Be Careful Pushing for Full-Time WFH. Don't Give Your Company an Excuse to Outsource Your Job

spychiatrist on 10/04/2022 - 11:41

A lot of people pushing for full-time WFH. Let's not kid ourselves by claiming we're more productive at home. especially if you have kids. Other distractions: telly, PS5/ XSX/ Switch, interactions with housemates/ pets (instead of interactions with co-workers in an office environment). And a lot of procrastinating - "I can do that later after dinner." "I'll just turn my laptop on and login while I go to the shops, cook, eat, nap and check OzBargain. They won't know the difference."

Don't give your boss an excuse to outsource your job interstate/ overseas or find another employee willing to work in an office environment. If you're boss/ supervisor/ superior is willing to rock up the office every day, what makes you think you're ok to WFH? Oh, you also want the same pay for WFH? What's that, you want a payrise?

Poll Options

  • 755
    WFH
  • 64
    WIO
Education & Work

Comments

  • rektrading on 10/04/2022 - 11:50
    +182

    WFH is the future.

      • rektrading on 10/04/2022 - 12:30
        +135

        Australian businesses outsourcing to Australians is good for Australia.

        • [Deactivated] on 10/04/2022 - 12:51
          +47

          the point is that if they can outsource it to Australians, what is stopping them from outsourcing to the Filipinos or Indians in their respective countries, at much lower wages? sure, they will probably get complaints from customers when the quality of service / product inevitably declines, but that hasn't seemed to bother Telstra or any of the other multitude of businesses that outsource to other countries.

          it's only a matter of time before they start looking at this, if they haven't already.

          • sheamas88 on 10/04/2022 - 13:18
            +15

            @[Deactivated]: It's OK to offshore low-to-mid level roles but it's really hard to offshore the senior level roles. Thing is if you offshore all the low-mid levels then there is no onshore people getting experience needed to get to higher level roles. Then as business expand, or new companies are formed those high-level positions are now in huge shortages.

            • mbck on 10/04/2022 - 13:30
              +10

              @sheamas88: By that logic, those offshore people will gain experience. There will be more senior level roles in the future from offshore.

              Considering people overseas will be paid less, more companies will hire offshore people. And then it's just a waiting game.

              • sheamas88 on 10/04/2022 - 13:46
                +49

                @mbck: I can only speak for my experience and industry, but IME the higher level positions are much harder to offshore and the issue isn't due to lack of experience per-say

                • Australia still has a far better education system than places where it's cheap to offshore. Aussies have a much better head-start so would take a few more years experience for offshore guys to get to the same place.
                • Time-zones become a bigger issue as higher level roles tend to be in more meetings or communicate with third parties, so having work hours that differ too much start getting in the way
                • Higher level positions have access to more sensitive data/systems and so offshoring it gets tricky for compliance and enforcement. Much easier to sue/arrest a employee in the same country than one in a country you probably have no presence in. (This is one of the biggest show-stoppers)
                • Language/culture barriers start to become more apparent and can hold back the offshore guys.
                • Offshore guys who are able to meet all of the above know they are leagues ahead of their countrymen have no reason to settle for lower salaries. Same reason outsourcing to other states/cities within Australia only works to a small extent. Applicants who are in demand don't need to settle for lower salaries just cause they are in a different city.
                • bobolo on 11/04/2022 - 12:18
                  +6

                  @sheamas88: My experience with my own offshore staff;

                  1. Not entirely true. The Australian education system teaches courses based on Australian legislation/laws. However, most staff are willing to learn the "Australian way" and some employers are even paying for them to go through entire Australian university degrees

                  2. Nope. My staff all work in line with local time zones (start later finish later)

                  3. Depends on the industry. Generally as employees regardless of position, the onus falls on the employer if any compliance/enforcement issues arise, even if its the fault of the employee

                  4. No. All the candidates at the offshoring company I use speak fluent English and even has courses to teach them the Australian accent if they are in client facing roles

                  5. Yes - but $30,000 AUD a year is a HUGE salary even for highly skilled/educated people in the Phillippines. Pay them $40k and they will move mountains for you - and would happily skill up/be capable for a local role worth $200k+

                  • sheamas88 on 11/04/2022 - 13:17
                    +6

                    @bobolo: thanks for the reply. I'll preface all my response with it sounds like you are mostly talking about low-to-mid level roles which I already concede are more easily off-shored. I say this as your response for #1, #3, and #4 don't really sound like people in already senior positions.

                    Not entirely true. The Australian education system teaches courses based on Australian legislation/laws. However, most staff are willing to learn the "Australian way" and some employers are even paying for them to go through entire Australian university degrees

                    If you're putting them through their degrees then sounds like you're hiring them out of school, in this case I'd say the positions you are offshoring are the exact ones I would expect to be offshore. Roles with little to no education or experience required.

                    Even if we discount primary/secondary education and assume that a tertiary degree is all that matters (personally disagree as it's easy to skate through a lot of degrees without understanding much but willing to concede the point) then you're talking 3-4 years full-time (which means limited time for them to actually work whilst doing the degree) or 6-8 years part-time added on to their careers. IMO if a company can wait 3+ years to fill a senior position then they didn't need it that badly to begin with.

                    Nope. My staff all work in line with local time zones (start later finish later)

                    Since you don't really provide anything other that "Nope" I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here.

                    Depends on the industry. Generally as employees regardless of position, the onus falls on the employer if any compliance/enforcement issues arise, even if its the fault of the employee

                    This one is the biggest tripping point (as I point out in my original comment) and I don't feel like you've addressed this at all. It's much harder to stop employees stealing IP or misusing company resources when you have no presence in their country or they have totally different laws in their home nation. For juniors this isn't much of a problem due to the nature of low-level employees not really getting access to sensitive company data. But seniority always demands more control which leaves abuse open.

