Working From Home Megathread

c68zapdsm5i1ru

2lazytogetup wrote: »

There will be no office employees in future. Companies will just tender for projects or tasks. You might offer to do it forv200 euro based on it will take you a day.
Some lad in Asia with lower cost of living will do for 50euro.

Or you could get loads of tenders offering to do each for 50euros each and you farm them out to some guys in Asia and pay them 10 euros.

The nature of what people do isn't going to change, just where they do it. Most jobs need ongoing specific experience, teamwork etc. Not everyone works on one off projects.

thomas 123

Sultan of Bling wrote: »

End of promotion prospects if you do though, certainly where i work anyway.

I don't know about that, I would question the decision making ability of someone who would rather come to the office over working from home.(Assuming both candidates are in the same role)

Any employee against it must be off their rocker. Think of it this way, life is short, you get an hour back in the morning, an hour back in the evening due to not having to commute, and that's if you have a short commute.

- Eat what you want, no more rushing out to the spar and gobbling it as fast as you can.

- Use your own jacks, self explanatory benefits.

- Home for your packages.

- Can make the most out of short winter evenings (Depending on hours).

- Don't have to deal with people you don't like regularly.

- More time for your own side projects and hobbies.

- See your kids more and/or keep an eye on them depending on their age and your job.

Sultan of Bling

thomas 123 wrote:

I don't know about that, I would question the decision making ability of someone who rather came to the office over working from home.(Assuming both candidates are in the same role)

thomas 123 wrote:

Any employee against it must be off their rocker. Think of it this way, life is short, you get an hour back in the morning, an hour back in the evening due to not having to commute, and that's if you have a short commute.

They will always have an answer. It would be a very hard thing to prove imo.

I love wfh myself. Have been doing it since March. Would I like to do it permanently? I'm not sure.

There are plenty of people I work with, if I never saw them again, I would be really happy but there's also people I really miss too.

I'm lucky that my office is within walking distance from my home so I don't have to worry about commutes.

I wouldn't go as far as to say employees are off their rocker not to want wfh. It all depends on the individual and their circumstances.

I just want to be given the choice and dont want to hear crap like this person is coming back so you should too.

Unfortunately my boss appears anti wfh. Every month since March my boss has been saying she's hoping to have us back in the "next few weeks". This month is the first time she's acknowledged we won't be back for a few months.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

If wfh becomes a norm it will be difficult for more inflexible organisations to attract or retain good and experienced staff. That factor might force change even from the most dinosaur managers.

adocholiday

I live in South Wicklow and pre-pandemic I was commuting to Dundrum every day by car. My employer was flexible with time so I was thankfully able to avoid the rush hour on the M11 and my commute generally was an hour each way. I didn't mind it to be honest I was in a routine and it worked for me but I also knew no different.

Since Leo gave his speech from the US last March I've been 100% working from home and the benefits are clear to see. I have better sleep, I eat a healthy breakfast and go for a short walk before work. No stressful commute, no worrying about traffic jams. I sit at my desk and do my work like I always have. If I have some downtime during the day, which I think most people do now and then, instead of pretending to work I get some light chores done. At the end of the day I turn off and I'm already home. Again no stress, maybe get another stroll in, eat dinner at a reasonable hour and have the evening to myself. Before I was getting home at 7, evening already gone and would have to do chores etc.

WFH has had such an immensely positive impact on my life and my productivity at work hasn't dropped a jot. In fact I'd say I'm more productive because I have less distractions. My health has improved, both physical and mental, I'm spending much less than I was because I'm not getting coffees and lunch out, and I have so much more time to myself to indulge my hobbies etc.

I think given the choice I'd like to work 2 days in the office and 3 from home in the long term, but I will never go back to 5 days per week in the office if I can help it.

stefanovich

adocholiday wrote: »

2 days in the office and 3 from home in the long term.

Sounds like a healthy balance.

I wonder what this'll do to the price of office space :pac:

BrianD3

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Wait till both public and private employers are faced with paying rent to employees for the space that they are currently getting for free. They might think again about those savings.

Employer: Hi Andrew, we are implementing WFH for employees who want it. Most of our employees want it.

Andrew: I don't want it. I won't do it unless you pay me rent.

Employer: We won't pay you rent but you are free to come in to the office. By the way, the office is being downsized and moving from South Dublin to Leitrim. Your WFH situation can be reviewed after 10 years when the lease for the Leitrim office is up or earlier if both parties agree. In the meantime, enjoy your commute!

Something similar but not as extreme can happen in the public sector given that IIRC staff are can only be moved a certain distance.

AndrewJRenko

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

They will still save a fortune. Leasing city centre buildings, and then paying insurance, heating, electricity, cleaners and security staff plus ongoing maintenance costs big bucks.

Leasing space in expensive residential developments, paying for heating and lighting, and equipment that they can't actually see and supervise ain't going to be cheap.

So I'm sure that good employers will be open to sharing these savings with their employees, right?

