Working From Home Megathread

Antares35

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A work colleague of mine has recently bought a house in their home county for the very reasons you give. A big factor was also that they could afford a very nice 4-bed house down home, but nothing even close to it in Dublin. They didn't want to live in Dublin forever, anyway.

I asked if they was concerned that they may not be allowed to work from home full time after the pandemic and they simply shrugged and said, "if I'm not allowed WFH at least 4 days a week, I'll move to a job where I can".

This is a younger person, under 30, college grad and now a couple of years work experience under their belt. They'd have no problem finding another job.

Employers who don't move with the times now, will lose good staff like these.

We are exactly the same. We recently got approval and it's so nice being able to look in the places we want and not be tied to Dublin. Even though I was born and reared here, I've no desire to shackle myself to a 30 year mortgage of half a million so I can live somewhere here. I've already had the conversation with my boss and there's a commitment to a more flexible approach, more than likely just board meetings etc on site, and perhaps meetings with external stakeholders too, but aside from that, there's no need to physically be there.

OH is WFH until August at the earliest. If his employer insists on everyone back in, he will be moving too. He actually found a job he wants which is completely remote but unfortunately can't move to a probation scenario until we draw down.

I'm Dublin through and through, but even I've been having a few sneaky looks on DAFT at what the equity I have in my Dublin home could buy me outright, within a reasonable commute.

helimachoptor

Had a standing desk in my last company, HR were kind enough to let me retrieve it over the weekend, nice surprise

c68zapdsm5i1ru

kippy wrote: »

I've gotten the impression from the various posts that I've seen form you since last March. I doubt, I am the only one who has gotten this impression.

I don't think it's gonna be widespread - like now, there are certain jobs that are not WFH friendly, there are certain companies who will not continue with it when the pandemic is over for one way or another, and it very obviously does not suit certain people, their mental state or their living conditions. But there is no doubt that there will be more flexibility in some workplaces that have managed to "work" their way through the last year.
Granted some organisations need to firm up policies, procedures and supports in place for workers and this will have to happen but one has to admit there are can be some serious benefits for the employee, the employer and the country if more of it were to happen.

I've had this impression too. Their comment implying that people who were eager to work from home were usually the office dossers spoke volumes about their mindset on this whole issue.

Antares35

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

I've had this impression too. Their comment implying that people who were eager to work from home were usually the office dossers spoke volumes about their mindset on this whole issue.

Indeed. In fact I believe the term working was even placed in quotation marks, implying that work was not actually taking place!

There was also some suggestion that dignity at work obligations would be breached by these people, who cannot be monitored.

ThunbergsAreGo

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm Dublin through and through, but even I've been having a few sneaky looks on DAFT at what the equity I have in my Dublin home could buy me outright, within a reasonable commute.

Absolutely, if my parents werent in Dublin I would be seriously considering the move

plodder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Well well well, the mask slips. It took a while but we've finally gotten here. So it's not a question of the rights or wrongs of the points I'm making. It's that I shouldn't be 'making noise' for sake of the majority of co-workers? I should be taking a musculo-skeletal injury for the team, apparently?

Classy stuff there.

But also misguided. I've no interest in restricting WFH from others. The scenario that an employer would restrict WFH for all simply because some expect the employer to provide a safe working environment is stretching credulity. If you're working for that kind of spiteful employer, then WFH policy is the least of your worries.


Interesting to see some employers being clear on their requirements. The Shopify one looks a bit like box-ticking, just to eliminate any excuses about 'me broadband is down'.

Setting out a specific broadband spec is a bit more complex than these jobs seem to think. An upload/download speed is a snapshot in time. It can vary considerably over the course of the day or the week, depending on what else is happening in the house or even in the neighbourhood.

Also, broadband speeds achieved over an uncontrolled local device can be very different to those achieved on a corporate device, with all the network checks and traffic inspection that goes on with corporate networks. I've regularly seen an order of magnitude difference in speeds - single figures upload/download on my corporate device and double figures on my personal devices.

