though.

 

Edited June 16, 2021 by iamnumerate

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

14 hours ago, Pmax2020 said:

It’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that within the last year there has been a mass migration of office workers to well beyond a reasonable commute isn’t it?!

The company I work for (owned by Jacobs) are firmly opposed to home working on a full-time basis - they won’t let any of us do it even though many roles can wholly be done remotely.

We’ve been told we can work a maximum of 2 days from home. They canvased opinion then reported their findings creatively to support their predictable position.   

Certainly in my sector there has been... Central London - financial services... emptied out (and with the financial resources to quickly relocation, which many have done. 

[wsn03]

12 hours ago, satsuma said:

 Middle managers are your Director and VP types, when you first meet them you assume they are genius but after 25 year in the business you know for a fact they are bullshiters, I get offers of some dismal Director role on a regular basis.  Load of crap.  They spend their time watching their back in case someone with actual ability gets noticed.  The problem these slime balls face is that we are 18 months into remote working and businesses have done fine, at some point the penny will drop that people don’t need someone to supervise them, it’s an outdated concept.  So yes, they are desperate to get people back so they can be seen to have a use.  I know one of these middle managers that bawled out a grey haired veteran as he had a stack of papers on one side of his desk.  The old geezer calmly explained that the forms come in, he deals with them and the stack reappears each day.  What a bunch of ******ing muppets.   

Couldn't have summed this up any better  -the reason I'm a contractor. I think you missed out a lack of friends and the need to massage the power ego.

I had a colleague who went into management, loved being in charge of everything, permanently on cloud 9. 6 months later he got sick of it and was last seen contracting again

[iamnumerate]

1 hour ago, dugsbody said:

That's the correct way. Some want to go in, some don't.

From what I'm hearing of the new place (job acquired through networking with ex colleagues), they really mean it with remote working. Some people are going to their office now, those who want to. But others are working full time remote, many not even in the UK.

I don't see why you'd force people to go in but each company must make its own choices, as I will make mine.

Managers often don't trust junior staff to work.  I was once in a meeting and someone said "We need to check that the clerks are working. They won't proactively look for work." (This was when they were in the office before Covid).

[wsn03]

2 hours ago, Roman Roady said:

They say that people dont leave jobs, they leave managers.

I have been WFH all through COVID...not been into the office once. So personally I can see how a project can easily be delivered via WFH but that has been a previously established team completing a project. I am not so sure about joining a new team who have never met each other face to face; that would be a real management challenge IMPO. Perhaps this will be the filter that sorts the management wheat from the chaff.

I joined the project with a remit to fix the broken relationships - 1 week in not allowed to travel to see our "partners" I was sent home because of Covid. It made life very difficult, almost impossible. I think it cost us a good 2 to 3 months, but eventually the relationship was fixed and everything was delivered. I don't thinks its practical on a new project, but in our case we have pulled it off, we now don't need to go into the office, especially as our main "partners" are in other countries now anyway. Us being in the office would only be to satisfy any clock watching managers needing to feel they own something - hence we'll quit collectively if they even suggest it. 

[wsn03]

2 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

Managers often don't trust junior staff to work.  I was once in a meeting and someone said "We need to check that the clerks are working. They won't proactively look for work." (This was when they were in the office before Covid).

I think this is the case, and unfortunately with some justification. I have seen so many cases of people "needing" to be managed. My work is delivery based as a freelance, so never need to be managed, I have to deliver to timescales. But the managers I deal with put up with some tireless stuff, a lot of staff completely take the mick. I can't believe the number of people sat at home on furlough pay refusing to even pick up the phone for a catch up. Equally there is a huge ego problem with unqualified junior and middle managers who feel the need to micro manage people for no good reason, like they are on some sort of a power trip. There are so many variables in the workplace.

Paint shop I know lose staff every week - stuff gets nicked, people go off sick when the sun's out, people quit after 2 weeks or just stop turning up - their expansion plans will make life not worth living, I just couldn't deal with the hassle

[Riedquat]

7 minutes ago, wsn03 said:

I think this is the case, and unfortunately with some justification. I have seen so many cases of people "needing" to be managed.

