There are growing voices from the corporates to force people to go back to office 5 days a week, with NAB now taking action for full 5 days a week in the office for senior staff:
https://www.9news.com.au/national/nab-ceo-calls-end-of-flexi…
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/25/time-to-go-…
Have you been asked to go back to work 5 days a week yet? Would you accept the request?
I wonder, How do homeless people work from home?
Was asked to come in 5 days a week from 3 because my new manager was an huge extrovert and he didn't mind coming in 5 times a week, also he lived 10 minutes away, I lived 50 minutes away!
I declined so many times, he just stopped asking.
What's up with people with going in? Seriously? If stats show the work is done, who cares.
Exactly… All it needs is ability to ignore… LoL
You've hit the nail on the head here. Extroverts are the ones ruining it for everyone. My previous manager was so extroverted that he would be singing when walking down the corridors. I mean the arrogance to think anyone in the office wanted to hear him singing. Have since quit said work place.
I fully understand! This manager would come in, talk to EVERYONE then sit down, then he would do no work. It was an open office, so when someone is having like a 3som or more conversation, he would be a meerkat and want to join in. It was quite embarassing but also his work ethic is to befriend everyone, he only got the job because he knew the CEO and the CEO knew of him from a podcast……
Wannabe overlords looking for minions.
My job can’t be done from home (yet).
Our dept head jumping up and down to get everyone in the office twice a week but direct supervisor is chill. He keeps referring him to the company policy which allows work from home. lolz.
Last job company made a big noise to have people work from office 3 days a week. Thrown in BBQ lunch for a week.
The lunch week was packed. Then everyone went straight back to WFH. 😂
When majority refuses, there’s nothing a company can do.
How to end WFH in five steps:
1) Wait for recession to hit
2) watch employment rate plunge
3) keep only who is okay working in the office
4) once economy picks up employ at your conditions
5) Bye bye WFH
Very simplistic view.
@RSmith: To simplistic view discounting high performers who preferred to work from home vs low performers.
The guy brings in the bacon will always win. If this guy wants to work from home. WFH it is.
Sure it's simplistic but this is what's going to happen. WFH is a failed experiment and it will be soon a distant memory. Overall I think it's dragging economy down with low productivity (not individual, that can vary, more as a whole) and in turn requirement for companies employing more than they need in normal times - hence the very low unemployment AND a looming recession (first time ever this happens, wonder why?)
@liongalahad: I doubt you have worked from home.
I have started work from home 5 years before pandemic.
It is a work place strategy to rent less space and save on facilitate cost.
WFH will stay.
@goraygo: WFH works well when your job is doing individual repetitive tasks that do not require team effort. Like coding, customer support, writing. In most cases if that's your job , you'll soon be replaced by AI I'm afraid.
I did WFH, like most people during the pandemic, and for my job (work in a small engineering consultancy - 25 people - almost every project is a team effort that requires a lot of coordination) it's quite terrible. In my company very few currently do it, and who does it's mostly 1 home 4 office. But almost no one really asks to do it because they know it's not beneficial to their own job and to the company.
Obviously this is andectodtal (like your experience) so it's not really relevant, however most CEOs are advocating for the end of WFH. Companies are starting to ask people to go back to the office.
WFH is the ultimate first world privilege and it's not sustainable. It will soon be over, at least generally.
Let's wait and see I guess.
@liongalahad: Assumptions. Assumptions. I ain’t doing coding or repetitive work. So there you go, all your assumptions went out of the windows.
I didn’t say all jobs can WFH. Because you said WFH will disappear soon and I am telling you it won’t. We don’t need to argue as in 10 years time, you will look back and think crap, WFH still around.
And again, not most CEO advocating full time from work. Most CEO actually advocate a few days at home and few days at work.
I see you work for a very small company and May be your view is not board.
@goraygo: Ok let's wait and see I guess. Happy to be proven wrong, if it survives the next recession it means it's a good thing and it works. For me, as I said, it's the ultimate white-collar first word privilege BS that is not sustainable on a large scale. I could be wrong of course. We'll see.
