New right to request remote working

I've also seen plenty of lazy and uncommitted people on site that are expert in appearing busy. These were exposed with WFH as there was no one to see them looking busy and their output was measured.
 

So how many "younger people" do you employ and how many of them WFH?
 
Broadcaster said:
In other words does the law trump the internal policy
Click to expand...
You shohld be able to work this out yourself by doing some research, google etc
Gordon Gekko said:
Working from home can make sense in certain very limited circumstances
Click to expand...
Such as?
Gordon Gekko said:
And what about collaboration, teaching younger staff, and fostering a team culture
Click to expand...
As per other poster above. This can all be done when teams wfh with few days in office. It depends on tyoe of work but some of this stuff isnt crucial.
 
One would hope that employers can set terms and conditions including deciding they need employees to be in at work. And that they are not at home minding children instead.
 
My husband was in a very intense job where there is no way he'd have been given any flexibility whatsover, so I worked part time to get the flexibility to collect the kids and take time off for them being sick etc. Since when are matches or concerts during normal working hours? For those you get another parent to help or take the time off. It's news to me a match is now more important than going to work.
 
A lot of the commentary here assumes that kids are at home all the time...pretty much all working parents I know have childcare, afterschool, camps etc and are not minding kids and attempting to work? The key issue is being ready to drop off work at 5.30 to collect kids and for older ones ferry them off to sports etc rather than sit in traffic/on public transport and have their kids have a longer day or miss out on sports. And in a lot of cases are the volunteers running the sports!

The instances where kids are in the background are more likely where they are home sick (but still full of energy!) or where childcare has unexpectedly failed. I think most folks would agree that trying to work with kids there is pretty much impossible, as a lot of us learned during Covid.
 

There are some jobs where flexibility is difficult/impossible but the majority of work can be made flexible to some degree. We are not all Navy Seals and Newgrange winter solstice tour guides.

Also we are not all in 2-parent households.

Plenty of school events and matches are on during the day. Are you saying if your child was in the Harty Cup final of an afternoon you would give it a miss for a Zoom about a discussion about a possible meeting?

Family/personal life is absolutely more important than work and good employers know this.
 
Aside from covid all my colleagues have minders, crèches, Nannies, schools, grandparents…something in place. For small kids anyway.
But a drop off at 8 and an hour long commute to work is a challenge. And a drop off at 8.50 followed by a commute is an even greater challenge. A lot of children still go to the nearest primary school so wfh is very efficient in those years.

As for the school matches, Wednesday afternoons are the traditional sports events. Now I rarely made it to those games but cup matches etc, well popping out for an hour shouldn’t be a big deal. Unless you are leaving customers high and dry for the afternoon, and there’s usually notice for these event.
 

This is exactly it. A colleague of mine had to stay home with her child recently for a few days. She was able to WFH and get time-critical stuff done. She was available 80% of the time, child occasionally popped up on a Zoom for a few moments. The alternative would have been for her to take leave, in which case we would have had her expertise 0% of the time and she would have lost out on a week of annual leave.
 
i know plenty of people who have 8-10 years olds coming home at 2.30 from school and then juggling all summer / easter / etc etc
 
I work for a multi-national, our starting point is "can you work from home". ? If so, then do so and we give the flexibility to staff to build their lives accordingly and as long as the job is done to the required standard and within the required timeframe and the clients are happy we don't care. If that means someone starts at 6.30am and takes an hour out for the school runs and is minding kids from 3.30pm, fine by us, as long as the job is done. Flexibility all round. 90% of my team are overseas, why do I need to be in an office to manage them?

In this case, the women in question has 2 options, take the job or don't take the job. Does no harm to ask about remote working but it sounds like she needs to "upsell it" as to how she will be more productive as a result, not so she can mind the kids.

Mention of things like the WRC is nonsense in this case.
 
Most people don't work in offices or for multinationals and can't work from home. It's worth remembering that when the people who make the laws and most of the people they work with and the people in their social circles are the minority who can work from home.
It's also worth remembering that within that group 60% of the Civil service are women and they, rightly, already have considerable flexibility in their working hours. The danger is the discussion becoming myopic.

People should absolutely have the right to work flexibly where it can be accommodated. What they shouldn't expect it to be paid the same as people who work longer and prioritise work over family.
 
I completely agree, whilst we mostly work from home, if the nature of the job demands you to be on a client site or a DC for work, then that was the job you signed up for and get on with it.

I do find though that people who work from home, tend to work longer hours, certainly that is what I see from myself and my colleagues, mainly because we are not commuting any more. Just because you are in the office, doens't mean you are working productively and that latter concept is beyond a lot of managers comprehension.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register