                    This can be seen in manufacturing industry. Everyone went offshore and now has their IP stolen left and right.

                    No. All the candidates at the offshoring company I use speak fluent English and even has courses to teach them the Australian accent if they are in client facing roles

                    You ignored the culture part, which matters more than being fluent in English alone. Addressing language fluency is easy, addressing cultural differences is not, which is why I suspect you ignored that part.

                    Yes - but $30,000 AUD a year is a HUGE salary even for highly skilled/educated people in the Phillippines. Pay them $40k and they will move mountains for you - and would happily skill up/be capable for a local role worth $200k+

                    OK so lets assume you have an offshore resource who is just as capable as anyone else in the field across the globe. Why are they still accepting this paltry 40k salary from you? There are thousands of companies across the globe who are all willing to pay top dollar for this employee and you think that the local salary is still going to be a factor? Why are companies going to artificially limit salaries like that when they want the top talent you've now trained up? Globalisation goes both ways, yes there's a bigger pool of employees to draw from, but there is also more competition for companies trying to hire too.

                    Same reason why inter-state "off-shoring" falls over too. Why would a talented, senior employee not want to demand top dollar from a Sydney-based company just because they live in Adelaide?

                    • bobolo on 11/04/2022 - 13:52

                      @sheamas88:

                      1. No. The ones that get university upskilling are already educated and have experience elsewhere but have started off in junior roles in your company and have worked with you over several years. There is a mutual loyalty between employee and employer and the employer is happy to invest $$$ into the offshore staff because they are so much cheaper (salary wise).

                      2. ??? I said my staff in the Phillippines start later and work later (their local time) in line with my Australian office hours. They don't mind doing this

                      3. Obviously industry dependant, but I have much less fear of my offshore staff stealing my IP than my local staff, since quite frankly, they wouldn't know what to do with it (not like they are going to start a competing business in Australia)

                      4. What cultural differences are we talking about? 2 of my offshore staff are indistinguishable from my local staff in terms of the way they talk or email

                      5. Because in the Phillippines, $40k per year is not paltry at all. In fact its extremely high. Most people can't just move around the globe to chase higher salaries due to migration restrictions, families, personal choice etc. And to be frank, if I had to pay this offshore person an equal salary as what I could find here in Aus and be exposed to Australian workplace laws, I would just hire locally and so would anyone else - so these opportunities wouldn't exist for the offshore person anyway. They are happy, I am happy

                      For the offshore staff, they can work for a normal local business in Phillipines and earn $15,000 a year, or they can work for me for $30,000 - $40,000 a year and be super happy doing so for the rest of their lives. As an employer, I am happy to invest to upskill them since they are esentially doing a $200,000 job, and are probably going to be much more loyal than someone local. They are hungry, eager to learn, much more teachable/malleable.

                      I've actually travelled to the Phillippines on several occasions to meet with them in person and taken them on short trips/fancy dinners as a reward for performance. They are grateful, compliant and importantly, won't complain/take advantage of silly Aussie workplace laws against you as an employer.

                      • sheamas88 on 11/04/2022 - 15:02
                        +4

                        @bobolo:

                        No. The ones that get university upskilling are already educated and have experience elsewhere but have started off in junior roles in your company and have worked with you over several years. There is a mutual loyalty between employee and employer and the employer is happy to invest $$$ into the offshore staff because they are so much cheaper (salary wise).

                        Yes, so as I suspected minimum 3 years added to their career start date since they are doing the degree after the fact, rather than like onshore doing it ahead of time. 3+ years is a long time to hold out on filling a senior role IMO, or you guys are hiring from outside too? Maybe your industry doesn't expand very fast so you can do all new positions internally. We'd definitely struggle doing that in my industry which basically gets by on poaching and contractors.

                        ??? I said my staff in the Phillippines start later and work later (their local time) in line with my Australian office hours. They don't mind doing this

                        Yes, my point is that I've experienced the opposite (which is why I mentioned it originally), but since we experience different things not much to talk about. Personally doubt that every single offshore resource is going to be willing to work outside hours (since we can't get this in the first place..) so at some point it's going to be a consideration.

                        Obviously industry dependant, but I have much less fear of my offshore staff stealing my IP than my local staff, since quite frankly, they wouldn't know what to do with it (not like they are going to start a competing business in Australia)

                        Very curious to what industry you are in that all phone calls/emails/contracts/intellectual property/internal group chats/financial data/customer data or anything else senior people would have are all completely open to the world with zero issues. Do you guys even have logins for systems? What prevents someone replicating your business like-for-like if you're happy to share all that data with competitors? Do customers agree to share all this data too?

                        What cultural differences are we talking about? 2 of my offshore staff are indistinguishable from my local staff in terms of the way they talk or email

                        Read a few more comments in this post and you'll get an idea of what I am talking about.

                        Because in the Phillippines, $40k per year is not paltry at all. In fact its extremely high.

                        And 200k is even higher. If you have some employees who are not interested in getting double or triple the salary from someone else for the same work then hit me up as I definitely wanna know where you are getting these guys from.

                        Most people can't just move around the globe to chase higher salaries due to migration restrictions, families, personal choice etc.

                        But your whole argument is that you don't need to move for a job since it can be done anywhere? They don't have to move across the world to chase higher salaries, they can do it right where they are now. If offshore is all the same as local people then no-one needs to move anymore, they can work for the highest paying companies from anywhere in the world. Why are your employees gunna stay on their tiny salary when they can command 200k from another company? Or even 80k from another company.

