Working From Home Megathread

Antares35

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Big tech companies are in Ireland only for the tax breaks, access to European language speakers without visa hassles, the chance to best-shore jobs needing English from the US to a cheaper location - and trips to Ireland for their execs.

As levels of English improve in Eastern Europe, and post-Covid travel is still curtailed, expect to see more jobs move there.


There really are very few jobs which cannot be offshored.

It isn't just about levels of English. That's quite a narrow view. It's about the relevance of one's education, experience, skillset etc. If it's all the same with you I won't hold my breath while my employer looks in Iceland or Mumbai for someone with extensive knowledge of the application of Health and Safety or employment legislation in Ireland. No more than I'd be of benefit to a company in either of those countries seeking same.

Quin_Dub

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Big tech companies are in Ireland only for the tax breaks, access to European language speakers without visa hassles, the chance to best-shore jobs needing English from the US to a cheaper location - and trips to Ireland for their execs.

As levels of English improve in Eastern Europe, and post-Covid travel is still curtailed, expect to see more jobs move there.


There really are very few jobs which cannot be offshored.

There is absolutely zero connection between WFH and Offshoring.

The existence (or lack thereof) of an appropriately skilled staff member in a lower cost location doesn't change because people are WFH.

If a company wants to Offshore , they'll do it - WFH is utterly irrelevant to the discuss.

Sheep Shagger

Quin_Dub wrote: »

There is absolutely zero connection between WFH and Offshoring.

The existence (or lack thereof) of an appropriately skilled staff member in a lower cost location doesn't change because people are WFH.

If a company wants to Offshore , they'll do it - WFH is utterly irrelevant to the discuss.

That's a big call to say the identification of WFH when it previously was thought not possible may not extend to offshoring

Every sector is different.

kippy

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

That's a big call to say the identification of WFH when it previously was thought not possible may not extend to offshoring

Every sector is different.

There is a big difference between WFH and offshoring though - a BIG difference.

ELM327

Quin_Dub wrote: »

There is absolutely zero connection between WFH and Offshoring.

The existence (or lack thereof) of an appropriately skilled staff member in a lower cost location doesn't change because people are WFH.

If a company wants to Offshore , they'll do it - WFH is utterly irrelevant to the discuss.

+1
They still have the same regulatory requirement, tax requirements etc to move to a lower cost country. WFH or non WFH.

Quin_Dub

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

That's a big call to say the identification of WFH when it previously was thought not possible may not extend to offshoring

Every sector is different.

What hypothetical type/size of company or sector are you thinking about when you picture a company deciding to Off-shore on the basis of a successful 2020 spent WFH ??

I would suggest that any company that did not already have WFH to some extent or other is not really a candidate for Office-job Off-shoring.

At the very least the subset of companies that had never had WFH previously and would also have roles and activities suitable outsourcing is an incredibly small group.

JDD

Vast majority of companies are going to have a hybrid office/home model, with perhaps a small number of employees per company (and perhaps a small number of companies) allowing full WFH with occasional attendance at the office - say for training days, team days, end of project stuff.

Even if you were very focussed on the bottom line, I think most managers would be reluctant to change from having, say, a team of 10 in Dublin who are in the office one day a week and are occasionally in for longer periods during very busy work periods to employing someone they have never met face-to-face, in another country with perhaps time differences and language differences, who will not be available to attend the office at any stage. Imagine trying to manage a team of 10 - two in Dublin, three in India, one in the States, two in Italy and one in Poland and do your own job as well. It would be a fecking disaster and it wouldn't take them long to figure that out. I wouldn't care if the salary cost went down by 30% or those people were experienced and well trained.

wes

Sheep Shagger wrote: »

Plenty of third party offshore operators hoovering up business (Infosys being a biggie). So big companies don't necessarily have to set up shop in India etc as such. Also means small companies can just buy what services they need from abroad without big set up costs.

Infosys has setup in Ireland :
https://www.infosysbpm.com/ireland/#:~:text=We%20operate%20across%205%20non,and%20positive%20work%2Dlife%20balance.&text=Infosys%20BPM%20Ireland%20is%20known,focus%20on%20the%20customer%20journey.

HCL has also setup in Ireland as well. The big Indian IT outsourcing firms are setting up in Ireland.

JDD

I work for a public sector organisation - quite large. We've been told we won't be back in the office before September. Return to the office will only be one day a week initially, and it will only occur when we are at Level 1. So if that doesn't happen in September, we won't be back.