Someone not proactively looking for work I'd argue isn't the job of someone who's not a manager. To expect those staff to go out looking for work is asking them to do their managers' jobs for them. I've steadfastly resisted any attempt at being pushed upwards because I find the entire idea of going out looking for work, planning it, sorting out the budgets etc. an unpleasant, extremely tedious faff; if there's some mug who wants to do that I'm happy to let them so I can get on with the interesting technical stuff. It is my job to let my manager know where I am in it (not on a micro level), so he should have something else waiting when I'm done.

[hotblack42]

Another binary thread!  "You have to play office politics to get on" vs "Middle managers are all idiots, and you have to skill up and be ready to move to get on".

Most of us old hands know life's not that simple.  Sometimes office politics is easy because you happen to genuinely like the people who can give you a leg up.  Sometimes upskilling is easy because you find a hot new technology or business process really interesting.  Most firms have their share of underperformers and daft traditions, but like people they all have their own personalities.  I've worked for 12 so can speak from reasonable experience.

The approach that has worked for me was to be skilled enough to be a bit of a pain to replace and friendly, but not big mates, with everyone - Execs, line mgt., colleagues, experts you rely on for support and advice on what to do and what not to do, especially the prickly ones that other people avoid 😉, security and post staff.  And I learned the hard ward to keep toxic people who 'warn' you about other people when you join a team, at arm's length.

Regarding being forced back to the office, what moronic hill to choose to die on.  Executives' first responsibility is the maintenance of their organisation as a going concern.  Alienating the workforce by imposing their will in a soft employment market is reckless and they should face a disciplinary.  If there are good reasons for a decision then that's a different matter.  We are implementing software which will lead to a c. 30% reduction in IT staff and 10% in back office.  Nobody is arguing, it is clearly in the long term interests of the Firm.

I'm really surprised how many posters seem to be still working for conservative organisations with a culture of 5 days in the office with no consideration of the effect of overnight stays or unpleasant, expensive commutes.  The board and HR should have staff welfare permanently in mind and if they don't, again that's a dereliction of duty.

We had people working 4 day weeks with 1 day WFH before the Pandemic.  Hybrid 2/2, 3/1, 3/2, 2/3 arrangements will just be an adjustment.  1/3 and 1/4 would hit resistance, but they will relent if it means losing key staff if the history of doling out immediate one off 10-25% base salary increases when they (credibly) threaten to leave is anything to go by.

 

[Locke]

17 hours ago, reddog said:

wear a mask at all times

So funny, because the bloody things don't actually reduce the spread of CCPV.

[iamnumerate]

44 minutes ago, wsn03 said:

Equally there is a huge ego problem with unqualified junior and middle managers who feel the need to micro manage people for no good reason, like they are on some sort of a power trip. There are so many variables in the workplace.

 

Very true - that is partly because the are not doing anything useful so have to justify their existence.

33 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Someone not proactively looking for work I'd argue isn't the job of someone who's not a manager. To expect those staff to go out looking for work is asking them to do their managers' jobs for them. I've steadfastly resisted any attempt at being pushed upwards because I find the entire idea of going out looking for work, planning it, sorting out the budgets etc. an unpleasant, extremely tedious faff; if there's some mug who wants to do that I'm happy to let them so I can get on with the interesting technical stuff. It is my job to let my manager know where I am in it (not on a micro level), so he should have something else waiting when I'm done.

If you are getting paid it is not unreasonable to expect you to look for work if you don't have any.  Saying that I used to that in a job and my colleagues didn't - and I got made redundant - and they didn't!

(I got a better paid job and my colleagues got given lots of work).

[Roman Roady]

58 minutes ago, wsn03 said:

- hence we'll quit collectively if they even suggest it. 

ive heard that one before and all i can say is dont be the first.

[Flopsy]

17 hours ago, winkie said:

If an employer wants someone to work so many days per week in a certain place they often will pay more to cover for the rent for two or three nights a week away from home......there are many people with a spare bedroom who would be happy to rent it out for an extra income tax free two or three weekdays a week.....win,win.

My other half has been asked to sign a new contract to say that he is a home worker primarily but if required to attend a company office or a client's site he will not be re-embursed for travel expenses.

