New hybrid "onsite" requirement and reporting to an empty office

[Anonymous]

Original post indicated there ARE people in the office Mon-Weds. OP should do the 3x week in office on the first 3 days. Simple.

[Anonymous]

The answer to this is alaya going to be that if you need your job you follow the rules and if you don’t, then you can see where ignoring and flouting the rules gets you.

And as a PP said, if yo are looking for company, go in on the three days that there are people in the office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When I was hired a few years ago, management did not have an onsite work requirement. They'd summon us once a month for an in-person team meeting, but that was about it. If you had a meeting in person for a project, you showed up. If you didn't, you didn't and so what.

This summer, they imposed an on-site at least three times per week (unless you have an exception or special permission not to show up 3x). I've been doing my best to make it work, but it's becoming ridiculous and a waste of time and money for me. We have four offices we can report to, and the two closest are about an hour away on a good day. Most of the time when I've showed up earlier in the week, the office is about half-full with enough people there to meet with in person or even go to lunch with. By Thurs-Fri though, only a few people trickle in and out. I put in two days this week and quite frankly, don't want to waste my time and money driving there tomorrow to sit alone in an empty office. I've shown up those days before and was the only one there. It was so stupid. I spent an hour in traffic to fx8King badge in and occupy a desk. I think at most one or two other people I don't even work with show up. So, my gas tank is empty, and I really don't feel like spending $30+ to fill it just to drive in traffic, sit alone, make one phone call, and then drive home in traffic.

I understand it's a risk not showing up anywhere and badging in, it can rattle the wrong cage, but I'm too old for this and I'm burning money to check a box. I can start my day early and be done by 5 rather than playing the badge in game and get home at 7 after sitting in silence for eight hours. If you were in my shoes and chose not to show up, how would you explain it to management if they call you out? How can they honestly argue with, "No one is there and it's a long drive for me to show up and sit at a desk, not attend any meetings, not even say hello to anyone." Is it worth getting into it with them? And no driving another half hour to a site further away where there may be what, at most 5 people in the office would be better?

By too old do you mean 28?

Go to the office or find a new job. Hopefully they to RTO the full week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was hired a few years ago, management did not have an onsite work requirement. They'd summon us once a month for an in-person team meeting, but that was about it. If you had a meeting in person for a project, you showed up. If you didn't, you didn't and so what.

This summer, they imposed an on-site at least three times per week (unless you have an exception or special permission not to show up 3x). I've been doing my best to make it work, but it's becoming ridiculous and a waste of time and money for me. We have four offices we can report to, and the two closest are about an hour away on a good day. Most of the time when I've showed up earlier in the week, the office is about half-full with enough people there to meet with in person or even go to lunch with. By Thurs-Fri though, only a few people trickle in and out. I put in two days this week and quite frankly, don't want to waste my time and money driving there tomorrow to sit alone in an empty office. I've shown up those days before and was the only one there. It was so stupid. I spent an hour in traffic to fx8King badge in and occupy a desk. I think at most one or two other people I don't even work with show up. So, my gas tank is empty, and I really don't feel like spending $30+ to fill it just to drive in traffic, sit alone, make one phone call, and then drive home in traffic.

I understand it's a risk not showing up anywhere and badging in, it can rattle the wrong cage, but I'm too old for this and I'm burning money to check a box. I can start my day early and be done by 5 rather than playing the badge in game and get home at 7 after sitting in silence for eight hours. If you were in my shoes and chose not to show up, how would you explain it to management if they call you out? How can they honestly argue with, "No one is there and it's a long drive for me to show up and sit at a desk, not attend any meetings, not even say hello to anyone." Is it worth getting into it with them? And no driving another half hour to a site further away where there may be what, at most 5 people in the office would be better?

By too old do you mean 28?

Go to the office or find a new job. Hopefully they to RTO the full week.

Try early 50s.

[Anonymous]

NP. What I don't like in this case and other is the company changing its policy. I'm going to get it here that they have a right to do whatever they want and if you don't like it, get a job. Fine, but while any decent job brings in hundreds of resumes, it's not easy finding a good person who fits in.

But there is also another slant to this. People take jobs for a variety of reasons. If a company changes it's policies, it's a dirty trick. When does it cross the line?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. What I don't like in this case and other is the company changing its policy. I'm going to get it here that they have a right to do whatever they want and if you don't like it, get a job. Fine, but while any decent job brings in hundreds of resumes, it's not easy finding a good person who fits in.

But there is also another slant to this. People take jobs for a variety of reasons. If a company changes it's policies, it's a dirty trick. When does it cross the line?

Dirty trick? So a company is forever bound to the policies that existed when employees were hired? Even when they may have been hired during an unprecedented pandemic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. What I don't like in this case and other is the company changing its policy. I'm going to get it here that they have a right to do whatever they want and if you don't like it, get a job. Fine, but while any decent job brings in hundreds of resumes, it's not easy finding a good person who fits in.

But there is also another slant to this. People take jobs for a variety of reasons. If a company changes it's policies, it's a dirty trick. When does it cross the line?

Dirty trick? So a company is forever bound to the policies that existed when employees were hired? Even when they may have been hired during an unprecedented pandemic?

Stealth layoffs via RTO-to-be-on-Teams-all-day are bad. That's not what deciding your organization has an operational need to be together in person looks like.

[Anonymous]

Unless it is causing financial issues for you, what's the issue? Plenty of people would love to replace you and drive to/from work to earn your paycheck.

[Anonymous]

Either quit your job or quit complaining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for all the feedback. It's a lot to consider. I don't know how a company can deem someone more effective simply for traveling an hour each way to park at a desk in a lonely office. Imagine getting into a bad accident just to do that? Or you go to your office to badge in, you're alone, and have a heart attack or stroke at your desk and you drop dead because no one finds you until Monday morning?

It’s not usually about being individually more effective it’s about a corporate dictated priority and they are willing to lose employees over it. In fact sometimes they are trying to force attrition.

Through death?

[Anonymous]

Why don’t you all organize in office days where you can collab successfully? That makes the most sense to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. What I don't like in this case and other is the company changing its policy. I'm going to get it here that they have a right to do whatever they want and if you don't like it, get a job. Fine, but while any decent job brings in hundreds of resumes, it's not easy finding a good person who fits in.

But there is also another slant to this. People take jobs for a variety of reasons. If a company changes it's policies, it's a dirty trick. When does it cross the line?

Dirty trick? So a company is forever bound to the policies that existed when employees were hired? Even when they may have been hired during an unprecedented pandemic?

Stealth layoffs via RTO-to-be-on-Teams-all-day are bad. That's not what deciding your organization has an operational need to be together in person looks like.

Everyone I know in a forced RTO are on Teams all day. It’s horrible. Plenty of people who dislike remote work don’t even know what Teams is or what the modern workplace is like.

[Anonymous]

Welcome to life in the Federal government OP.

[Anonymous]

Start some audiobooks for your drive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. What I don't like in this case and other is the company changing its policy. I'm going to get it here that they have a right to do whatever they want and if you don't like it, get a job. Fine, but while any decent job brings in hundreds of resumes, it's not easy finding a good person who fits in.

But there is also another slant to this. People take jobs for a variety of reasons. If a company changes it's policies, it's a dirty trick. When does it cross the line?

Dirty trick? So a company is forever bound to the policies that existed when employees were hired? Even when they may have been hired during an unprecedented pandemic?

Stealth layoffs via RTO-to-be-on-Teams-all-day are bad. That's not what deciding your organization has an operational need to be together in person looks like.

Sounds like they should just straight up lay you off.