They have come out with a very initial view on how we are going to work in the future, once everyone is vaccinated. They have suggested a hybrid model - they are yet to confirm whether that is 60% in the office or 60% at home. But it does mean that we will have to be in the office at least days a week, every week.

Some colleagues are very annoyed with this. They cannot see why staff cannot opt for a full WFH model - only attending the office when it is essential (busy periods, training days etc). One colleague in particular is quite vocal about this, and has made the good point that management have stated on a number of occasions over the past year that we have been working effectively from home and have achieved all of our targets.

I think she is being a little naïve about this. First, if you are one of only a small amount of colleagues who have opted to fully WFH, you run the risk of being forgotten about. Senior management, in my work anyway, will definitely be in 3 days a week, if not more. It doesn't matter how many emails you send, or how efficiently you are working, or how much effort your team goes to to make sure you are video called every time there is an impromtu meeting, if senior management never see you, never chat to you, never ask your opinion on something in passing, they'll just begin to forget about you. And that will seriously harm your promotion prospects.

In addition, if you are jumping up and down about not being included on certain calls or certain work projects because those decisions were taken in the office, that's only going to piss management off. There are always thankless dead end projects that have to done in every office - why not give them to the person fully WFH because then you won't have to put up with their whining because they won't be there anyway? Before you know it you'll be looking for a job elsewhere and management won't particularly care because they have no day to day interaction with you anyway.

kippy

JDD wrote: »

I work for a public sector organisation - quite large. We've been told we won't be back in the office before September. Return to the office will only be one day a week initially, and it will only occur when we are at Level 1. So if that doesn't happen in September, we won't be back.


They have come out with a very initial view on how we are going to work in the future, once everyone is vaccinated. They have suggested a hybrid model - they are yet to confirm whether that is 60% in the office or 60% at home. But it does mean that we will have to be in the office at least days a week, every week.

Some colleagues are very annoyed with this. They cannot see why staff cannot opt for a full WFH model - only attending the office when it is essential (busy periods, training days etc). One colleague in particular is quite vocal about this, and has made the good point that management have stated on a number of occasions over the past year that we have been working effectively from home and have achieved all of our targets.

I think she is being a little naïve about this. First, if you are one of only a small amount of colleagues who have opted to fully WFH, you run the risk of being forgotten about. Senior management, in my work anyway, will definitely be in 3 days a week, if not more. It doesn't matter how many emails you send, or how efficiently you are working, or how much effort your team goes to to make sure you are video called every time there is an impromtu meeting, if senior management never see you, never chat to you, never ask your opinion on something in passing, they'll just begin to forget about you. And that will seriously harm your promotion prospects.

In addition, if you are jumping up and down about not being included on certain calls or certain work projects because those decisions were taken in the office, that's only going to piss management off. There are always thankless dead end projects that have to done in every office - why not give them to the person fully WFH because then you won't have to put up with their whining because they won't be there anyway? Before you know it you'll be looking for a job elsewhere and management won't particularly care because they have no day to day interaction with you anyway.

This is the biggest single issue that is out of the hands of those that make the decision to WFH full time once things return to a "normal" environment.
Particularily for newer recruits.
The game still has to be played if you wish to progress within a company.

Quin_Dub

kippy wrote: »

This is the biggest single issue that is out of the hands of those that make the decision to WFH full time once things return to a "normal" environment.
Particularily for newer recruits.
The game still has to be played if you wish to progress within a company.

Agreed - How you work and how you communicate absolutely has to change when working from home.

It's not just - Do exactly the same except not in the office.

You have to alter how you interact with the people around you and above you - They are no longer seeing you around the office , you are no longer getting the corridor conversations , the chat at the coffee machine etc.

Those things matter in the context of promotion conversations or opportunities for other roles etc.

That visibility and exposure has to be replaced/replicated elsewhere - either through setting up recurring 1 to 1 meetings with key people (even if it's only once every few months) or through other informal channels like company charity events etc.

jrosen

JDD wrote: »

Vast majority of companies are going to have a hybrid office/home model, with perhaps a small number of employees per company (and perhaps a small number of companies) allowing full WFH with occasional attendance at the office - say for training days, team days, end of project stuff.