AndrewJRenko

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

If wfh becomes a norm it will be difficult for more inflexible organisations to attract or retain good and experienced staff. That factor might force change even from the most dinosaur managers.

If it becomes a norm, it will be difficult for ALL organisations to attract and retain staff who don't have a spare room with space for a desk, or who aren't safe from abusive family at home, or who can't afford to pay extra heating bills.

BrianD3 wrote: »

Employer: Hi Andrew, we are implementing WFH for employees who want it. Most of our employees want it.

Andrew: I don't want it. I won't do it unless you pay me rent.

Employer: We won't pay you rent but you are free to come in to the office. By the way, the office is being downsized and moving from South Dublin to Leitrim. Your WFH situation can be reviewed after 10 years when the lease for the Leitrim office is up or earlier if both parties agree. In the meantime, enjoy your commute!

Something similar but not as extreme can happen in the public sector given that IIRC staff are can only be moved a certain distance.

All employers, public and private, are limited in law as to how far they can move employees. Unionised employees should be making absolutely sure that;
1) WFH continues as a serious option for those who want or need it
2) Any savings from WFH are shared with the employee.

Smart employees in non-unionised environments should do the same. Why would you give free space in your home to any business?

plodder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

2) Any savings from WFH are shared with the employee.

Exactly. For some people it will come down to a choice of - do I keep my heating on for an extra 8 hours, or do I go to the office where the company pays for the heating?

The challenge then is how to actually exploit the saving potential. It could mean (for large organisations) everyone on the same team WFH the same days and hot desking when they go to the office, sharing the desks with other teams.

For smaller orgs, maybe they can do without office space completely in which case it's clear that paying something towards employee light, heating etc is required.

An Ri rua

2lazytogetup wrote: »

There will be no office employees in future. Companies will just tender for projects or tasks. You might offer to do it forv200 euro based on it will take you a day.
Some lad in Asia with lower cost of living will do for 50euro.

Or you could get loads of tenders offering to do each for 50euros each and you farm them out to some guys in Asia and pay them 10 euros.

We're both OT but you obviously haven't read any stellar instruction manuals on Asian-made products recently. There won't be any flow of such work to Asia until they can write like an Irish person or UK etc. You might tolerate it it in an assembly guide but you won't tolerate it in marketing bumf.

Improbable risk.

Coding, programming, yes. But so much room for miscommunication. And yes, I know. Have sourced coding in my time.

timeToLive

An Ri rua wrote: »

Coding, programming, yes. But so much room for miscommunication. And yes, I know. Have sourced coding in my time.

This has been said for about 2 decades now :pac:

ThunbergsAreGo

timeToLive wrote: »

This has been said for about 2 decades now :pac:

But still correct

Dyr

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Smart employees in non-unionised environments should do the same. Why would you give free space in your home to any business?

LOL one of the things I've noticed in recent comms from our union is that they seem to be petrified of work from home becoming a thing, no workplace, less scope for a union to pull in members subs to piss against the wall on socialist crusades

My most important resource is time, I can't make more of it. If not spending 15 to 20 hours of my week commuting means I pay for heating my home then I'm fine with that. It's going to be less than I spend on transport, lunches and work clothes.

1966

Are there any large companies who still don’t facilitate working from home, for office/admin staff ?

GazzaL

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

Surely it will also be illegal to discriminate against those who work from home. If an employee or union can demonstrate that a disproportionate number of promotions are going to those who attend the office every day, an organisation would have a case to answer.

It will be illegal to discriminate but very difficult to prove. People who work from home will be at a disadvantage compared to those who work from the office and meet and build relationships with others in their company. You can't beat face-to-face time.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

GazzaL wrote: »

It will be illegal to discriminate but very difficult to prove. People who work from home will be at a disadvantage compared to those who work from the office and meet and build relationships with others in their company. You can't beat face-to-face time.

Most people will probably opt for a blend between home and office which should solve that problem.

I see Tony Holohan is appealing to employers to let staff work from home at the moment. Awful that he's forced to do that abs a sign of how controlling some employers and managers are.

Sultan of Bling

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote:

I see Tony Holohan is appealing to employers to let staff work from home at the moment. Awful that he's forced to do that abs a sign of how controlling some employers and managers are.

This should be called out patucularly in the public sector.

The government can't be preaching to wfh when some managers in the civil service are trying to get people back in the office.

beauf

1966 wrote: »

Are there any large companies who still don’t facilitate working from home, for office/admin staff ?

In our place it was done by the discretion of each manager. Some allowed it, some didn't. Some allowed it with flexi, some didn't. As a result when flexi was withdrawn during Covid, some people felt it more than others. Though in truth its a privilege than can be withdrawn as suits the business requirements.

Made it difficult to recruit and retain people including contractors as many look for it these days.

Underground

The longer WFH has gone on the more I've come to get used to it. It's not ideal but the office environment people are yearning for (and miss myself) is simply not coming back.

My employer is implementing a desk booking system for the eventual office return, which sounds a bit dystopian and I think will just encourage people to not bother and continue WFH.

