Timeline for Simple rules for a successful partly remote policy with about 50% office time
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 30, 2021 at 17:11 | history | edited | Robin Bennett | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Entirely rewritten in response to an edit of the question.
|
| Jul 29, 2021 at 9:02 | comment | added | Robin Bennett | @user132647 - I take your point that it was completely normal to require 100% office work in 2019, and most people accepted it because they had no other option. The difference is that now good people are being tempted by 100% remote job offers from companies across the country. You don't have to offer something 100% perfect, but you do need to offer something good enough to counter that temptation. If this negotiation fails, you could struggle to recruit replacements (unless someone locally has imposed something even more unpopular) | |
| Jul 28, 2021 at 18:12 | comment | added | user132647 | They offer to pay for the commute in the same way as they payed in 2019. From their view: it's easy for employees to say that remote working is 'worth it', when management has to pay the bill. (here: have problems with organizing meetings, and not being able to see their employees working). Having said that, that's just one of the reasons managers don't like remote working, and they can be different for each manager. A good employee should be trying to understand that, and don't reject every solution that is not perfect in every way. (Meant as a friendly parody of your reply ;)) | |
| Jul 28, 2021 at 17:33 | comment | added | Robin Bennett | @user132647, but are they actually offering to pay that cost, or allow people to commute during office hours? It's easy to decide that something is 'worth it' when someone else is paying the bill. Having said that, the commute is just one of the reasons people want to stay at home, and they can be different for each person. A good manager should be trying to understand all those reasons and find solutions that work for their team. | |
| Jul 28, 2021 at 17:07 | comment | added | user132647 | According to many people in management, the answer is: yes, the benefit to the company is worth it. They may be wrong, but that's irrelevant: they think it,and act like it. | |
| Jul 28, 2021 at 16:02 | comment | added | Robin Bennett | @user132647 - I think that's a legitimate worry, but most people are willing to be reasonable about it, provided the other side is also being reasonable. Put it this way, is the benefit to the company of an in-person meeting worth the company paying for the commute (in time and expenses)? That sounds ridiculous, but it's what you're asking your staff to give up. | |
| Jul 28, 2021 at 11:49 | comment | added | user132647 | The risk: every new meeting will come with a discussion "should this be remote", where management argues that it has to be in person, while most of the staff thinks remote is good enough. Then attempts will be made to make rules for which meetings can be remote. This will fail. Everybody will be unhappy. Maybe I am too pessimistic... | |
| Jul 28, 2021 at 9:14 | history | answered | Robin Bennett | CC BY-SA 4.0 |