                        In the end, if you have world-class employees then they can command world-class salaries. If they can't do that then they aren't world-class, maybe they are "good enough" but there is always gunna be some threshold to where businesses will need someone better. There is always going to be competition in recruitment for talent so salaries aren't going to tank just because you want them too.

                        And to be frank, if I had to pay this offshore person an equal salary as what I could find here in Aus and be exposed to Australian workplace laws, I would just hire locally and so would anyone else - so these opportunities wouldn't exist for the offshore person anyway. They are happy, I am happy

                        If we're just talking about worker exploitation being the sole advantage, then then it's possible governments would crack down on this practice. We already force companies trading in Australia to follow our laws, no reason this can't extend to foreign workers if we truly moving toward a global economy/workforce.

                        • bobolo on 12/04/2022 - 00:34
                          -1

                          @sheamas88: I've had my offshore staff being offered more money for the same jobs in the past and they still stay with me. Retention is incredibly low for offshore staff as many business owners feel they can treat them like slaves. Yes the salary is much lower and workplace laws are vastly different, but you still have to treat them with a level of respect for them to stay loyal to you

                          "phone calls/emails/contracts/intellectual property/internal group chats/financial data/customer data" - like I said, this IP is way more dangerous being "stolen" by local employees in our industry where they can use it and start a competing business immediately. Regardless of it being stolen locally or overseas, good luck taking any kind of legal action, unless the person taking it is asking to be caught.

                          Your culture argument is overblown. Companies in Australia poach senior staff from all around the world who, with the right offers, will make the move to Australia if not just temporarily. They have zero knowledge of the culture and many don't even speak English fluently if at all, but are only physically here to work. We are a nation of immigrants, old and new. Hiring a local who happens to be Filipino vs hiring one actually in the Phillipines has almost no difference. Take away the physical component and there are none

                          You say its worker exploitation, when its actually employer exploitation in Australia. Locals commanding ridiculous salaries, but also want all this WFH freedom, calculating annual/personal/sick leave to the hour, expect all these entitlements and benefits, cry workplace bullying with performance reviews, disappear for years with the announcement of a baby etc. Yeah I run a business, not a charity.

                          • sheamas88 on 12/04/2022 - 08:49
                            +1

                            @bobolo: It sounds like you have some truly unique employees if they wouldn't take more money elsewhere. Not sure how that scales when all WFH are now going to be offshored like OP says it will. We're talking about hundreds-of-thousands of new jobs flooding the markets from Australia alone and you think that salaries will stay low due to loyalty?

                            IP is way more dangerous being "stolen" by local employees in our industry

                            They just sell it on the side to your competitors whilst they keep working for you. Maybe that's why they are not demanding more money…

                            good luck taking any kind of legal action, unless the person taking it is asking to be caught.

                            Still far more viable than trying to do it in a foreign country. This is a huge consideration for many businesses.

                            Locals commanding ridiculous salaries, but also want all this WFH freedom, calculating annual/personal/sick leave to the hour, expect all these entitlements and benefits, cry workplace bullying with performance reviews, disappear for years with the announcement of a baby etc.

                            Yes, this is how capitalism works. Talent can make greater demands of their employers as they are in demand. Funny how some business people love capitalism when it makes them money or can pay rock bottom wages for easily replaceable people, but moan about how terrible it is when it costs them money or have to pay out the nose for talent.

                            Yeah I run a business, not a charity.

                            But employees are charities?

                            Anyway it sounds like you have some very niche business where you can afford to wait 3 years minimum to fill a position and have staff who seemingly wouldn't take a higher paying job even if offered so I am willing to concede that your business can laugh off any Aussies making too many demands. Fortunately for me your experience is not reflected at all in my industry where companies have tried and failed to completely offshore for the last decade or more. Now they moan about the shortage of senior staff and the inflated wages they are forced to pay. Any threat made about offshoring due to demands of WFH are laughed off, or at worst known it will only be temporary and in the end wages in Australia will be driven higher due to their incompetence.

                            In the end the sweeping claims that all WFH jobs will go offshore are naive at best, or stupid at worst. The reality is that the mix of onshore and offshore may shuffle back and forth a bit but will always be leaning toward more onshore than off. That is where businesses get the benefit of cheap resources for the jobs that are more easily replaced, but the stability and safety of onshore for the work that requires talent and training. There has to be more onshore as they need some juniors to training up to senior otherwise we'll just keep hitting the shortages that we're already seening caused by moving too much offshore.

                            • bobolo on 12/04/2022 - 09:36
                              -1

                              @sheamas88: I've never had any IP stolen. Or that I know of. And even if it was, the risk is the same locally or overseas. End of story

                              Although the global marketplace is becoming more integrated, salary levels/work expectations still vary hugely - especially between developed and undeveloped nations. Even doctors get paid vastly different country to country. Do they all move to the country where they get paid the most?
                              As a capitalist, I choose to take advantage of this discrepancy. I have very talented people locally and overseas. Whether they are absolutely the best in the world? I don't know nor do I care. There is an opportunity cost in forever finding the best talent on Earth and I choose to work with who I have with the best budget possible and make it work for me.

                              In the end, jobs going offshore is a reality and offshoring is fast becoming much more streamlined/efficient. Employees who think their precious company won't make that change at the drop of a hat are naive at best, or stupid at worst. You are not the only one who can do any given job and the world as a whole is hungry for employment. Local employees should be careful of not being labelled "too hard" or "too costly".

                              • sheamas88 on 12/04/2022 - 11:24

                                @bobolo:

                                I've never had any IP stolen. Or that I know of.