Even if you were very focussed on the bottom line, I think most managers would be reluctant to change from having, say, a team of 10 in Dublin who are in the office one day a week and are occasionally in for longer periods during very busy work periods to employing someone they have never met face-to-face, in another country with perhaps time differences and language differences, who will not be available to attend the office at any stage. Imagine trying to manage a team of 10 - two in Dublin, three in India, one in the States, two in Italy and one in Poland and do your own job as well. It would be a fecking disaster and it wouldn't take them long to figure that out. I wouldn't care if the salary cost went down by 30% or those people were experienced and well trained.

These decisions are typically made well above a manager. My husband currently has teams in Ireland, Lux, Poland, India, NYC, Toronto, and Boston. Apart from the time differences there isn't much issue and to date nothing that hasnt been able to be worked around. Poland are becoming less attractive due to caps in over time and the rise in salaries over the last 10 years so alot of the work done in poland is now being moved to India. They already have a presence in these cheaper locations so making a position redundant in a high cost location and moving it to a lower cost location isnt a huge leap for them. As I said already, up untill now much of the positions held in cheaper cost locations were entry level and junior associate roles.
Now I personally think money is well spent on experience and I wouldn't be supportive of moving senior roles for some of the reasons you mention. But his company are not the only ones where this is being considered.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

JDD wrote: »

I work for a public sector organisation - quite large. We've been told we won't be back in the office before September. Return to the office will only be one day a week initially, and it will only occur when we are at Level 1. So if that doesn't happen in September, we won't be back.


They have come out with a very initial view on how we are going to work in the future, once everyone is vaccinated. They have suggested a hybrid model - they are yet to confirm whether that is 60% in the office or 60% at home. But it does mean that we will have to be in the office at least days a week, every week.

Some colleagues are very annoyed with this. They cannot see why staff cannot opt for a full WFH model - only attending the office when it is essential (busy periods, training days etc). One colleague in particular is quite vocal about this, and has made the good point that management have stated on a number of occasions over the past year that we have been working effectively from home and have achieved all of our targets.

I think she is being a little naïve about this. First, if you are one of only a small amount of colleagues who have opted to fully WFH, you run the risk of being forgotten about. Senior management, in my work anyway, will definitely be in 3 days a week, if not more. It doesn't matter how many emails you send, or how efficiently you are working, or how much effort your team goes to to make sure you are video called every time there is an impromtu meeting, if senior management never see you, never chat to you, never ask your opinion on something in passing, they'll just begin to forget about you. And that will seriously harm your promotion prospects.

In addition, if you are jumping up and down about not being included on certain calls or certain work projects because those decisions were taken in the office, that's only going to piss management off. There are always thankless dead end projects that have to done in every office - why not give them to the person fully WFH because then you won't have to put up with their whining because they won't be there anyway? Before you know it you'll be looking for a job elsewhere and management won't particularly care because they have no day to day interaction with you anyway.

Sorry but it is bull**** to say that senior management will 'just forget you' if you're not around the place. If you're doing a goid job, they're speaking to you on the phone, seeing you at Skype meetingd, having you email them suggestions, obs on documents, ideas for going forward etc then any good senior manager will be very aware of your work and worth.

Antares35

Antares35 wrote: »

Much the same, though I'm slightly longer off the Luas. I was assaulted on it in broad daylight coming home from work one evening. Nobody was brought to task on it. There was a fair bit of anti-social behaviour, not to mention the increased exposure to general cold and flu never mind covid! Plus at least working from my kitchen I don't need to call my boss to tell him I'll be ninety minutes late for work because we've all been thrown off the Luas at black horse (again), buses are full and there's not a taxi to be found. The commute from the bedroom to the kitchen is arguably less fraught with such risk

I got a really bad flue about three years ago. My cousin was staying with me at the time and was almost giving out to me "How did you catch the flu?!?". I said Well I spend about 15 hours a week on the Luas. The penny dropped with him and he said, yeah, that would do it. If I am forced to regularly go back on the Luas for work, my face gaiter will be coming too.

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

Sorry but it is bull**** to say that senior management will 'just forget you' if you're not around the place. If you're doing a goid job, they're speaking to you on the phone, seeing you at Skype meetingd, having you email them suggestions, obs on documents, ideas for going forward etc then any good senior manager will be very aware of your work and worth.

My team mate, also working from home for a year was nominated employee of the month last month. So management havn't forgotten him. I also got a well done email from the CTO recently.

Quin_Dub

Deleted User wrote: »

My team mate, also working from home for a year was nominated employee of the month last month. So management havn't forgotten him. I also got a well done email from the CTO recently.