P.S. now you got me curious on what is that you do that works so well with WFH
Mandatory 5 days in the office, it’s time to look for a remote job.
I work in IT so I WFH most days, try to go in once a fortnight or so to catch up with people in person but it's pretty much purely a social/get out of the house thing, I get less work done and I'm tired at the end of the day from the commute
Happy to work from home and have the freedom to go into office if needed. Companies forcing people to come in will just lose motivated talent people unless they are paying significantly more.
If an office-based business does not offer at least 2 x WFH days a week they had better be offering pretty decent pay.
I wonder if Hungry Jacks burger flippers could work from home?
The scope of WFH is endless…
Soon it’s WFH retail staff and maybe even cabin crew serving drinks from home lol
More like robot and AI takeover those workers and no more work.
Post-covid got asked to go back in full time, but since then got approved for 2 days WFH 3 office which I'm quite happy with as I like seeing my co-workers
The solution is hybrid in the future as a compromise . About 3 days is fair i think.
I started a new job 2 months ago and everyone on the team works one day at home a week. I was promised the same once I settled in however HR sent an email with a new draft flexible working policy and I am not impressed and it looks like I won't be eligible:
"Team members are eligible to make a request where the team member:
● is the parent, or has responsibility for the care, of a child who is of school age or
younger,
● is a carer [within the meaning of the Carer Recognition Act 2010 (Cth)],
● has a disability,
● is 55 or older,
● is returning from parental leave,
● is person experiencing family or domestic violence; or
● provides care or support to a member of the team member's immediate family, or
a member of the team member’s household, who requires care or support
because the member is experiencing violence from the team member’s family."
"Types of FWAs may include:
● Reduced hours or days of work per week
● Change to days of the week a team member is required to work
● Change to start and finish time
● Compressed working hours
● Job share
● Transition to retirement
● Working from home"
Time to look for a new job
I would love a work from home job. Now and again I have a look on Google but a lot I find look like scams.
No. Not yet and probably not likely in a short-medium term by the look of it.
Hopefully it will stay that way but I do understand the other side's argument so I think I'll stay neutral.
Currently no requirement to go in, but I try to make the effort 1-2 days a week. It's good for some variety/socialising etc. And the city is sometimes nice to walk around. Incidental exercise is also a bonus (without specifically going for a local walk/gym etc).
I'd probably never work at a job that required 5 days a week moving forward (I work as an IT Consultant, but generally don't touch physical hardware/networking etc, I can do my job 100% remotely atm). I think 2-3 days office, 2-3 days home is a good compromise.
I wish I had that. I’m in IT and do much more work when at home but they force me to come into the office 2-3 days a week. I had commuting to work which is an hour each way when I could be getting work completed at home during that time.
So many people working from home?!? What?
no one at my company goes into the office unless we have a meeting. there have been some who havent gone into the office for about 8 months straight.
Can I ask what's the industry you work in?
cloud software company
Super interesting. I did WFH for a little while but was happy to go back when it felt safe.
As someone who plays card / board games with my workmates at lunch and has a great office set up, I can't even imagine working from my dingy home office alone haha. I actually really enjoy working from the office, and the 30 mins to and from is great wind down / podcast / audiobook time for me. It's like the 3rd location in between work and home that helps me connect/disconnect.
There was no good answer for my situation, I work for a state government department who has been incredibly stubborn regarding WFH since it's inception, and remarkably creative in their rationale for resisting it and denying peoples ability to WFH even on the odd ad-hoc occasion, let alone a regular occurrence.
Well, the latest EBA that secured the 3% raise and cost of living payment had a WFH clause built in that our departments are being forced to accept. So I look forward to seeing how they implement it to mute it as much as they possibly can.
A quote, from the latest email from the union.
What are the improvements to your working from home provisions?
A right exists for all employees to request working-from-home (WFH) arrangements. Your improved WFH provisions now give you more rights to negotiate flexible working from home arrangements with your employer.The improved Working from Home provisions outlined in Clause 51 of the Agreement shift the attitude around WFH from being a unique arrangement only approved in limited and extraordinary circumstances, to an arrangement that asks, ‘if it can be done, why shouldn’t it be done?’