                                This whole post is claiming that all WFH is at risk for being offshored, so this isn't just about your company, it's about all companies moving offshore, and you're claiming that there is no concern at all since it's not something you personally are worried about. I can tell you that many companies share this concern. Manufacturing is still struggling with this problem to this day.

                                Even doctors get paid vastly different country to country. Do they all move to the country where they get paid the most?

                                You still seem to be struggling with the basic concept we are talking about here. With WFH there is no need to move for a job anymore, so using a job that requires the employee to physically be in the location as your example is asinine. If a doctor could work remotely to the same effectiveness then why wouldn't they take a higher paying job? Your argument is just "Nah, they won't do that because they like me", which seems unrealistic when you're talking about a global scale. There will be plenty of employees chasing the money, particularly when locale is no longer a hindrance like you claim.

                                Either way, funny you mention doctors specifically around moving for money, because that's exactly what the NHS is struggling with, all the doctors leaving the country to chase the money and perks. But of course for some reason this won't happen for offshore even though they no longer need move.

                                In the end, jobs going offshore is a reality and offshoring is fast becoming much more streamlined/efficient.

                                Like I said, been tried for over a decade. There are whole companies in popular offshore regions specifically to facilitate this, but it never sticks at the scales we're talking about in this post. There is never enough senior people to replace onshore resources, because the ones who are just as good as Aussies just leave to freelance or contract directly. There is literally no reason why they would take the lower salary when they can get a much higher one.

                                Even if it happens in the next few years not sure where they are getting all these senior staff that apparently grow on trees, since you yourself admit you need to give them the 3+ years of onshore training to get them there. Also not sure how you expect Australian education system to keep up with this sudden influx of offshore employees needed a good education either.

                                Employees who think their precious company won't make that change at the drop of a hat are naive at best, or stupid at worst.

                                If they could make the change at the drop of a hat then they already would, or the hundred other times they tried would have worked.

                                You are not the only one who can do any given job and the world as a whole is hungry for employment.

                                You really seem to think that this employee/employer thing is all one way, which is obviously not true otherwise everyone would just be on minimum wage. Any argument you can make for employers looking elsewhere also applies to employees.

                    • Icecold5000 on 11/04/2022 - 14:22
                      +1

                      @sheamas88:

                      You ignored the culture part, which matters more than being fluent in English alone. Addressing language fluency is easy, addressing cultural differences is not

                      I was part of a team of 9 in a professional services team. There were only three born and bred Australians while he rest were migrants. Cultural fluency doesn’t really matter these days.

                      • sheamas88 on 11/04/2022 - 15:22
                        +1

                        @Icecold5000: If they are migrants then they are living in AU, we're talking about offshore who have probably never been here.

                        I've known some people from very rough/different parts of the world who adapted to Australia very quickly. I doubt it would be so easy/fast if they were doing it all online.

                        • Icecold5000 on 11/04/2022 - 16:06

                          @sheamas88:

                          I've known some people from very rough/different parts of the world who adapted to Australia very quickly. I doubt it would be so easy/fast if they were doing it all online.

                          If someone offered you a life changing amount of money to work from 100k to 300k how high would your motivation be to learn all you could to retain that job? Thats what its like for them.

                    • Aneurism on 11/04/2022 - 22:00
                      +3

                      @sheamas88: Cultural differences ? You mean taking sick days when you aren't sick ? Going home early on pay days to get to the pub ? Wasting the first 15 minutes of each meeting waffling about non business related personal stuff ? Whining about anything that involves increase in effort or output ?

                      • sheamas88 on 12/04/2022 - 08:55
                        -1

                        @Aneurism: Yep it's called capitalism. Talented employees can make demands of their employers since they are in demand. On the other side employers can make demands of low-skill employees since they aren't in demand.

                        It goes both ways, can't realistically expect everything to be in the employers favour

            • ankor on 11/04/2022 - 11:08
              +2

              @sheamas88: ..The cream of the crop from o/s who actually have a brain can get into those senior roles later on down the track.

              • sheamas88 on 11/04/2022 - 11:12
                +1

                @ankor: Re-read my comment, I already address this

            • netpenthean on 11/04/2022 - 17:22

              @sheamas88: worked at big multinational software company
              they cut all the local dev and moved em offshore
              PM's stayed local cos they still needed to interface with clients

              • sheamas88 on 11/04/2022 - 17:28
                +3

                @netpenthean: Current company off-shored 7 years ago and last year they cut most of the offshore and hired back in Australia.

                PM's running the show with no real seniors will bite them in the ass eventually, then they'll be scrambling to hire Aussies to right the ship and rewrite all the trash they got. In the end they'll spend more doing it twice then they would have if they just had a sensible mix of on and off shore.

                Talk to anyone in the industry for more than 10 years and you'll hear this story every time.

          • Freestyle on 10/04/2022 - 21:21
            -6

            @[Deactivated]: its good to see that you have no idea how labour laws work

          • pangwen on 10/04/2022 - 22:09
            +13

            @[Deactivated]:

            but that hasn't seemed to bother Telstra or any of the other multitude of businesses that outsource to other countries.

            If it hasn't bothered Telstra, then why have they announced that they are converting back to an all-Australia based call centre workforce? https://exchange.telstra.com.au/answering-your-customer-supp…

            We’ve also committed to answering all voice calls in Australia by the end of June 2022, and with our contact centre teams at home, they could be answering calls from down your street or over the back fence.

            • [Deactivated] on 10/04/2022 - 23:48
              -5

              @pangwen: that's a surprise, i suppose they must have become tired of losing customers. regardless, my point still stands.