So are eBay and Apple talking about speeds on a personal device or corporate network? And what if the speed varies across the day?

I took a look at the Ebay ad. They seem to be requiring Eir FTTH which they install for you, but will accept a much lower speed for the probation period from your own broadband.

Eir FTTH is the gold standard and more than adequate for any job 24x7, but is not universally available.

Interesting that they require you to have a separate space with a door and you supply your own (ergonomic) desk and chair. I'm in two minds about that last bit as that could prove quite expensive for the employee, but in practical terms it would be a long term investment. Especially in other hybrid cases, for companies that provide a desk and chair in the office for you it's hardly reasonable to expect them to provide the same in your home as well.

ELM327

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just to be clear, I don't want to you post a live feed. I want you to think about the reasons why you won't post a live feed here, and apply those same reasons to an employer/employee scenario.



Several people have claimed this, that's right. But no-one has actually given any reason as to why this is not a very real security risk in a WFH environment.



There is some truth in this. As explained above, some of the issues that I'm raising don't actually apply to me. They apply to other people.

Unlike most on this thread, I'm able to think beyond my own personal situation to understand how issues will affect other people.

I'm a senior data analyst in credit risk (fintech).
Me and my team had at will WFH before covid, yet we handle PII on a daily basis as well as sensitive company info about profitability, margin, forecasts etc. The most "non public" of all info.


How do we work from home yet remain PCI compliant? (and without the nonsense you and mrs bumble come out with about live streams)

Thats me

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

5%-10% of people couldn't heat their homes from 2012 to 2017. In the 21st century.
Table 3.5a from the CSO.



Fuel poverty is a thing, and WFH makes it worse.

Hi Andrew, the CSO said to me:

"An analysis by socio-demographic characteristics showed that those most at risk of poverty in 2019 were those individuals who were not at work due to illness or disability (37.5%) and individuals who were unemployed (35.4%). "


Are you not at work or unemployed?

How you think WFH would affect that part of "those individuals who were not at work due to illness or disability" who not at work because they cannot be in the office, but could work from home?

Do you think WFH decrease chances of eployment of these individuals who were unemployed because they have no employment options in reach?

In this thread i see example of Galway man got employed in Dublin, and by the way of Eir Broadband reaching rural areas it will be more and more people getting opportunity to obtain remote job.

I think WFH should decrease poverty and therefore let more people to have warm and safe environment... If there will be enough business willing to keep all of us busy..

Backstreet Moyes

Positives for me

I can get an extra hour in bed each morning

I can drop the kid to school without rushing to get to the office

No need to worry about getting home after work

No needless meetings giving me less time to actually do work

No needless conversations with people who love gossiping all day giving me less time to do work

Spend more time with my kid

Use lunch breaks to do some cleaning or ironing, especially ironing used to hate having a load of it every Sunday

Saving money on clothes and shoes

Comfort I can just sit and work away in a tracksuit

Sundays I love having a few drinks watching the football, I would stop around 6 if i was in the office the next day because of a smell of drink, but now I can relax and stay up till 9 or 10, some may say this is a bad thing

Negatives

I have some very good friends in the office

Everytime I go to the toilet I have to pass the fridge

Overall the positives far outweigh the negatives and I was against working from home at the start but I would hate to go back full time to the office

In regards people slacking off work as my manager said I dont care if every time I pass you are on your phone or talking, I will care if you are missing the deadlines that I set for you

Maybe I am lucky that my manager cares about the important thing in getting the work done and not watching what I do during the day

But again I have seen managers who are looking to see what you are doing and standing over you a few times a day for no reason

In regards taking photos of your screen I never even thought of that being an issue, I often take pictures if I see something funny and send it on if one of the lads is on holidays

I might have been naive in doing that but the thought of somebody thinking I could be recording confidential info never came into my head because why would I even do that

Sam Hain

I know an employee with a large recruitment agency, who said they have been inundated with requests a from large to medium sized companies enquiring around outsourcing WFH roles in certain positions to countries with competitive wage structures. Its tentatively called Break down the walls or something similiar. They reckon when the job becomes divorced from the location, the job is literally up in the air. They include themselves in that. But is it possible for a company to overhaul certain departements in such a manner, is it even legal to do so?

ednwireland

Nuts102 wrote: »

No needless meetings giving me less time to actually do work

Where do you work my calendars full of needless teams meetings !