When deciding to approve or reject a WFH arrangement, Employers must now consider the individual circumstances of the employee making the application and adopt an “if not, why not?” rationale, and provide ‘reasonable business grounds’ should a working from home arrangement be refused.
What are 'reasonable business grounds'?
If your employer rejects your WFH application, they can only do so on ‘reasonable business grounds’, which are clearly defined in the clause. They include but are not limited to the following:
a. The working from home arrangement requested by the Employee would be too costly for the Employer;
b. It is not possible or would be impractical to change the working arrangements of other Employees, or to recruit new Employees to accommodate the working from home arrangement requested by the Employee;
c. It would result in a significant loss of efficiency or productivity or have a significant negative impact on customer service.
The new provisions should make it easier to request WFH and to raise a dispute if the Employer rejects your application on irrelevant or weak grounds.
i worked for state government for a decade and trust me they have every reason to ask people to come to office and do nothing then sitting home and do nothing … lol
most of SG bosses are dead wood and has nothing to do at home but in office they can micromanage others and make others listen to their BS … and that is the only reason they want everyone in office… !
there are some SG department even bosses don't want to go back to office but sadly all politicians (Liberal first and then Labor) want coffee shops in city to be in the business so they are forcing staff to go to office in a hope that it will allow landlords to charge sky high rents and coffee shops to run business nothing else… ! i left SG when they forced to go to office … !
The issue I have found with total WFH is that I appreciate home less. When I wasn't WFH and came home from the office I'd enjoy coming back to a bit of sanctuary, but now I am here all the time.. probably doesn't help that work and home are blended a bit too much.
I'm the opposite, love being at home. Feel like I am getting more out of the house I spent a lot of money on by being here most of the time.
Work can creep into home life if you are not careful though.
For me, going for a run at the local park and then grabbing a coffee before starting work is so much better than sitting on a packed train with other miserable people like I used to. Both physically and mentally.
Theres no option for…
The company asked us to come in 4 days a week and the workers collectively told them to piss off.
The diverse ozbargain community is interesting.
It is not detrimental to productivity, it boosts it. I get way more done at home. No time wasted commuting, far less distractions and easy to work back when you need to when you don't have a train to catch.
Yeah that's why most employers now want people back in the office..lol… You may think productivity is good but it's not. Team work needs presence. A lot of people underperform when WFH.
I believe unemployment is so low also because of this, low productivity requires more people employed to generate the same revenue, and in turn low available workforce forces employers to accept everything employees want or they'll quit. This situation is one of the factors, I think, why global recession is unavoidable. A situation that has never existed before. Well, recession will wipe this work from home nonsense away once and for all and at least it will be a good thing recession will bring.
People are just lazy and entitled, but thank f*** it is going to end soon enough.
You sound very put out by wfh.
But just remember, “you are entitled to your opinion, but not your facts”.
Everything you said, from productivity being worse, to wfh being nonsense, are all incorrect statements for the field I work in.
@Mr Random: Maybe for the field you work in its different, I don't know. If you work in a field where teamwork is essential, working from home is just terrible.
Most CEOs are now advocating for the WFH to end. Do you think they'd do it if WFH productivity was high? Productivity may seem high for the individual, especially when their job is very individual and does not require collective effort, but for a team or for a company as a whole it's just terrible.
@liongalahad: Definitely the type of work is a huge factor, and I think team size.
For me personally, I work in a team of about 10, in software development. We have found our productivity increase since wfh has become a 5 day a week thing. Processes are now documented more frequently, and we can easily video chat and have it saved to recall decisions made if something was overlooked by another.
The last place I worked at (same field) had the same setup, but the major difference was that management required us back in 5 days a week. The reasoning they gave us was, “how do we know you are doing the work you say you are doing”. Big trust issue, and a very idiotic reason considering all software work is tracked on servers.