              • seenandunseen on 11/04/2022 - 08:20
                +8

                @[Deactivated]: First you asked what is stopping employers from offshoring, and now you acknowledge Telstra may have been losing customers due to their offshore call-centres.

                • [Deactivated] on 11/04/2022 - 10:51

                  @seenandunseen: Some businesses don't really care about lost customers due to poor service.. Telstra was formerly among this group. Its not exactly hard to work out

                  • sheamas88 on 11/04/2022 - 11:17
                    +3

                    @[Deactivated]: Everyone who works in an industry with offshoring has this story though. They all tried to offshore the roles, realize you get what you pay for and then bring it back on-shore.

                    Will there always offshore jobs, of course, but WFH is not going to be the cause of mass offshoring in the foreseeable future like OP claims. If you think otherwise then feel free to address any of my points from this comment

            • amsaini15 on 11/04/2022 - 00:11
              +3

              @pangwen: Indeed that's a surprise for me too. I hope other Telcos learn from the same and bring back jobs onshore.

              • seenandunseen on 11/04/2022 - 22:18
                +5

                @amsaini15: The big banks are bringing the jobs back. There was a period 10-15 years ago when they would enjoy a sugar hit from laying off a bunch of onshore staff and move the jobs to India/Philippines for 10-20% of the cost.
                A few people did very well for themselves moving from bank to bank, repeating the same trick advising them to gut their operations and put them overseas, but it wash short-lived and a false economy.
                There was the hidden cost of babysitting people who lacked knowledge, had dubious qualifications & little initiative. Then throw into the mix regular disruptions due to monsoons and floods, poor data protection legislation, increased data theft incidents, poor network infrastructure, corrupt customs practices (try shipping IT equipment through customs without some kind of 'tip'), and it just became too big a headache for too little gain.

            • Blitzfx on 11/04/2022 - 09:44

              @pangwen:

              If it hasn't bothered Telstra, then why have they announced that they are converting back to an all-Australia based call centre workforce? https://exchange.telstra.com.au/answering-your-customer-supp…

              Because it's cheaper to manage a smaller team with low overhead

              The number of calls coming into our consumer and small business contact centres has fallen by 70%
              and by the end of this financial year we expect to answer all of these calls in Australia.

              Further improving customer experience including the completion of bringing our stores in
              house and Consumer and Small Business call centres on shore

              Covid is still causing disruptions in other nations and it is not easy to outfit all of them with WFH equipment.

          • cuteseal on 11/04/2022 - 11:10
            +2

            @[Deactivated]: The same reasons why they find it hard to offshore in the past.

            My company outsourced one low level IT function overseas which is supposed to be pretty straightforward to do.
            But guess what, their communication skills are so poor that our company made it a policy that they are no longer allowed to communicate with customers directly.
            So basically our on-shore engineers have to basically field all the requirements from the customer, feed it to the team, deal with all the to and fro-ing to resolve issues, and then quality check their work when they get it back, and then hand it off to the customer.

            On paper, the cost difference between onshore/offshore is shocking - somewhere between 2-3 times. But as they say, pay peanuts…

          • MikeKulls on 12/04/2022 - 09:30
            +2

            @[Deactivated]: I work with offshore workers for a large company. First off they go through an outsourcing company and the cost ends up being 50% of a local resource, so it's not the massive money saver you'd think it is. The language barrier makes every single thing you do much slower than it needs to be and you're never 100% sure your message has got across. Then there's the 3 day long weddings where they turn up to work but sound like they are falling asleep in meetings. Then there's the security issues where you have to hand out VPN access to staff overseas. Then the staff keep moving so you have to start all over again. And then you have meetings where you can hear chickens running around in the background or construction noises or traffic. I personally don't think it's even worth the trouble. I think it just appears to save money if you have accountants running the company.

            • MikeKulls on 12/04/2022 - 09:56
              +2

              @MikeKulls: Also the time difference is an absolute PITA, someone wants to know something, I say I'll have to wait for offshore to come onboard, they send the reply back after hours and then I get another question the next morning. So can end up being 1 day per communication. Plus you can't really interview them like you do local resources

          • [Deactivated] on 12/04/2022 - 11:03
            +2

            @[Deactivated]: Because they are shit at their jobs? I'd have to say you're fairly deluded if you think your offshore staff are providing equal customer satisfaction to what on-shore would provide. They might be able to read scripts real good and massage KPI's, but they simply don't do the job as well.

            There is a reason many companies are moving back (and marketing) on-shore.

            • MikeKulls on 12/04/2022 - 11:43

              @[Deactivated]: I haven't found them to be any worse or better at their jobs, some are quite good. I do think they care a little bit less as they are working for some overseas company they might have never heard of.

          • knk on 12/04/2022 - 12:18

            @[Deactivated]: There is a huge culture difference in the philippines. It might be doable for a big company who can have an entire office there but if it's just your local business hiring 1 or 2 people it's a (profanity) nightmare.

            Source me, who hired a Philipino for an IT support business.

          • AustriaBargain on 13/04/2022 - 12:37

            @[Deactivated]: And what is to stop you from finding an even better WFH job and quitting? If it's easier for employers to find another WFH worker in Australia to take your job, then it's easier for you to take someone else's job in the same way.

          • Sydneyswans on 14/04/2022 - 13:32

            @[Deactivated]: Ummm Telstra is actually bringing back their call centers to Australia… I know as I was dealing with the employee share plans for Filipino Telstra employees in a previous role.