You won't be forgotten by your direct line manager , of course.

And in the current scenario when everyone is away from the office even less so.

However , when things return to the new normal with some people in the office 100% and other doing some or all of the time WFH , those working from home do lose a certain degree of visibility..

You don't get stopped and asked a question about something by another manager when they see you in the corridor etc.

It's all the little intangible "contact opportunities" that you miss out on that have the potential to lower your broader profile in the company.

Picture the scenario -

Every year your manager and their peers likely all sit in a room with their boss to discuss pay rises , bonus payouts and promotions.

You've been doing well and your manager put you forward for promotion , but you are competing with multiple others so to actually get it , you need a few of the other managers to agree with your boss and support your case.

Do all those other managers know you , know what you do and the skills that you bring?

Some will , some won't depending on how much you interact with them in your core tasks.

When you are all in the office , other people and managers will get a "feel" for you based on those small interactions that happen multiple times a day when you share a common work-space.

If you are 100% remote you miss out on those chances to make an impression - They have to be replaced so that you don't lose "visibility points" as it were.

It should be pointed out that what the majority of people have been doing for the last year is NOT normal WFH - With everyone out it's entirely different.

Having been remote for years , this last year is very different to the previous decade or more.

Managers and leaders are having more team meetings , more communication , more opportunities to engage with staff etc.

Most of that will not continue when the physical offices re-open.

If you plan to be majority WFH when a decent percentage of your wider team are majority onsite, you will have to make adjustments to compensate.

jrosen

Quin_Dub wrote: »

You won't be forgotten by your direct line manager , of course.

And in the current scenario when everyone is away from the office even less so.

However , when things return to the new normal with some people in the office 100% and other doing some or all of the time WFH , those working from home do lose a certain degree of visibility..

You don't get stopped and asked a question about something by another manager when they see you in the corridor etc.

It's all the little intangible "contact opportunities" that you miss out on that have the potential to lower your broader profile in the company.

Picture the scenario -

Every year your manager and their peers likely all sit in a room with their boss to discuss pay rises , bonus payouts and promotions.

You've been doing well and your manager put you forward for promotion , but you are competing with multiple others so to actually get it , you need a few of the other managers to agree with your boss and support your case.

Do all those other managers know you , know what you do and the skills that you bring?

Some will , some won't depending on how much you interact with them in your core tasks.

When you are all in the office , other people and managers will get a "feel" for you based on those small interactions that happen multiple times a day when you share a common work-space.

If you are 100% remote you miss out on those chances to make an impression - They have to be replaced so that you don't lose "visibility points" as it were.

It should be pointed out that what the majority of people have been doing for the last year is NOT normal WFH - With everyone out it's entirely different.

Having been remote for years , this last year is very different to the previous decade or more.

Managers and leaders are having more team meetings , more communication , more opportunities to engage with staff etc.

Most of that will not continue when the physical offices re-open.

If you plan to be majority WFH when a decent percentage of your wider team are majority onsite, you will have to make adjustments to compensate.

I would agree, anyone I know who worked from home pre covid made a point of going to the office weekly to ensure they had face time. Its were the networking happens. You want someone to go to bat for you when pay rises/bonuses and promotions are being spoken about. There is a value to being seen.

BrianD3

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

Sorry but it is bull**** to say that senior management will 'just forget you' if you're not around the place. If you're doing a goid job, they're speaking to you on the phone, seeing you at Skype meetingd, having you email them suggestions, obs on documents, ideas for going forward etc then any good senior manager will be very aware of your work and worth.

Good managers won't forget about you whereas a bad manager won't value your work no matter what you do. There are some awful managers in the PS - disengaged most of the time then suddenly start micromanaging on a whim. I am hearing a lot of anger from public servants in various organisations in relation to WFH.

Re: promotions, the organisations that have a presenteeism culture and are anti WFH are IME those where morale was already rock bottom with one reason being - lack of promotional opportunities.

Try to get inside the conscious and subconscious thoughts of a crap manager

• I'm not sure what the staff do
• They must be doing nothing when they're at home as that's how I'd behave.
• I'll get them back into the office at the first opportunity at least then I'll know they aren't off playing golf or in bed
• Once they're back I'm grand and can relax
• I won't know what they're doing but who cares about that. At least if my boss questions me I can point to the staff sitting at their desks. He doesn't know what I do, Jesus, this place is full of dossers and bad managers

c68zapdsm5i1ru

I really hope that attendance in the office doesn't become the new 'hanging around the office late' ie presenteeism becoming confused with productivity and game players making 'off on a half day' type comments to people who do a good job but also want a decent work life Balance.