Since that experience I’ve been skeptical about why managers demand wfh to end. Whether it is in fact poor performance by employees, or a lack of trust or micro management high.
Anyways. Many factors I suppose.
So companies aren't laying off workers because they don't have visibility of how lazy they are being at home 😂😂😂?
Come on now, we've all had a drink.
https://fortune.com/2023/05/05/remote-work-productivity-5-st…
Productivity is showing the sharpest decline in 75years. Enough said I guess
@liongalahad: It is pretty easy to find articles online to coincide with your views.
Take a quick Google of "Productivity WFH" for example, which mostly discuss the benefits.
Random Article 1
Random Article 2
Random Article 3
I could go on, sine the entire first page results are in favour of wfh.
To be fair, I could probably find just as many article aligning with your views. Which likely stands to reason that with so much conflicting data, there is no right or wrong answer, and it comes down to what suits your company and needs best.
It’s the stupid middle managers whose existence hinges on micromanaging workers who are absolutely obsessed with going back to the office.
As long as other businesses continue to offer wfh as an option it will continue to exist. Any employee worth their salt will consider jumping ship if to a competitor if their employer axes wfh. Many employers have seen productivity boosts and no longer have to waste money on an expensive office lease in cbd districts. We already have several years of data to back this up. It's not rocket science. Perhaps do some research instead of making baseless claims.
Maybe the people in your workplace like to goof off when no one’s watching, but that doesn’t apply to the broader working community.
My company is actively promoting flexible working arrangements but the nature of our job requires us on site at times like when handling paperwork and printing client requests. Yes you can argue we can work off email but subpoenas for example can only be done in hard copy. So that means I'm in 3 days a week minimum and I am only 15 minutes away from the office anyway. Some people still only come to the office at the prospect of being treated to Starbucks or dominos pizza but it shouldn't be bribery to get someone in the office.
When we moved offices to brand new facilities (parramatta) , we didn't even need all the office space due to remote work so we sold off a few floors. Now there are some teams so big such as customer service teams who wouldn't even fit if we asked them back in 5 days a week so remote work, works in our favour.
Ultimately I want flexibility with work so if something urgent comes up at home Amazon delivery, landlord inspection, child sick, I can stay home….. Pre covid19 one guy took like 20 sick days in a row when he would have been Able to help if he had been given a laptop.
Wfh has opened up markets, especially for interstate firms which find it hard to source talent locally.
Doing meetings over teams is tonnes more efficient. People are on time, and you can multitask if the topic has nothing to do with you. People used to have to wait 6 minutes plus just for people to pack up and change meeting rooms, buildings etc. People have missed entire meetings because they couldn’t find the meeting room! Not to mention the farce of finding meeting rooms that will fit the right number of participants and have the right equipment.
Needing to focus and churn out work is a legitimate reason to wfh as well. Wasting time travelling to the office, staying late and taking a taxi home paid for the company is a thing of the past.
Frankly if you can’t trust your staff to work from the office, then you probably can’t trust them to work from the office either.
Viva la work from home!
Very good points. Used to spend ages outside meeting rooms waiting for others to vacate, not to mention the time getting to and from them.
Let alone many people are unaware that the booking time has already elapsed. There seems to be a common misconception that the longer a meeting lasts, the more productive it is. 😅
Out of interest, particularly for entry level roles: if you never need to attend the office what is to stop your employer making you redundant and hiring someone from overseas to perform your role remotely?
I don't think coming into the office alone will be the difference, almost all office jobs can be done remotely.
It just wasn't as common 10+ years ago due to home internet speeds sucking and collobration software not being ubiquitous.
Another way to look at it, talented people don't have to settle for bad conditions and will seek out jobs with better work life balance.
Working from home is a perk and comapnies should lean on that to attract and retain talent.
LoL so like those from overseas going to attend your office? …
because 3rd world off shoring cant buy intelligence and initiative. we have offshore resources at my place and they're mostly robots or lack intelligence/initiative
Honestly if you’re a terrible leader it’s really hard to manage remote workers. Most corporates are packed full of terrible leadership so return to office is the only viable option.