        • DrScavenger on 19/04/2022 - 12:05

          Which teaches them "if they can outsource to local Ozis they can outsource to foreigners"

      • terrys on 11/04/2022 - 08:06

        I'm not that convinced you're fully aquainted with the recent [ within 200 years] history of industrialisation in the Enlish speaking world…

      • Boogerman on 11/04/2022 - 09:00

        Spot on! Seems like most don't get it

      • Truthbe on 17/04/2022 - 14:25

        Be mad

    • [Deactivated] on 11/04/2022 - 22:57
      +1

      Couldn't agree more. No commute, more sleep, better rested for the work day - and if you get all of your work done - go and watch that movie or play that PS5 - good for you. No-one will be upset as long as the work is getting done - it's a win win.

  • apsilon on 10/04/2022 - 11:55
    +135

    If you're less productive WFH then that's on you. Sure some people will take advantage and that may or may not reflect in their performance and KPIs but don't assume everyone is the same. Many are just as or more productive at home. I know due to constant interruptions in the office from people who don't really know how to do their job and constantly need help that I'm far more productive at home not having to deal with all that. I do miss interacting with staff that I like but we've been meeting up on weekends etc to catch up instead.

    As for pay or payrises I don't see how either of those relate to working from home. I'm being paid for my work, not driving around for an hour a day and payrises are based on performance which is measurable.

      • elgrande on 10/04/2022 - 12:29
        +38

        8-5?

        More like 7-7..

      • DATApush3r on 10/04/2022 - 12:48
        +101

        Tell us how a full-time employee spends their time in the office 8-5…
        People that are anti-WFH always try to throw this in peoples faces as if most white-collar employees aren't trying to find a way to look busy for half their work day in the office. Why is it that when you work in an office you don't have to account for your time but somehow when you WFH for have to justify every second. GTFO of here with this illogical bullshit dude.

        Using excuses like there being more distractions at home like playing video games etc… if you can't keep yourself from slacking off, that's on you. Don't assume that is everyone.

          • DATApush3r on 10/04/2022 - 12:56
            +37

            @spychiatrist: You are the one putting this stuff out there. No one has to answer to you. Especially when you are making extremely wild conjecture from thin air.

          • tikei on 10/04/2022 - 23:25
            +7

            @spychiatrist: My company's customer support team is more productive WFH. This is supported by KPI measurements. Not sure about other teams as the metrics is harder to measure.

          • mlbrooke on 11/04/2022 - 09:12
            +11

            @spychiatrist: YOU are less productive at home and you are making the assertion that everyone else is just the same as you are. That at its very least shows a lack of empathy and potentially intelligence too. As you are a gamer (XBX, PS5, Switch remark), try treating WFH as a third person RPG and look at your self from the outside in, then you can see all the others around doing their own thing (in game of course) while you are just standing there looking around….. this is just like real life, just because you stand and do nothing it does not mean those around you do the same thing.
            For any job where the results can be measured it is very easy to see that working from home works (or not as not all people can handle the responsibility of looking after themselves)….. sales roles, pre sales roles where results are bottom line company figures or many other roles where one is given. workload and expected to do it in a timely manner.

            I used to be at an office 5 days a week, I went for coffees 3 times a day with colleagues and then lunch as well, I went and mingled with sales makers and different teams as a part of my job, was I successful … yes because the output (measured in $$$) can be calculated.

            At home it is exactly the same metric, except now I start at 8am because I can (no drive to work) and I can if I want go and do the laundry or go out for lunch, why because I have the intelligence to know that where ever I am I am paid by someone to help their business grow and I will be the right thing by my employer because they trust me.

            Your stated opinion I hope is not your actual view on life and that you are just trolling, otherwise you (not everybody else) needs to go into an office and work so you can be monitored.

          • Chandler on 11/04/2022 - 11:25
            +2

            @spychiatrist:

            do you stay in your "home office" 8-5?

            Do you stay at your desk 8-5?

            So how are you more productive at home than at work dude?

            Can't speak for DATApush3r, but I know apsilon's comment spoke true for me. Less people interrupting me. I don't have people passing by and deciding that I can help them with their problem, or just asking how my weekend was, etc. Like apsilon, I did miss the social aspect of the office environment, which funnily enough is anti-productive.

            As other's have said - you will have slackers. You will have people that might be slightly less productive, others who are more productive, and then others who work more because it's right there. All-in-all, I think WFH is beneficial for companies. The pros for the employees results in greater productivity, and the cons result in deadweight potentially being noted for what it is and removed from the company. Removed need for so much office space (and where applicable, parking). Likely greater IT costs, but the decreased office space should more than account for that.

            A podcast I listen to recently talked about some company's WFH policy (can't recall which podcast nor which company they were referring to, sorry) and they talked about the company having a small office for staff to utilise for client meetings etc, and they also had a company meet-up every so often there. Sounded like a good practice, in my opinion.

            • johndoh89 on 11/04/2022 - 20:30

              @Chandler: Downero is probably the one that is always bugging you because they aren't able to do their job without asking a million questions of those around them.

              Or they are a middle management level and figuring out that they are completely useless in a wfh situation because all the people who report to them are self managing themselves just fine. The comment about if your boss is in the office you should be sounds like this may be the one.

          • Mr Random on 11/04/2022 - 16:43
            +1

            @spychiatrist: Dude. I'm more productive with my WFH arrangement because I can:
            - Get up at 8am and be on my PC at 8:15.
            - Stop working 4 - 5:30pm (depending on lunch break taken) (or in the case of the past few weeks, 6:30pm because I get the job done regardless of WFH)
            - No long commutes which make me feel sluggish and angry of the rest of the day.
            - No one coming up for a quick chat or tempting me to go for a coffee break.

            That's just off the top of my head dude…

        • KLoNe on 11/04/2022 - 02:42
          +6

          You're the type who owns a "home gym" but is still is 60kg overweight.

