Public Servants to work 20% from home

addaword

Pkiernan wrote: »

Will working from home eat in to the 40 sick days year that they always seem to use up?

Working from home is great for peoples physical and mental health. I know one Failte Ireland employee, often used to be taking sickie days off work, and who since the lockdown cheerfully says they have been working away from home. Plenty of running and cycling and gardening and sunbathing during the daytime weekday hours, so they must be answering tourists queries during the late evenings/ nights. Neighbours and friends joke they would like to work from home 60 or 80%, so the sickies can be used up on some of the office days.

MadYaker

Fred Cryton wrote: »

BS. You might think that, but you're probably dossing watching youtube or Facebook or Twitter half the day. Employers are paying for your full attention, not half your attention.



There's a reason employers block these sites in the office.


In my experience there's a huge cohort of people if you give them an inch, they'll take a mile. I'm sure they're putting in the hours now because it's novel but if it's permanent then expect 4 hour lunch breaks to become a thing.

My employer doesn’t pay me for my attention they pay me to do my job which I’ve been able to do perfectly well at home since February. People who slack at home will be found out the same as people who slack in the office. You’re either on top of your workload or you aren’t.

addaword

MadYaker wrote: »

People who slack at home will be found out the same as people who slack in the office..

What happens to people who slack in the office? Does the office close down? The person get fired? No, I do not think so. So why give them extra opportunity to slack at home?

KaneToad

Calhoun wrote: »

The lack of hour long commutes each way is great for you, however it would need to be offset with certain days in the office or a hub as you get cabin fever working from home all the time.

Not everyone would get cabin fever working from home. Some (myself included) would gladly do it 100% of the time.

Padre_Pio

addaword wrote: »

What happens to people who slack in the office? Does the office close down? The person get fired? No, I do not think so. So why give them extra opportunity to slack at home?

Usually 2 warnings, a PIP and then the door where I am.

MadYaker

addaword wrote: »

What happens to people who slack in the office? Does the office close down? The person get fired? No, I do not think so. So why give them extra opportunity to slack at home?

It makes no difference, it’s always obvious who the slackers are. Whether or not they get fired is more complicated and has nothing to do with where they are working. I’m much more productive at home. Less people annoying me me with pointless inane BS.

_Kaiser_

KaneToad wrote: »

Not everyone would get cabin fever working from home. Some (myself included) would gladly do it 100% of the time.

Indeed. I've been doing it full time since March (and 1/2 days a week before that) and I have absolutely no desire or reason to go back to the office.

I'm getting more done every day, the company is generally getting an extra hour out of me as I'm starting earlier, no hunting for a meeting room or pacing the lobby because of the stupid open plan system when I need to make/join a sensitive call, no commuting so more energy, regular and better meals (I've even lost weight) - the list goes on.

I certainly don't miss the inadequate small canteen with no hot food (unless you microwave it yourself), the business park with nothing to do at lunch that many people spend sitting in their cars, the constant reminder that there's actually very little that I need to be in there for because I can do everything at home

WFH has been a requirement for me in any job offer I've considered in the past few years. It'll be even more so now.

beauf

addaword wrote: »

What happens to people who slack in the office? Does the office close down? The person get fired? No, I do not think so. So why give them extra opportunity to slack at home?

Why give them the opportunity in the office in the first place. That makes no sense.

That's a management issue if productivity isn't being tracked.

Calhoun

Fred Cryton wrote: »

That's because a large cohort of the "little people" are sly chancers who need to be whipped into doing any work. You have no understanding of human nature, and of Irish people in particular, if you think otherwise.

Luckily i work in an industry that doesn't see the workforce as slaves that can only be managed by small minded apes who love the power trip.

So yes i don't know the Irish owned company mindset. Don't get me wrong btw you are right there are industries exactly as you say i am lucky not to work in one.

Calhoun

KaneToad wrote: »

Not everyone would get cabin fever working from home. Some (myself included) would gladly do it 100% of the time.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Indeed. I've been doing it full time since March (and 1/2 days a week before that) and I have absolutely no desire or reason to go back to the office.