One bad habit I've developed is not being able to get out of bed till 8.50am. I'm a divil for it now.

tom1ie

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

If it becomes a norm, it will be difficult for ALL organisations to attract and retain staff who don't have a spare room with space for a desk, or who aren't safe from abusive family at home, or who can't afford to pay extra heating bills.



All employers, public and private, are limited in law as to how far they can move employees. Unionised employees should be making absolutely sure that;
1) WFH continues as a serious option for those who want or need it
2) Any savings from WFH are shared with the employee.

Smart employees in non-unionised environments should do the same. Why would you give free space in your home to any business?

Because it might suit you better to work this way as opposed to sitting in a car commuting.

AndrewJRenko

Bambi wrote: »

LOL one of the things I've noticed in recent comms from our union is that they seem to be petrified of work from home becoming a thing, no workplace, less scope for a union to pull in members subs to piss against the wall on socialist crusades

My most important resource is time, I can't make more of it. If not spending 15 to 20 hours of my week commuting means I pay for heating my home then I'm fine with that. It's going to be less than I spend on transport, lunches and work clothes.

You're being taken for a ride. Your employer never cared about how long your commute was or what you spend on transport, lunches and work clothes in the past. They didn't give you an increase every time bus fares or petrol prices went up or when commute times increased. They were your issues to deal with.

But now suddenly, employers are happy to take the savings on transport, lunches and work clothes into account when negotiating with employees.

Your employer should be paying for heating and lighting in your workspace. Your employer should also be paying for your workspace.

If you let your employer away with taking all the savings from a WFH environment, you're a fool.

tom1ie wrote: »

Because it might suit you better to work this way as opposed to sitting in a car commuting.

It's not an either/or choice. You should be able to negotiate a WFH arrangement while your employer still pays for renting, heating and lighting your workspace.

Don't get taken for a ride.

An Ri rua

Underground wrote: »

The longer WFH has gone on the more I've come to get used to it. It's not ideal but the office environment people are yearning for (and miss myself) is simply not coming back.

My employer is implementing a desk booking system for the eventual office return, which sounds a bit dystopian and I think will just encourage people to not bother and continue WFH.

One bad habit I've developed is not being able to get out of bed till 8.50am. I'm a divil for it now.

10 minute walk! Home office must be at the end of a fierce long garden!! Now don't be boasting square feet and say kitchen...

GazzaL

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You're being taken for a ride. Your employer never cared about how long your commute was or what you spend on transport, lunches and work clothes in the past. They didn't give you an increase every time bus fares or petrol prices went up or when commute times increased. They were your issues to deal with.

But now suddenly, employers are happy to take the savings on transport, lunches and work clothes into account when negotiating with employees.

Your employer should be paying for heating and lighting in your workspace. Your employer should also be paying for your workspace.

If you let your employer away with taking all the savings from a WFH environment, you're a fool.



It's not an either/or choice. You should be able to negotiate a WFH arrangement while your employer still pays for renting, heating and lighting your workspace.

Don't get taken for a ride.

Painful reading that. Calm down m8.

a_squirrelman

GazzaL wrote: »

Painful reading that. Calm down m8.

Agreed, these types will ruin it for the rest of us.

AndrewJRenko

a_squirrelman wrote: »

Agreed, these types will ruin it for the rest of us.

"These types" are not your enemy. Quite the reverse.

a_squirrelman

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

"These types" are not your enemy. Quite the reverse.

Many of us are happy with all the benefits from working from home. If it ends up that some of my colleagues start demanding 'rent' from the company I would expect that (after first laughing at them) the boss would cancel it across the board.

It takes a small number of trouble makers to ruin things for the majority.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

a_squirrelman wrote: »

Many of us are happy with all the benefits from working from home. If it ends up that some of my colleagues start demanding 'rent' from the company I would expect that (after first laughing at them) the boss would cancel it across the board.

It takes a small number of trouble makers to ruin things for the majority.

I agree. An awful lot of people feel the benefits of wfh far outweigh any disadvantages. There will still be lots of opportunities for office working for those who wish to do so. But a significant majority of workers have indicated that they would like the option to work full or part time at home in future. I really hope this is respected and not undermined by a minority of disruptive begrudgers.

H8GHOTI

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

...I see Tony Holohan is appealing to employers to let staff work from home at the moment. Awful that he's forced to do that abs a sign of how controlling some employers and managers are.

Sultan of Bling wrote: »

This should be called out patucularly in the public sector.

The government can't be preaching to wfh when some managers in the civil service are trying to get people back in the office.

Ya f*** all enforcement it seems & at the same time people are being fined €100 for walking on a beach >5km from home!

Obviously people need to work & employees that are being forced into workplaces shouldn’t be fined but there should be some enforcement on the employer for WFH.

JoChervil

GazzaL wrote: »

It will be illegal to discriminate but very difficult to prove. People who work from home will be at a disadvantage compared to those who work from the office and meet and build relationships with others in their company. You can't beat face-to-face time.

Or face-to-back time. Some people can only advance through office politics, while back stabbing through email leaves a trace...