We’re fully remote and we’ve never performed better. It’s also unlocked a global team which has been amazing.
Get a load of this high quality, unbiased journalism by Nine 😂
https://9now.nine.com.au/today/selfish-staffers-still-workin…
CEO of office leasing company says people should come into the office more… hmm…
Quality hey 😂
We have 2 day wfh policy but I go all 5. Really enjoy the 2 days in the office when most people wfh.
In my opinion, all these people advocating for this working from home nonsense:
1) will be soon forced back to office once global recession hits, and it's going to hit hard unfortunately. Employment rate will plunge and they're not going to have the upper hand when negotiating their employment.
2) If for some reason the above point does not happen, employers will soon start employing cheap labour for overseas
3) a bit further down the track, they will be the first ones replaced by AI in the next few years anyway (if your job is writing you're basically screwed) so enjoy while it lasts folks
Why is it nonsense? No matter how many days I go into the office I'm harassed by catch-ups and discussions and people just turning their chair around asking questions and pulling me into meetings …it's the worst. Working from home has made me so much more productive….what I used to do in 8 hours I do in 4. My output and delivery of projects has almost doubled.
And I'm in project management.
Whf has helped my locally community so much more. Cafes are popping up, and small communities are forming. I can spend time with my son before daycare and sometimes even have a breakfast with the wife at a cafe at 7am rather than being stuck on the train for 55 minutes with the rest of the unwashed masses.
The people who are advocating are people who have a stake. Where I work official policy is 1 day. But if you want to come in 5 then it's welcome. That's what I think it'll be eventually. A mandate for part in but can always do more.
1) Or keep the wfh and save on the real estate costs (+ power etc) which is generally a businesses 2nd largest expense after labor. Also potential extra labor cost in losing
the wfh incentive to attract talent.
2) Employers have been trying and failing to employ cheap labor overseas. Turns out uneducated, untrained, unmotivated labor is cheap for a reason.
3) Very far down the track because
a) Businesses will have a disengaged workforce after trying point 1 above.
b) They'll be fixing the problems for 10 years+ after trying point 2 and have no competent staff left to make anything happen
c) Workforce will increase anyway as they'll need dozens (many) just sitting in committees trying to make a decision, and prob each committee person will then want their own staff, (if this is being done by cheap os labor just multiply this by 10-15).
d) They will then need huge teams to try and undo the mess the first team created as the didn't bother to source any skills and thought making up bs would work in any scenario, rinse & repeat until AI leads to a massive labor shortage.
I think WFH is actually one of the main reasons for inflation and the looming recession. This is the first time in history we have a recession at the door while enjoying one of the lowest unemployment rate ever.
Companies are experiencing lower productivity because of it, in turn they have to employ more people (hence the low unemployment), and spend more, so products prices go up while revenues stagnate or receed. WFH definitely not the only cause, but surely one of them.
People think they're being more productive personally, but overall the company is less productive. Culture and teamwork is just terrible with WFH. Having to call another team member is a waste of time and effort, and not as effective compared to just lean over a desk and speak. Plus it has been proven WFH often trigger isolation and depression… Companies are losing because of WFH, it's a fact and that's why most prominent CEOs are all calling fur an end to the WFH experiment.
It's going to end when the next recession starts, whether you like it or not because it's not sustainable.
First off you started that with 'I think' ie your opinion which is fine. Then finished with your opinion being 'a fact' whether I like it or not. Can I first off ask whether you do wfh and what sort of role you have.
There are a lot bigger smoking guns around than wfh, the people I know would say they spend less and are much more discreet with their spending when they wfh. Personally I think there are some similarities with the GFC which was ultimately caused by employee targets and bonuses being incorrectly set. In this case executives with revenue based bonuses finding the only way to meet those targets is to increase the product profit margin. Shareholders want consistent dividends, supply costs are rising, There was also a huge amount of cash funneled into many of these businesses through job-keeper in previous years, that was huge a windfall for many companies (ridiculous yes), but they need to try and maintain that profitability, and execs can loses out on hundreds of thousands in bonuses if they don't.