I'm getting more done every day, the company is generally getting an extra hour out of me as I'm starting earlier, no hunting for a meeting room or pacing the lobby because of the stupid open plan system when I need to make/join a sensitive call, no commuting so more energy, regular and better meals (I've even lost weight) - the list goes on.

I certainly don't miss the inadequate small canteen with no hot food (unless you microwave it yourself), the business park with nothing to do at lunch that many people spend sitting in their cars, the constant reminder that there's actually very little that I need to be in there for because I can do everything at home

WFH has been a requirement for me in any job offer I've considered in the past few years. It'll be even more so now.

Give it a year or two and see what its like then, its a whole new area of study in human resources. As it brings its own challenges.

As long as you set a strict routine and get out and about your ok. The big risk is over working outside of business hours. We have seen allot of emails going out at all hours.

_Kaiser_

Calhoun wrote: »

Give it a year or two and see what its like then, its a whole new area of study in human resources. As it brings its own challenges.

As long as you set a strict routine and get out and about your ok. The big risk is over working outside of business hours. We have seen allot of emails going out at all hours.

I've been WFH for years now and as above, I much prefer it and I get more done.

But you're right in that it's not for everyone or even possible in every role. Where it is, you do need a set routine, dedicated work room (kitchen table isn't sufficient), and a mindset that when you're working you're working - not watching telly, playing with the kids etc

But personally speaking I'll never go back to a full time 9-5 office job again if I can avoid it. I enjoyed the social aspects when I was younger, but nowadays in a more senior position you need to maintain a level of separation anyway and my priorities for what I need from a job are very different as well.

addaword

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Usually 2 warnings, a PIP and then the door where I am.

And has that ever happened in the public service? I am thinking of some schools who have not communicated with any of their pupils in 6 weeks? Are we going to see entire schools including headmasters being fired?

namloc1980

Fred Cryton wrote: »

BS. You might think that, but you're probably dossing watching youtube or Facebook or Twitter half the day. Employers are paying for your full attention, not half your attention.



There's a reason employers block these sites in the office.


In my experience there's a huge cohort of people if you give them an inch, they'll take a mile. I'm sure they're putting in the hours now because it's novel but if it's permanent then expect 4 hour lunch breaks to become a thing.

Most of those issues are down to poor management and leadership and inability or unwillingness to track productivity and get the best out of people. In my experience even the least productive staff can be turned around. If management can't manage people at home, then they probably aren't doing a very good job of it in the office ether.

Sheep breeder

Have being working from at home full time since March and part time for the last 3 years with a tough book computer, find that it is all about planning your day and doing the work and having a room in the house to go and do the time required.
When in the office the productivity is lower and the work day is longer due to having to do other people’s work and deal with queries, answer phones, manger not capable of working, go to the canteen, other workers with bad habits.
Example the guy that goes to canteen 3 times a day for half an hour each time just to kill the day to get overtime. One girl in the office goes a 6 times a day to each of the toilet and to do her make up and to water station spends the whole day walking around and wanting to talk to everyone about where she was at the weekend.
Working at home get up early and do two hours before the kids get up and then a couple of hours after lunch and a couple after dinner in the evening and at the weekend do a bit in the spare time and have time to farm away and more time for the family and less stress.
Life is a lot easier and less stress and no working late at night farming to get work completed.
Biggest draw back in the office is the poor worker who is being shown up now having to work at home and not capable of doing the job.

Padre_Pio

addaword wrote: »

And has that ever happened in the public service? I am thinking of some schools who have not communicated with any of their pupils in 6 weeks? Are we going to see entire schools including headmasters being fired?

I don't think teachers and principals are going to be WFH permanently any time soon.

But to answer your question, you can make a complaint to the board of management, and better yet, get other parents to complain too.

blanch152

addaword wrote: »

And has that ever happened in the public service? I am thinking of some schools who have not communicated with any of their pupils in 6 weeks? Are we going to see entire schools including headmasters being fired?