They had all been asigned an official 'company office' years ago and expected to travel to that when needed. The company now say that they are selling some of their offices and staff will be re-assigned. No one knows where these are.

The English staff are leaving to take up office based roles with other companies if they don't like this arrangement or don't want to work from home. Lots of attrition in some teams so far.

 

Edited June 16, 2021 by Flopsy

[dugsbody]

6 minutes ago, Flopsy said:

My other half has been asked to sign a new contract to say that he is a home worker primarily but if required to attend a company office or a client's site he will not be re-embursed for travel expenses.

They had all been asigned an official 'company office' years ago and expected to travel to that when needed. The company now say that they are selling some of their offices and staff will be re-assigned. No one knows where these are.

The English staff are leaving to take up office based roles with other companies if they don't like this arrangement or don't want to work from home. Lots of attrition in some teams so far.

 

Well that's good then. The market will sort itself out. It seems that some companies have learned that remote working is good while others prefer bums on seats in the office. Employees can gravitate to whichever they prefer. Win/win.

[hotblack42]

2 minutes ago, Flopsy said:

if required to attend a company office or a client's site he will not be re-embursed for travel expenses.

Blatantly unfair T&C's of employment.  Getting staff to locations other than their home office is part of the cost of doing business.  I trust the the execs who came up with this will now pay for their own travel and accommodation😄

They would be savaged in a tribunal for charging company outlay to employees.

Sounds like a firm in a tailspin or race to the bottom.  Avoid/Leave.

[MancTom]

2 hours ago, hurlerontheditch said:

are there not tax implications for the company if they do this?

Yes. There are new issues due to brexit and for that reason my employer has banned employees from living in the EU (we were told now the company would have to set up a local office in every country that one employee lived in, so not worth the hassle anymore).

[wsn03]

49 minutes ago, Roman Roady said:

ive heard that one before and all i can say is dont be the first.

Thanks, good call - we've been working together for years so we fight battles together, its a good set up

[wsn03]

1 hour ago, Riedquat said:

Someone not proactively looking for work I'd argue isn't the job of someone who's not a manager. To expect those staff to go out looking for work is asking them to do their managers' jobs for them. I've steadfastly resisted any attempt at being pushed upwards because I find the entire idea of going out looking for work, planning it, sorting out the budgets etc. an unpleasant, extremely tedious faff; if there's some mug who wants to do that I'm happy to let them so I can get on with the interesting technical stuff. It is my job to let my manager know where I am in it (not on a micro level), so he should have something else waiting when I'm done.

Agree - I make it my job to let any manager know the score before they even think about picking up the phone. Only met 2 who couldn't get it, who thought they needed to micro-manage, and in both cases found a way to get rid of me when they saw I didn't play ball. It was just an ego / control thing. They need employees not contractors. Actually one thought contractors were employees, and decided to get rid because I went for a breakfast on Friday mornings for 10 minutes - only employees should be "allowed" to do that apparently - hilarious. 

It's no problem, in both cases I walked straight into another contract much to their obvious shock. The majority just tell me they're relieved, one less person to have to worry about when they give me a task to carry out, which works well both ways. I don't do clock watching or any of the other stuff, I just get the job done - I presume that's why people employ contractors (temporary skills gaps and all that)

Edited June 16, 2021 by wsn03

[Riedquat]

1 hour ago, iamnumerate said:

If you are getting paid it is not unreasonable to expect you to look for work if you don't have any.  Saying that I used to that in a job and my colleagues didn't - and I got made redundant - and they didn't!

I suppose it depends on what the work is; generally for me it'll be working on a project for quite a while (it's rare to get anything that takes less than a month), and "finding work" would involve going through the whole approval and getting budget etc.

[iamnumerate]

27 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

I suppose it depends on what the work is; generally for me it'll be working on a project for quite a while (it's rare to get anything that takes less than a month), and "finding work" would involve going through the whole approval and getting budget etc.

I am talking about office clerks who could easily find work - nothing like your type of work.

[Riedquat]

38 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

I am talking about office clerks who could easily find work - nothing like your type of work.

Fair enough, at that sort of level where it would require micro-managing to keep someone busy all day if they didn't that's reasonable.