Working From Home Megathread

Same here. I find key players are left alone to work fully remote (from wherever they want) or hybrid. My own wife's company has recalled a load of staff back to the office, but herself and a few others have just been quietly ignored and let carry on remote. Very handy during the summer with the kids where she can work from anywhere and extend the holidays by a few weeks.

Ah, I see. That's unfortunate. Some companies can't shake that factory floor attitude I'm afraid. OR… people are taking the piss. However, you mention line managers being fully remote, so maybe the shift has changed towards the key players and you're simply not one of them. Would you aspire to be a line manager or (like me) you're not interested in managing people.

I cant understand how in this day and age that a manager needs staff in an office to make sure they are not slacking on the work.

You are literally assigned work and your manager can see how you are performing.

If you had new hires and you wanted team members to come in to help out at the start, then fair enough.

If a manager is looking for people back in the office a few days a week, I can only assume it's because they need to make it look like they do something.

Wfh policies are set by a companies board of directors lads. No "manager" that you interact with during your workday gets a say in whether you can work remotely or not.

True but replae board with owner etc. No middle manager is setting remote work policy.

They're enforcing what they're told to enforce.

You are literally assigned work and your manager can see how you are performing.

Managers have now had several years to observe whether meeting expected speed targets is the only measure that matters.

It looks like they've concluded that it's not, and that there are other less quantifiable factors that influence overall rganisational performance.

Who'd have every guessed!

Where I've worked, it's often been the middle management in different private companies or agencies and public sector organisations who have been free (or had the responsibility) to make local arrangements with remote working. Years before lock down.

Even now our policy is it has to be signed off by the line manager. They can nix it if they require it.

Its not much different to organising shifts or holidays, or leave. Anything really.

What are these other less quantifiable factors?

It would be interesting to see how large multinationals might suffer compared to others.

There's a whole industry devoted to putting check boxes and objectives , targets achieved, customer ratings, satisfaction, retention, staff culture surveys, on anything and everything.

October 2023 I started a job and was told 1-2 days a month in the office.

January 3rd 2024, we got a new CTO who said in his inauguration speech that he despises WFH and was now mandating 3+ days a week in the office. I wonder did he co-write the book "how to lose friends and alienate people".

Of course then the predictable happened, lots of people showed up to the office and there werent enough desks for everyone. People who had travelled in from Portarlington, ended up sitting at one of the tables in the canteen, on a chair less comfortable than their home office at home.

My line manager lives in Denmark and has told me she doesnt care if I go to the office or not.

The point is, unless it is written into your contract, the employer can change their policy on remote working at any point.

In the company I work for anyway it has nothing to do with performance of that I am certain. Some of the most productive and successful times for the company (worldwide) have been during the period with a lot of hybrid/remote working (we also still retain contractually protected remote workers many of whom are management themselves). If anything the policy has hit productivity as many are "working to rule" so to speak out of annoyance with the policy - leaving on the dot of finish time, taking holidays when it suits rather than working around deadlines etc.

Yes and no, the mandates do come from the top, In our case I feel its similar to the other poster and its the CEO or certainly the very top rung of the company (though it was communicated as a board decision or something like that). Plenty of senior level managers have been forced back to the office also who were working hybrid for years and some have left so its hitting pretty much all levels.

That being said managers do have a say to a degree in that they can choose to turn a blind eye to things. My manager was/is currently doing this in my case but there is such a push on now that they are sort of asking me to be in everyday for now until things die down at least. I was also allowing people who report to me do a day or two from home but they are more junior staff and are less willing to rock the boat so have been coming in even though I wasn't pushing it.

Everyone one has a boss and the optics of one team doing one thing and another doing something else won't last long.

It'll be flagged and the manager pulled on it.

I work for a large MNFC with a small team under me. But I really can't see how the politics of it would differ much regardless of the company size/makeup.

I get the work to rule aspect. If flexibility given isn't reciprocated, then you find you've burnt that bridge when you need it again.

Our managers have veto on quite a few aspects of remote working. There's been different arrangements on different teams even before lockdown.

Its been the same almost everywhere I've worked my entire life. Because the hr policies have always had that wriggle room.

One I remember before lockdown was one team having remote working and another not. Or remote with Flexi time or remote with no Flexi time. All sorts of local arrangements. Same now some teams have different days in the office, and some even have different anchor days.

But for the purpose of this thread which is discussing post covid wfh/rto setups.

Most companies have mandated a set amount of days in office. Local nuances not with standing.

This policy is being set from the very top of the food chain. Middle managers, Directors/MDs are not setting this policy.

Its set by the board and the rest of the ponzi scheme have to adhere to it.

I've never worked anywhere that local managers can veto company policy.

They can fail to follow policy much like you can fail/ignore anything you want to in work/life.

But you're putting yourself in a position to be reprimanded/fired/arrested if caught.

Arrested, because you said Bob needn't commute to Dublin for Tullamore three days a week?

Right…

Unless Policy is they can veto it.

Its gives more flexibility if it's required.

Am I the only one seeing the hypocrisy and irony in Musk whining about the below when he and his ilk have no concern for work/life/family balance?

In a trend that is almost global at this stage, people are settling down later because its getting more and more difficult to afford a home. So they are having less kids and having them later in life. It's not surprising that one of the richest men in the world does not have those concerns, and didn't think about that.

Not defending him, I think he's a pr1ck, just saying little details like that are not on his radar.

Again, one of the richest men in the world he can do anything he likes and has no concern for plebs like you and me.

I really wouldn't put too much stock in what he's saying.

Employers should be allowed to say no, the government has no place dictating where people should work

I disagree. The greater good for society should always be taken into account (environmental, societal, equality, etc). There are plenty of work places legal rules in place that have improved people's lives that would have been fought against by employers over the years and guess what? Corporate profits are higher than ever so it's done them no harm.

If a job can be done just as good remotely then for the greater good employers should be forced to accept this new way if life. They have no issue working between geographically remote teams when it suits them.

Edit: Just to add. In my place if work they want everyone in the office full time despite the fact that the team is spread across 4 different countries, so instead of saving people hours of commute you are expected to come into the office to then hold meetings at your desk over MS Teams that you could do the exact same at home. Return to office mandates serve two purposes.

1. Companies basically want to reduce the work force without redundancy.
2. Weak managers can't handle the fact that they are becoming obsolete so make up bullshit about innovation in person or productivity.