I doubt that there has been any school that hasn't communicated with any of their pupils in 6 weeks.

I am certain that there have been individual teachers who have ended up in ICUs with Covid, who for obvious reasons haven't communicated with their pupils, and for whom, the principal getting a replacement or substitute, wasn't an option.

Vizzy

blanch152 wrote: »

I doubt that there has been any school that hasn't communicated with any of their pupils in 6 weeks.

I am certain that there have been individual teachers who have ended up in ICUs with Covid, who for obvious reasons haven't communicated with their pupils, and for whom, the principal getting a replacement or substitute, wasn't an option.

Oh dear blanch152, you have opened Pandora's box now !!

Apparently there are thousands (according to addaword) of schools who have not been in contact with pupils for 6 weeks , but don't hold your breath for a link or anything.
As for SNA's, well they are all home sitting at home on full pay doing nothing

storker

Calhoun wrote: »

Give it a year or two and see what its like then, its a whole new area of study in human resources. As it brings its own challenges.

As long as you set a strict routine and get out and about your ok. The big risk is over working outside of business hours. We have seen allot of emails going out at all hours.

I keep office hours at home. Start at 9, finished by 5.30. Of course if something urgent comes up or someone needs a dig out then obviously I'll help out but otherwise the extra time I get from remote working is for me and for my family - it's not to be handed back gratis to the employer.

Rodin

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

I've no particular problem with the proposal, but the impact on rural Ireland could be hugely overstated. There's no shortage of public sector employment in the regions, and hasn't been for a very long time; if anything, many rural towns are over-dependent on public sector employment.

This analysis, from 2009, highlights that.

Every one of those towns has a hospital. This skews the figures.
Many of those who work in the hospitals may not live in the towns.

namloc1980

Calhoun wrote: »

Give it a year or two and see what its like then, its a whole new area of study in human resources. As it brings its own challenges.

As long as you set a strict routine and get out and about your ok. The big risk is over working outside of business hours. We have seen allot of emails going out at all hours.

Don't answer emails out of hours. If you do you're basically signalling to management that you are ok with working out of hours.

CrabRevolution

MegamanBoo wrote: »

I just don't think they're very clued in to how much political capital is at stake here. Introduce this fully across the public and private sectors you could reinvigorate rural Ireland and cut co2 by 10% (≈30% co2 comes from transport).

Personally I think we're looking at a few years with a lot of working from home anyway with Covid-19. So get the structures in place, do it right and make it a permanent change. It's the right thing to do and what the people want.

I don't see how it will "reinvigorate rural Ireland". An article was posted earlier in the thread pointing out how there's numerous towns around the country where the biggest sector of the workforce is employed in the Public Sector. These are generally the same towns people say are "dying" and blame the government.

If these people already live and work in rural Ireland, how does them working from home give any benefit to these towns? If anything it'll remove business and money from these provincial towns because people are staying at home.

WFH will benefit the worker, and potentially their employer, but where does this notion that it'll "save" rural Ireland come from?

snoopboggybog

Some people are so anti work from home i find it quite hilarious.

Is it because you can't boss people around in the office or are you so tied up in your jobs that your afraid yourself to work from home?

Quin_Dub

CrabRevolution wrote: »

I don't see how it will "reinvigorate rural Ireland". An article was posted earlier in the thread pointing out how there's numerous towns around the country where the biggest sector of the workforce is employed in the Public Sector. These are generally the same towns people say are "dying" and blame the government.

If these people already live and work in rural Ireland, how does them working from home give any benefit to these towns? If anything it'll remove business and money from these provincial towns because people are staying at home.

WFH will benefit the worker, and potentially their employer, but where does this notion that it'll "save" rural Ireland come from?

It's not an instant thing , but over time it will benefit smaller towns and reduce pressure on major urban centres for housing.

As an example , if you are currently a 20 something renting in a city or maybe with a mortgage on a small house/apartment. and now you are allowed WFH most/all of the time.