Gotta tell you, the people that are unproductive at home are likely also unproductive in the office, regardless of how busy they appear to be . The productive people have measures and KPIs and workload to keep them productive.
Also you're thinking people communicate in a different way when wfh is just not my experience for at least 15 years. People message in exactly the same way in or out of the office. Possibly even more likely to have a phone conversation when remote. There are also a lot of areas where you become more efficient and flexible, which increases productivity. I could provide many anecdotes, one is I am currently able to support 3 businesses at the moment because I don;t need to commute, and my absenteeism is zero for the last 5 years I've been doing it..
@tonka: Sorry my "you" wasn't directed to you in particular, was a generic you. I'm not an expert of macro economy so I have no instruments to state facts on this matter, just my opinion. If my opinion came out like a supposed fact it was a poor choice or words.
I don't WFH. I did in the past and for certain tasks where I required full concentration it's great. But if I need to deal with coworkers and work collectively to one project, I find it terrible. I'm in an office where some WFH sometimes (mostly 1day a week home, 4 in the office) and whenever I have to work with them while they are at home, it's always a struggle to get hold of them, send them a message in ms teams, wait many minutes, try to call them they won't pick up…I just find it a waste if time. My company is engineering consultancy and I'm in a managerial role.
I'm sure there are realities where WFH works, but WFH can't be the norm and I can't stand the entitlement some employees have on the matter. In my experience it's detrimental to a company's productivity as a whole and hearing CEOs saying it's time to end WFH reinforces my position
@liongalahad: Apart from some of the more obvious benefits I'm gonna mention two.
One big one is the benefit to parents, and more specifically women (that we know very often take on the larger child rearing duties). How does someone drop a kid off to school, then find a car spot at the train station, commute an hour to work and still be available if the childcare center or school calls for the kid to be picked up? And is it not better if those kids don't spend an extra hour and half in after school care while that parent commutes home. And yes I know 'previous generations did it', nope they didn't, there's a giant gap in our childbirth rate were society forgot to make this feasible.
The second one is a a little less tangible, a little weirder, and I think may even be at the core or the problem, Workplace culture, something that is more easily administered to employees in attendance. But also something that isn't always healthy. We all have a propensity to be conform to the authority figures around us, studies prove this. Whether nature or conditioning I don't know. I do know I feel very much more comfortable saying no when I'm asked to do something unethical or even illegal, and much, much more comfortable rejecting any kind of coercive pressure. It's so very much easier to be objective about your work relationship when you are remote. And I suspect albeit unconsciously it's this management is the most uncomfortable about. Productivity itself can be managed with good tools and measurement, it's the politics (and narcissism) that's muted and politics very often undermines productivity.
All just my opinion but based on my current experience. I do work 2-3 jobs remotely at the moment. A bit of an experiment on my part where I am seeing if they compliment each other to increase my productivity, so far so good. All up I've had about 5 completely remote roles, but unique to my specialization I do work a bit with some of those offshore teams you mentioned, (empire builders allergic to efficiency, productivity and accuracy) they only pretend to take work from us and actually create more and end up very expensive.
I do have entitlement on the wfh matter, but it's entitlement I've earned. I can afford to and will remove my skills from the workforce before I go back to an office, I've done my time and got more than my share of scars from office bullies.
No confrontation intended, I appreciate the discourse.
3) a bit further down the track, they will be the first ones replaced by AI in the next few years anyway (if your job is writing you're basically screwed) so enjoy while it lasts folks
I don't think so because many writing jobs require specialized knowledge and expertise in specific fields. AI models at the moment can only provide general information that they are only trained on what's on the internet therefore lacking depth of understanding and domain-specific knowledge such as technical writing, scientific research papers, and industry-specific content. Only moron managers at the higher ups get on board hype train after watching it on 7 news or some BS, any good business owner should be taking a good eye of these managers looking to replace people with AI.