        • Therealjohndoe on 11/04/2022 - 12:16
          +2

          I can refute your point right now. Last week I was WFH and was on ozbargain by 10am when I got bored with work. This week I'm in the office, and I am on Ozbargain at 10am refuting your point. Wait thats not right…

        • Franc-T on 11/04/2022 - 12:40
          +2

          Our company has reduced the amounts of seats in our CBD offices - productivity has gone up from pre-covid, people are happier as they have 1-2+ hours more time in their day.

          Our business unit is more task dependant than time, when I need to I will work 18+ hours other times I work normal hours, though we all do stuff like dishes and go to shops as needed. No ones bothered and everyone is happier.

        • drprox on 11/04/2022 - 13:07
          +2

          you're spot on, and it's funny because I realised it was ME trying to account for my time when WFH. I felt guilty putting on a load of washing, or emptying a dishwasher. The reality is these household tasks that keep everything ticking along take up a lot less time than going for a coffee a couple of times a day or even standing around the "water cooler" chatting!

      • apsilon on 10/04/2022 - 13:06
        +28

        Working, exactly the same as if you're in the office. ie Not going out to the shops, not playing games, not gardening, not playing with the dog, not watching Neflix etc. Doing the tasks that make up your job. If you don't have the discipline to do it then that's a you problem, not an everyone problem.

      • cheeseburger on 11/04/2022 - 15:24

        Just because you're in the office doesn't mean you're doing any meaningful work. At my workplace, I'm pretty sure the staff are just as inefficient at the office as they are at home. People are always chatting, going to grab coffees, looking at their phones etc. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if people are more productive at home. A lot of people at my workplace act as if simply showing up to work is work itself. Meanwhile, when you're at home, there's a feeling that you need to prove that you're actually doing something.

        • Harold Halfprice on 12/04/2022 - 16:11
          +3

          One guy at work that keeps telling me they're more productive in the office, isn't very productive at all.

          They come in late, they don't know how to do their job properly so they always interupt others, they take long lunch breaks, always chatting and taking coffee breaks.

          They probably don't like WFH because they feel guilty about not doing work, but don't feel the same guilt if they're slacking off in the office.

      • AustriaBargain on 13/04/2022 - 12:38

        Netflix for the first three hours, then a Star Wars movie on Disney+ for the next two hours, and the rest is just grinding Elden Ring on Playstation.

      • CRS34 on 13/04/2022 - 18:28
        +1

        not commuting to the office

    • Nebargains on 11/04/2022 - 06:20
      +5

      So what about new staff who have a legitimate reason that they don't know how to do their jobs? Too bad for them I guess? But at least you don't get interrupted.

      I was on the receiving end of this last week, had something dumped on me which is somewhat outside the expected knowledge for the role and basically wasted half a day trying to chase people down looking for answers and some simply never respond. This doesn't happen when you are in the office, a message can be easily ignored but it's hard to ignore someone standing next to you.

      Also find it amusing that you now have time in your weekends for catching up with work people, just more time spent working for free.

      I'm currently WFH and see the pros and cons of both but people are kidding themselves if they only see pros and no cons.

      • apsilon on 11/04/2022 - 06:28
        +9

        So what about new staff who have a legitimate reason that they don't know how to do their jobs?

        Completely different scenario if you're training someone. Dumping something on someone without planning shouldn't happen, it's literally your managers job to organise this.

        Also find it amusing that you now have time in your weekends for catching up with work people, just more time spent working for free.

        Sorry I've made some actual friends who I happen to also work with?

        • Kangal on 13/04/2022 - 20:00
          +1

          Doesn't matter. That scenario is stupidly common. Upper management are effectively business blind, and the slack is either pushed to middle-managment or lower to the workers.

          He's got a point about the social aspect.

          And his conclusion is correct, people are blind to certain aspects (pros or cons). You don't know until you experience it fully.

          (Note I'm not condoning WFH/or not. I think it depends on the worker, the workplace, and the nature of the work. With time, companies who do take advantage of computing and internet will gain an efficiency/advantage over those who can but don't. It's been a staple in the IT industry for the last two decades.)

  • trustnoone on 10/04/2022 - 11:56
    +30

    Oh, you also want the same pay for WFH? What's that, you want a payrise?

    That seems to be a big assumption? I do way more work when I'm at home. Our whole team does. I'm actually open either way because if we go back, I can go back to having hours wasted away from idle chit-chat, breaks, actually take my lunch, no questions from colleagues when I'm away from my computer, meetings that I just sit there staring at my coffee etc.

    Don't give your boss an excuse to outsource your job interstate/ overseas

    Why would they want to? They'd need to take on a major cyber security risk to a person outside of Aus jurisdiction and find someone that knows the same amount I do. Besides if a company could outsource your job, they would've already done so, covid aside. They care about the bottom dollar not you, so if your job could be outsourced at a lower rate you'd already be gone WFH aside.

    or find another employee willing to work in an office environment

    This says to me that the boss just wants someone to work in the office "just to be there", if thats the type of manager they are, I don't think I want to work for them.

    Let's not kid ourselves by claiming we're more productive at home. especially if you have kids. Other distractions

    We're all adults here, if you're not being productive, your job is on the line whether you have distractions or not. If there's instances of staff who work better in the office, then thats fine. But you can't assume everyone is like that. Likely its the opposite.

    Look, I feel like there's arguments either side for working in the office or from home. But your post suggests you're trying to write a narrative to get people back in, using a few possible negatives.
    If you're a real, proper manager, in a proper company. You need to assess your pros and cons and figure out what works best for your team. Because I imagine that will provide a much better productivity, work life balance and money for the company then forcing employees to do something that doesn't fit well with them.

