Anonymous wrote:Part of my job depends on input from people that WFH. Their work is always late and incomplete or incorrect. They don't attend scheduled meetings because they forgot their kid has an activity or they have someone fixing something at their house. They make my job more difficult.

Then you take it up with them vs make assumptions about everyone. They’d probably be bad either work environment.

Part of my job depends on input from people that WFH. Their work is always late and incomplete or incorrect. They don't attend scheduled meetings because they forgot their kid has an activity or they have someone fixing something at their house. They make my job more difficult.

I only care when it makes my life worse or harder. If that never happened you’d never hear from me. But…

Anonymous wrote:Because we know you aren’t working all of the time and are taking advantage.

what i'm actually doing is taking advantage all the days i'm in the office. apparently it's now part of the agency mission to get face time and socialize. so i do that, hard. mandatory in office day? i'm taking hour coffee "meetings". i will not join multiple meetings simultaneously. you scheduled a meeting right after an in-person meeting? sorry, i'll be having an oh-so-important "hallway meeting" instead, and i might dial in 20 minutes late. maybe. you scheduled a meeting when i am commuting home? sorry, not attending and i'm not going to bother to hit decline because you can see my available hours in the calendar and 5:30 is never it. basically i get about 1/3 of my normal work done if i'm in the office, but that's clearly what the folks in charge want, so thats what they get.

Op - just came back to say that what I’m gleaning from these responses is that there is envy that some are allowed to wfh and some are not. That is expressed in ‘they should be paid less’ - but really I think what people want is parity and choice. Which I get. It’s pretty random right now.
All I can say to those who feel there is inequity is that there are many wfh jobs now. So if you do have the kind of job where you feel you could do it from home, I encourage you to search and intv!

Anonymous wrote:These threads are so pointless. Someone asks why people don’t like wfh and if anyone is brave enough to say why they prefer in person work they are criticized and picked apart by the wfh mob. I look forward to having a mandate for more in office time and an end to the constant whining from the people who want temporary pandemic flexibilities to be permanent.

This exactly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get it, some people want to quiet quit with their lazy girl jobs from home and don’t ever want to see the inside of an office. Others have ambition, want to have real relationships with colleagues and are willing to make some effort to show up in person. We’ll see which group has progressed farther in their careers over the next few years, I know who I’m betting on.

And that's fine. Some of us just want to do our work and make a decent salary. Companies should be flexible and allow remote, hybrid, and fully in office options. Those who are ambitious can put in tons of face time if they want. I wouldn’t expect huge promotions working from home. It wasn't important to me when I worked in the office either. I did my work and went home on time.

+1, I’m 45 years old and enjoy my job and make a good salary, I have no desire to further climb the ladder at work. I totally understand the value of in person work for those that are young and ambitious, but for this Gen-X mom I could not care less about that at this point.

I have four adult kids. Three are now back to work (required) while one is 100 percent work from home. She has two jobs. Her “full time” employer doesn’t know about the second job. She works hard, is efficient, and doesn’t mess around. But she puts in 40 hours a week, tops. She absolutely could not do what she’s doing if she had to report to an office.

So my sample size is one. But I find it really hard to believe that she is the only remote worker in America who is working a second job behind her primary employer’s back. I’m betting it’s a widespread practice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently corporations and agencies believe there is added value to in-person work. That’s why they’re willing to pay for buildings and are asking you to RTO. WFH nuts may not care what others on this board have to say about their preferences, but they should care what their bosses think. And, if they don’t, they need to get another job before they’re fired. Plenty of people will take their job.

My work is not asking us to return. And I have no plan to return. We good?

Get some help for your narcissism. Last I checked, this board wasn’t about any particular individual.

But by grouping us together you are making it personal. Like OP asked, why do you care at all? If WFH is allowed, how is that your business?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently corporations and agencies believe there is added value to in-person work. That’s why they’re willing to pay for buildings and are asking you to RTO. WFH nuts may not care what others on this board have to say about their preferences, but they should care what their bosses think. And, if they don’t, they need to get another job before they’re fired. Plenty of people will take their job.

My work is not asking us to return. And I have no plan to return. We good?

Get some help for your narcissism. Last I checked, this board wasn’t about any particular individual.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate zooming from my office, or from home, if it’s most of the work day. I much prefer working in person with humans. At least for me, the work gets done quicker and better, and l feel better and have better morale. It doesn’t have to be every day, but l do much better mentally with in person work as long as some of my colleagues are also there, so the days in need to be synchronized.

But when did it become your colleagues’ responsibility to improve your mental health? This is by far my least favorite argument for RTO. I should not have to commute in to the office multiple times a week to satisfy your personal need to be in person.

It isn't a colleague's responsibility, but it is the employer's responsibility. It is necessary for retention, at a minimum. For that reason, organizations create policies that try to balance as best as possible and create a work environment that meets as many needs as possible.

Okay so my org still believes allowing folks to WFH is the best for the organization. Why would you have a problem with that? It really is none of your f'king business.

Really not sure why you’re being so aggressive.

I answered the question. If you’re org made a different decision about hat is perfectly fine.

Anonymous wrote:Apparently corporations and agencies believe there is added value to in-person work. That’s why they’re willing to pay for buildings and are asking you to RTO. WFH nuts may not care what others on this board have to say about their preferences, but they should care what their bosses think. And, if they don’t, they need to get another job before they’re fired. Plenty of people will take their job.

My work is not asking us to return. And I have no plan to return. We good?

Apparently corporations and agencies believe there is added value to in-person work. That’s why they’re willing to pay for buildings and are asking you to RTO. WFH nuts may not care what others on this board have to say about their preferences, but they should care what their bosses think. And, if they don’t, they need to get another job before they’re fired. Plenty of people will take their job.

Anonymous wrote:Because we know you aren’t working all of the time and are taking advantage.

Who's "we"? How do you know exactly?

Anonymous wrote:Because we know you aren’t working all of the time and are taking advantage.

We know you aren't either with your coffee klatsch.