Thing is, they will replace one writer with a proofreader, 2 programmers, 3 tech support, 2 people in manufacturing process, another person in the vendor's support, 16 people in the project team, 3 analysts, 3 marketers, 10 customer support and a lawyer. Now we have that team in place, they will need extra support, HR, Payroll, cleaners, transport, tech support, coffee shop etc. Now that doesn't even take into account the structure required to support it when it starts going wrong, then to try and fix, then to wind back it all.
It's not about replacing everyone. It's about keeping the good ones who, using AI, will be able to produce a lot more than now. What takes hours today, it will take minutes. The average workers will be the ones at risk of being replaced. At that point these people will beg to work, office or home won't matter.
Also, you are missing the projection where AI is going, which is exponential. 3 years ago what's possible now with AI was only possible in sci-fi movies. In 3 years, what you think it's not possible today, will be the norm. Writing jobs will be the first ones to go, but many other jobs will be at risk too (and I'm including my engineering job also).
My points though, is there are plenty of areas, really so very many, that could be already be more labor efficient just using software that has been available for decades. Plus the people that are supposed to be able to code can't , most people don't even know what a macro is.
Things are not moving forward, things are going backwards. 30% of our workforce are in public service and would be horrified if something came across their desk promoting efficiency, it would be immediately burnt. As I heard it that was the reason Rudd got ousted so quickly. The wrong people are in charge, the wrong people are implementing. There's a few businesses out there that can cut through the bs and make things happen. But most are full of so much bureaucracy and risk adverse leadership, that they will only action short term gains for short term rewards. Nothing will happen quickly.
We were asked to go back to work 5 days a week so long ago now, I am still surprised how common it is in the big smoke!
Those supporting working from office are one of below categories:
LOL
I’m in 3, home 2. I like it this way and I’d never want 5 either way.
I find it funny how entitled most people seem to be about it. Unless it’s written in your contract you aren’t entitled to anything.
Workers have the upper hand at the moment because of low unemployment but I reckon there is a bit of change coming.
I also don’t think it has much to do with control or office costs. There is something to be said for in person working. Social interaction and collaboration are massively beneficial to working environments.
I don't really view it as entitled. It's just a tug of war and good on workers (for once) winning a round (I agree assisted by right employment).
I would add though if your work calls you back 5 days and a week and you say 'no' you had better be happy to leave! Hollow threats are nonsense.
A tug of war would be a negotiation. Like negotiating working hours, pay, holiday etc.
All I see currently is “I want to work from home 5 days a week and my employer says no how dare they?”
If we all got to decide everything about our working conditions nothing would work.
It's not entitled it's choice…if where you work is shifting to 5 days….then move. It's what I prefer, I enjoy 1 days on and 4 days at home.
Of course it’s choice. But the choice most of the time is going to be if you don’t like it, find somewhere else. Unless it’s in your contract you have no entitlement to work from home.
People these days seem to act like if employers don’t let them work from home when they like it’s outrageous. Don’t like it? Tough! They don’t have to let you work from home.
It’s exactly what I’ve just done. I’ve gone from somewhere that did 0 WFH, to somewhere that lets me do 2-3.
You do have to acknowledge that a business is going to be more successful with an engaged an happy workforce. They don't have to let you work from home, but if they want to employ intelligent people than they have to engage with that intelligence.
At the moment workers are saying, wfh works, and it has so many logical benefits, family, commute, life balance, reduce pollution, reduce traffic/crowding, I personally feel safer and healthier at home and I interact more my colleagues and managers constantly in the same way I would at work.
Employers are saying come back because we said so, no logic offered or maybe because 'teams'.
My experience is the person requiring return to office us usually the CEO, the dude who's gonna lose their corporate palace where they love coming to work and get treated so special with more attention than they could need.
Also a lot people don't want to be in arms reach of their 'teams' lots of people now know narcissism is rampant, toxic cultures are rampant people are coming home from a boring office job with anxiety and ptsd because every business has abusers and when you're at work you're a sitting target the only way to avoid them is to avoid them.
@tonka: I am fully with you on the first paragraph, but that still doesn’t mean anyone is entitled to it like most people seem to think they are.