      • Freestyle on 10/04/2022 - 21:23
        +20

        good to see your level of education, in line with Muricans

      • cheeseburger on 11/04/2022 - 17:10
        +1

        Hey, you're from WA, you should be happy! More job opportunities for you! Woohoo!

        Also, why would a company go through the trouble of replacing existing workers with people from other states? Where's the cost benefit?

    • AustriaBargain on 13/04/2022 - 12:39
      +1

      Also when WFH you are paying for your computer, the electricity, you are paying the rent on your office room, you are paying for your broadband connection, and you are paying to heat or cool your office.

  • Blokeinhisundies on 10/04/2022 - 12:02
    +51

    Hmm you seem completely unbiased and not looking for people to agree with you at all. You seem pretty aggressively against WFH lol.

    As for my manager/supervisor/superior being willing to come in to the office that is irrelevant. My manager is willing to do all kinds of other crap, it doesn' mean I have to do it as well. How is working from hme a pay rise? If you do the same amount of work for the same money there is no difference. Oh, that's right, you assume everyone is lazy and can't be trusted so they must be doing less work if they aren't in the office. Never mind all the people who make half a dozen coffees a day, go out for durries non stop or just stand around talking for half the day when they are in the office.

    Let me guess, you're a manager who hates their staff working from home because you can't micromanage every minute of their day.

  • rektrading on 10/04/2022 - 12:05
    +17

    The only people who push for commuting to work are cafes, hospitality, retail and other shops that lose walk-in business.

  • rektrading on 10/04/2022 - 12:07
    +18

    The retail and commercial real estate associations are desperate to get people back on the street to keep their members 😊.

    • spychiatrist on 10/04/2022 - 12:31
      +1

      You raised a good point there actually

    • Almost Banned on 10/04/2022 - 19:53
      +1

      The biggest impact in actually on the small traders - the coffee shops, lunch bars, and the like in CBDs who have seen their customers disappear…

      • cacique on 11/04/2022 - 11:44
        +5

        Yet the local suburban traders are booming and local small business seeing more trade from people being local and using their services through the day. You want to risk setting up a business in the CBD that's your problem not mine

  • BuyOrNot on 10/04/2022 - 12:14
    +13

    especially if you have kids.

    Kid goes to childcare even though I am working from home.

  • Stopback on 10/04/2022 - 12:16
    +5

    Share houses becomes a third world call center

  • gabtug on 10/04/2022 - 12:20
    +34

    WFH - no travel, no waiting for meetings to start, ability to sit in boring meetings on mute and work on other things without being rude. What, what's that? WFH is more productive, not less, when you do it right. Maybe you just need to learn to make the most of the WFH situation.

    How to stay relevant? Know your job, your company and your industry inside out. It's your knowledge that makes them worthwhile to keep you.

    • Nebargains on 11/04/2022 - 06:26
      +1

      WFH - no travel, no waiting for meetings to start, ability to sit in boring meetings on mute and work on other things without being rude.

      Virtually none of my meetings ever start on time, always waiting for people who were making a coffee or whatever, no different to the office.

      Also super obvious when people are working on other things without being rude, some people think it's clever multi tasking and I do it sometimes too, but it's so obvious when someone asks you a question and then you have to fumble clicking the mute button and then say the customary 'sorry I just missed that', lost count of how many times I hear that.

      • misu p on 11/04/2022 - 13:58
        +1

        I will take the ability to do some real work in the meetings where I am needed for 5% of the entire meeting, over the fact that from time to time I have to ask somebody to repeat a question.

    • MrKnowItAll on 11/04/2022 - 14:14
      +2

      This hit the nail on the head. Some of us live quite far from work.. I'm doing a 40 minute train ride each way and travel time eats into the day something fierce - previously I'd wake up (tired) at 5.30 am, get ready and arrive at work shortly after 7, work until 3.15 in the afternoon and then make a mad dash to catch the train home. By the time I get home, I've lost where I was at with work and find it impossible to resume where I left off.
      WFH I feel more rested by getting an extra hour and a half of sleep, I work through til 4 or 5 if needed (healthcare so it can get busy quickly) and then transition into "home life" - it's a good balance and one that I hope continues for the forseeable future.

  • holdenmg on 10/04/2022 - 12:21
    +11

    What about all those meetings that you "must" attend, that turn out to be nothing but a time-wasting exercise or faux consultation. I miss them (not).

    • orangetrain on 10/04/2022 - 14:10
      +3

      Yep, a lot of places are embracing asynchronous communications. A good example is messaging people what you need, what you tried and the details in full. A synchronous equivalent begins by only sending "Hi Orangetrain"

      • bmerigan on 10/04/2022 - 21:12
        +17

        OMG I hate it when people message me "Hi" and don't say what they want until I've said "Hi" back. Time wasters.

        • Draco on 11/04/2022 - 05:50
          +3

          Hahaha I knew this would come up my strategy is never respond. I have several people who are known time wasters that I only have conversations that say hi or hey from them and nothing else

    • Brianqpr on 11/04/2022 - 12:34

      Tbf I still get those when WFH. Although its easier to ignore without being noticed.

  • cyrax83 on 10/04/2022 - 12:35
    +33

    You sound like HR or Middle Management lol. Thankfully the company that I joined just before covid went crazy is full time permanent WFH. I also work later and more hours because I'm not wasting my life away on a commute.

    I'm far more productive than being in an office and don't have to deal with the crap fest that is Sydney Trains or paying $4+ for a coffee every day.

    Employers are actually struggling to fill roles at the moment. If you don't offer WFH flexibility, you won't attract the talent.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join