Bigfatmichael

Sam Hain wrote: »

I know an employee with a large recruitment agency, who said they have been inundated with requests a from large to medium sized companies enquiring around outsourcing WFH roles in certain positions to countries with competitive wage structures. Its tentatively called Break down the walls or something similiar. They reckon when the job becomes divorced from the location, the job is literally up in the air. They include themselves in that. But is it possible for a company to overhaul certain departements in such a manner, is it even legal to do so?

They wouldn't be going through recruitment agencies if they wanted to do this.

kippy

Sam Hain wrote: »

I know an employee with a large recruitment agency, who said they have been inundated with requests a from large to medium sized companies enquiring around outsourcing WFH roles in certain positions to countries with competitive wage structures. Its tentatively called Break down the walls or something similiar. They reckon when the job becomes divorced from the location, the job is literally up in the air. They include themselves in that. But is it possible for a company to overhaul certain departements in such a manner, is it even legal to do so?

Lots of large organisations have done this for decades....nothing new there, they don't need go through agencies for it either
Smaller organisations simply couldn't do it for legal and taxation reasons more than anything else.

Thats me

ednwireland wrote: »

Where do you work my calendars full of needless teams meetings !

Probably he is doing real work instead of wasting time on meetings

is_that_so

Survey of WFH feelings, by Chadwicks of all people, a lot of unhappy bunnies!


http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0215/1197216-most-workers-unhappy-with-home-office-set-up/

ednwireland

Thats me wrote: »

Probably he is doing real work instead of wasting time on meetings

damn there goes my self esteem

ThunbergsAreGo

is_that_so wrote: »

Survey of WFH feelings, by Chadwicks of all people, a lot of unhappy bunnies!


http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0215/1197216-most-workers-unhappy-with-home-office-set-up/

Unhappy with the set up, and not having the right equipment. Not necessarily WFH itself

Also is a spare room not a dedicated workspace if it has been "taken over". Almost like they want people to get renovating :cool::cool:

Antares35

is_that_so wrote: »

Survey of WFH feelings, by Chadwicks of all people, a lot of unhappy bunnies!


http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0215/1197216-most-workers-unhappy-with-home-office-set-up/

Wow a survey of 928 people

is_that_so

Antares35 wrote: »

Wow a survey of 928 people

Most surveys are in and around the 1K mark! I've heard a good bit of anecdotal stuff on what's in it, especially for those in shared accommodation.

ThunbergsAreGo

is_that_so wrote: »

Most surveys are in and around the 1K mark! I've heard a good bit of anecdotal stuff on what's in it, especially for those in shared accommodation.

Yeah that is a decent sample size. WFH is far from ideal for many people, especially as you say those sharing with others.

Having the work desk in your bedroom would really depress me

average_runner

ednwireland wrote: »

Where do you work my calendars full of needless teams meetings !

If you are going to needless meetings there is a few problems:
- The person organising the meeting has no clue on who to invite
- The people attending are inefficient and can't recognise when they should attend and not attend
- Company has no policy for calling meetings.




Simple Rule:
If the person calling the meeting cant tell you why you should attend, then don't go

Antares35

average_runner wrote: »

If you are going to needless meetings there is a few problems:
- The person organising the meeting has no clue on who to invite
- The people attending are inefficient and can't recognise when they should attend and not attend
- Company has no policy for calling meetings.




Simple Rule:
If the person calling the meeting cant tell you why you should attend, then don't go

Something I've noticed too since WFH started is there's less place for the bull****ters to hide. There's someone I work with (loosely) and she can never give a straight answer, everything has to be convoluted either because she doesn't know what she's talking about and is trying to fudge it, or she wants to make something simple sound very complicated so she looks more important or busy.