Antares35

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

I really hope that attendance in the office doesn't become the new 'hanging around the office late' ie presenteeism becoming confused with productivity and game players making 'off on a half day' type comments to people who do a good job but also want a decent work life Balance.

I think a good manager will always have seen through the "putting in the hours for the sake of it" charade. I can see through it, and I'm not management. I would assume that the "show your face for a promotion" act would be along the same lines. Between lockdown and mat leave, it's over a year since I've physically been in the office. My first day back was nicely cushioned by a chat with my direct line who told me I'd been approved for an 18 percent payrise Not a water cooler in sight! Then again, he's a great boss. He's never been one to micro manage, has said several times he just wants results and how they are achieved is more or less my business etc.

I know the three hours saved that I'm not commuting each day really help me to be even more productive.

Sheesh, some of you have very poor management if being in front of their faces is what is required to get you promoted.

kippy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sheesh, some of you have very poor management if being in front of their faces is what is required to get you promoted.

I am generally pro WFH as an option but I do think it helps greatly to have face to face contact with senior people in the organisation when you are looking to make a good impression..not saying it can't be done.It is done all of the time in certain organisations but my own experience would be that it is difficult to do one hundred percent WFH.
Could be just me and my opinion, problem is if your manager is like me and their perceptions are like mine, this is going to be an issue. Whether it is right or wrong.

JTMan

Interesting FT article here (paywall) on the UK return to office plans.

- Half of managers in the UK want to be allowed to make coronavirus vaccinations mandatory for staff returning to work.
- Three-fifths of managers have already decided to make testing available for their employees when they are allowed to return to the office.
- Businesses can get free coronavirus workplace tests under a government scheme.

Good employers will insist on testing or ask for proof of vaccination before allowing return to the office.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

Deleted User wrote: »

I got a really bad flue about three years ago. My cousin was staying with me at the time and was almost giving out to me "How did you catch the flu?!?". I said Well I spend about 15 hours a week on the Luas. The penny dropped with him and he said, yeah, that would do it. If I am forced to regularly go back on the Luas for work, my face gaiter will be coming too.

Sick leave has gone way down in my workplace. I presume some of that is down to people not travelling on crowded public transport and sharing office space with several other people everyday. Another advantage for employers when considering ongoing wfh.

doc22

Shawn Sparse Sunstroke wrote: »

Sick leave has gone way down in my workplace. I presume some of that is down to people not travelling on crowded public transport and sharing office space with several other people everyday. Another advantage for employers when considering ongoing wfh.

Well it's easier to WFH if under the weather rather than having to travel to office

doc22

doc22 wrote: »

Well it's easier to WFH if under the weather rather than having to travel to office

This is true. I ended up in A&E yesterday for a physical matter. I won't be able to drive for a while and if I had to commute to work I'd be out on a cert for a few weeks.

But as I can work from home, a sick cert is not necessary and I can continue on working, as normal (which I prefer).

strandroad

Important for people with IBS, painful periods, pregnancy nausea etc. If you don't need to worry about the commute and can access a private toilet any time you need it you don't actually need a sick day when you might have needed one before.

AndrewJRenko

JDD wrote: »

Vast majority of companies are going to have a hybrid office/home model, with perhaps a small number of employees per company (and perhaps a small number of companies) allowing full WFH with occasional attendance at the office - say for training days, team days, end of project stuff.

Are the vast majority of companies going to accommodate those employees for whom WFH doesn't work?

Quin_Dub

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Are the vast majority of companies going to accommodate those employees for whom WFH doesn't work?

Yes. Of course.


Hybrid means just that , a mixed approach everything from 100% in the office to various level below that.

If can't or don't want to work remotely , you won't be forced.

kippy

kippy wrote: »

I am generally pro WFH as an option but I do think it helps greatly to have face to face contact with senior people in the organisation when you are looking to make a good impression..not saying it can't be done.It is done all of the time in certain organisations but my own experience would be that it is difficult to do one hundred percent WFH.
Could be just me and my opinion, problem is if your manager is like me and their perceptions are like mine, this is going to be an issue. Whether it is right or wrong.

In my company, getting sh1t done gives a good impression. I'd imagine thats the case in most organisations.