If you get married or have kids and are looking to buy or to move to a larger home , as you no longer have to consider the daily commute your location options are greatly increased - a 2hr drive a few times a month to go to the office is manageable but it's not possible daily, so now you can look further afield and get a lot more for your money and so on.

Maybe some of those younger rural people that are currently living and working in Dublin could move back to their hometown if they can WFH and only have to be in the office every now and again?

Not a lightswitch thing at all , but over time there are definite benefits all round.

Edgware

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Likewise. I don't miss the social aspects too much. No more chat about football or the "any plans for the weekend" and "what did you get up to at weekend".

I'd do one or two days a week in an office max.
Bliss... :D

You'll be missed around the water cooler allright.

Calhoun

storker wrote: »

I keep office hours at home. Start at 9, finished by 5.30. Of course if something urgent comes up or someone needs a dig out then obviously I'll help out but otherwise the extra time I get from remote working is for me and for my family - it's not to be handed back gratis to the employer.

namloc1980 wrote: »

Don't answer emails out of hours. If you do you're basically signalling to management that you are ok with working out of hours.

As much as there are comments on this thread about employees being chancers there is also the other end of the spectrum where the employer will take advantage.

This is something to keep in mind when working from home, individuals will have to ensure they keep their working day norms in place.

Some will find it easier than others to do.

Padre_Pio

Edgware wrote: »

You'll be missed around the water cooler allright.

The water cooler crowd can miss me all they want.

I couldn't give a f*ck:D

MegamanBoo

CrabRevolution wrote: »

WFH will benefit the worker, and potentially their employer, but where does this notion that it'll "save" rural Ireland come from?

I live in a fairly small parish not far outside Cork. When I was growing up in the 80's we had 3 shops, 2 pubs and a post office. Now we have nothing.

I'd estimate 3-400 people commute from my parish every day to work, most of which could be done from home. If this work was regularly from home, ideally with an option of using one or two of the abandoned buildings in the village as work hub it would allow for a shop and maybe a post office to open in the area.

That would be a huge change and would also allow people to once again get to know neighbours.

I've made plenty of friends in workplaces over the years but a job for life is generally gone, so you loose touch with people when they or you move on to another company. I'd love if there was a local hub to work from and get to build some longer term friendships.

I can see for some mid-size towns it mightn't make much of a difference, other than the positive environmental impact.

Edgware

MegamanBoo wrote: »

I live in a fairly small parish not far outside Cork. When I was growing up in the 80's we had 3 shops, 2 pubs and a post office. Now we have nothing.

I'd estimate 3-400 people commute from my parish every day to work, most of which could be done from home. If this work was regularly from home, ideally with an option of using one or two of the abandoned buildings in the village as work hub it would allow for a shop and maybe a post office to open in the area.

That would be a huge change and would also allow people to once again get to know neighbours.

I've made plenty of friends in workplaces over the years but a job for life is generally gone, so you loose touch with people when they or you move on to another company. I'd love if there was a local hub to work from and get to build some longer term friendships.

I can see for some mid-size towns it mightn't make much of a difference, other than the positive environmental impact.

A work hub maybe providing positions for small start up or sole trader would be a start, then these would need a coffee outlet, cleaning service etc. It starts a circle of money that is kept local.

VillageIdiot71

Rodin wrote: »

Every one of those towns has a hospital. This skews the figures.
Many of those who work in the hospitals may not live in the towns.

As I understand it, the source of the data is the Census - so it would be an analysis of town residents.

But that's not especially the point - the point is

CrabRevolution wrote: »

... there's numerous towns around the country where the biggest sector of the workforce is employed in the Public Sector. These are generally the same towns people say are "dying" and blame the government.

If having a large amount of public sector workers is the solution for rural Ireland, then those towns and the surrounding areas should be thriving already.

Deebles McBeebles

Pkiernan wrote: »

Will working from home eat in to the 40 sick days year that they always seem to use up?

Who is "they"? All PS employees? You would surely have stats to back that up?