So often now if I email her asking to clarify X or provide Y, I'll get a response, "em, can I call you about this instead" and the call is guaranteed to be a thirty minute ordeal which culminates in me having to ask someone else anyway. Don't know why she can't just email back and say "I don't know". I tend to avoid her now wherever possible because she just confuses things. In the office, there was no escape!

c68zapdsm5i1ru

is_that_so wrote: »

Survey of WFH feelings, by Chadwicks of all people, a lot of unhappy bunnies!


http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0215/1197216-most-workers-unhappy-with-home-office-set-up/

Exactly, Chadwicks who have absolutely no reason to carry out such a survey without having a vested interest. I would be very suspicious of that survey, particularly as their results seem to contradict the outcome of many other surveys. I would be particularly interested to know if participants genuinely represented a cross selection of those wfh.

Bigfatmichael

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

Exactly, Chadwicks who have absolutely no reason to carry out such a survey without having a vested interest. I would be very suspicious of that survey, particularly as their results seem to contradict the outcome of many other surveys. I would be particularly interested to know if participants genuinely represented a cross selection of those wfh.

Good Marketing from them. I say the 923 people who took the poll are looking for anywhere to vent.

Unhappy with your home office setup, come to Chadwick's!!!

zerosugarbuzz

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

Exactly, Chadwicks who have absolutely no reason to carry out such a survey without having a vested interest. I would be very suspicious of that survey, particularly as their results seem to contradict the outcome of many other surveys. I would be particularly interested to know if participants genuinely represented a cross selection of those wfh.

There are a lot of very fair points in the survey. A proper desk or at least an office chair and a monitor for laptops should be provided, and often are not. This may well lead to hip and neck problems for these workers. Also the very idea of trying to work from home with young children around must be close to impossible. I like it myself but I am well equipped.

zerosugarbuzz

Bigfatmichael wrote: »

Good Marketing from them. I say the 923 people who took the poll are looking for anywhere to vent.

Unhappy with your home office setup, come to Chadwick's!!!

Very good marketing.

kippy

zerosugarbuzz wrote: »

There are a lot of very fair points in the survey. A proper desk or at least an office chair and a monitor for laptops should be provided, and often are not. This may well lead to hip and neck problems for these workers. Also the very idea of trying to work from home with young children around must be close to impossible. I like it myself but I am well equipped.

This really goes without saying.
In an "ideal" world, with WFH having policies in place etc the organisation SHOULD provide equipment, including chair and desk - docking station and/or PC/Monitor of adequate site.
However in "my" world, I have provided myself with a decent desk and chair as well as a big monitor that I can use for WFH for pretty much any organisation I work for as opposed to moving kit in and out of the house whem moving jobs etc (not that I move jobs much anymore)
However, the employer SHOULD have to provide the proper equipment should it be required.
WFH with kids around (depending on ages, who else is there etc) isn't really feasible and the current situation isn't really reflective of an ideal WFH environment.
Again, there are many people that want to WFH some portion of the week and that can WFH, there are many more that would like to WFH a portion of the week longterm but their home environment does not suit for one reason or another - these people will probably modify their home environment to do this soon, if they haven't already. If they cannot for one reason or another their options are limited.
There are others who don't ever want to WFH for one reason or another, thats fine too!

I don't mind it, I am well set up for it, but I'd prefer to be in the work environment a few days a week due to the nature of what I do and the ability to talk to people at work etc etc.

Antares35

Antares35 wrote: »

Something I've noticed too since WFH started is there's less place for the bull****ters to hide.

100% This.

Dyr

Deleted User wrote: »

100% This.

****ing A. Lot of micro managers and office politicans looking for something to do these days

Our place is full of people who seem to now spend all their time running corporate social resposibility inititiatives, staff wellbeing events and such fluff

Go get a job in Butlins