@ldt: Fair enough, and of course it depends on the job you do.
I think it would probably my fair to attend one day a week if the reason attend is 'just because'. But then you have productivity problems where you may not have a suitable workspace/equipment for that one day.
Remote environments are a global trend though, and not just because of co-vid. Businesses are global and frequently see global teams working together virtually as best practice.
So if wfh is what the quality employees value, businesses that don't allow it are going to going to have problems.
But as you say it is up to them.
@tonka: "WFH works" isn't just a statement but it is a fact because it did worked for 2 year during covid …. and biggest myth of the corporate world and employer exposed thanks to Covid in my opinion.. !
I worked in State Government and efficiency increased, involvement of every individual increased, no delays from office worker in delivering projects and all thanks to working from home… but Liberal government (and now labor) being lobbied by big wealthy people that if people don't go back to offices then all those rich people who bought office buildings won't get rents and their shareholders won't receive enough of the dividend and coffee shop owner who used to under liberal federal government able to claim upto 20k in asset write off won't be able to do it without business as there are no customers … lol … ! so government together with CEO (as you mentioned those who love to be pampered) decided to start this bull crape about teamwork requires working face to face … lol :D :D :D
i have CEO who every morning send out business update with him visiting one of the office or sites interstate with photo of him running on beach or wearing high vis t-shirt …. ! now our business runs at a margin of 1% … lol and CEO keep flying around taking photographs … lol :D
@SydBoy: And there's the kicker, you have to attend the office to 'be seen', and after making that effort there's no-one there to see you.
I got so many people living at home that I won't be able to WFH even if my employer offered me to.
Senior staffs that NAB are pushing for 5 days gets paid in the excess of 400k+ annually. I would work 5 days in the office if I get that much
most those with 400k package afford to use toll roads, pay parking next to office in the CBD and in the office they simply talk bull crape and delegate works .. !
interesting to see if @scotty want everyone to work from home or prefer everyone to travel in germ infected public transport ? :D
No. My company just gave back 1/3 of it's floors in 2 buildings (about 12 of them) back to the lease company.
So I don't think they're ever expecting 5 days
Maybe 2 to 3 days moving forward.
Pays good but not great. But I'll stay out for now and see what happens
may be we working for same company… !
my company also gave 70% of real estate back to owners after lease finished and now have small office so not a single senior manager forcing anyone to work from home as first thing they will need to do is buy back those 70% real-estate at high rent prices going around at the moment (few millions for our office size) … and they prefer to use those spare few millions in bonus instead of wasting on real-estate rents … lol !
NAB have been pushing a back to the office policy for ages because it's good for them. Increased credit card spend, they have tonnes of floorspace unused, it pushes up the value of downtown office space, there's risks around office space owners defaulting on loans, it's just common sense for them to push everyone going back to work.
I do 1-2 days in and it's fantastic. Cram all the face to face meetings in, the gossip, the quick chats people and it's done. Then I can go home and focus without interruption the other days and get way more work done because 2 hour stretches of uninterrupted work are now a real thing, that never happened in the office. My productivity has gone through the roof even though I piss around at home a lot.
Honestly i've found businesses that are backward with the idea of wfh(especially the ones pushing 0 days wfh) are backward with business decisions, company direction and things like maintaining good company culture as well and are not secure places to work long-term. Most people in my circle who still work for these places and gave in to the wfh pushbacks have seen said companies go under or layoff several staff due to loss of funding and had their workloads go up significantly with no pay increases for years.
There's also many people who have purchased homes hours away from cities because prices close by are cooked and commuting to work is just no longer feasible. At least not on our poorly maintained joke of a public transport system.
Also I don't get crotchety users on this site who are obsessed with other people's life choices, in this choosing to wfh, calling people lazy or entitled with no reasoning. Stop watching sky news and get back your abilities to make coherent arguments for yourselves.
Hahaha. At my previous company I did exactly this. Just didn't go back in when they wanted 2 days in the office. I was going to keep working from home until somebody told me personally to come in. :)