Not getting same opportunity at work....

[mikehn]

There is something called face time. And I dont mean on an iphone. They aren't requiring you to come in, but you know how that goes. The more face time you put in, the better the results tend to be. Just saying

 

[tony67]

There is something called face time. And I dont mean on an iphone. They aren't requiring you to come in, but you know how that goes. The more face time you put in, the better the results tend to be. Just saying

True - but if the manager is not coming in where is the face time?

My preference is hybrid, two days a week at most, but the entire team needs to be in on the same days and at least have some crossover hours so you can have a face to face team meetings/discussion. So some may be in the office at 6AM some at 8 some at 9 and some at 10 - but there are a few hours where you are all together. People can even work at home for the morning or afternoon and only come in for the meetings - to me it does not matter as long as there is a little crossover and the work gets done.

In addition there is something to those face to face meetings and "knowing" a person that you just don't get from zoom that also makes it harder to cut people or ignore them.

It's just human nature, but if I have a bunch of requests and the person I had few beers with and formed a relationship of sorts with is probably going to get addressed first.

 

[Christine]

There is something called face time. And I dont mean on an iphone. They aren't requiring you to come in, but you know how that goes. The more face time you put in, the better the results tend to be. Just saying

Face time is very important and I agree. But her manager is not showing up nor does she have an in-person team to physically interact with. So now this whole situation does not even make sense.

And don't even get me started on people who are allowed to work from home "to do their own childcare." Thankfully that doesn't fly in my office--no one should be watching kids under the age of say 8 years old while they are supposed to be working. If your company lets you flex around that, fine, but I disagree with having an infant on your lap all day while you're supposed to be doing data analytics and calculations for instance.

 

[disneychrista]

I’m pretty amazed at how employees are still expecting to be able to work remote. Even during the height of COVID I was working in the office because I was considered an essential worker.

 

[Christine]

I’m pretty amazed at how employees are still expecting to be able to work remote. Even during the height of COVID I was working in the office because I was considered an essential worker.

It really just depends what your duties are. I work from home 2 days a week but I can 100% do my entire job from my laptop and I am considered essential.

 

[Smugpugmug]

I’m pretty amazed at how employees are still expecting to be able to work remote. Even during the height of COVID I was working in the office because I was considered an essential worker.

My job is fully remote. There is an office building but there wouldn't be enough desks for everyone if we were all required to come back. Many of my coworkers live in other states and one of them is in another country.

I have to go into the office for a quarterly meeting and was supposed to go in next week but it was canceled. Next time I have to go in is in June.

 

[tony67]

And don't even get me started on people who are allowed to work from home "to do their own childcare."

Yeah this is something that really grinds my gears...

People who don't have kids, or their kids are older do seem to be treated much differently....
I've seen people have their PTO canceled because someone with kids wants the time off - its a business and it not right.

 

[tzolkin]

Since I work in a secure facility and at no time was able to work from home for other one day every two weeks, I have no sympathy for folks that complain about having to come into the office 2 or 3 days a week. This is the way it was before COVID and things should return to that way.

Why?

Just because "that's the way it always has been" does not mean that is the best way.

Doesn't feel fair, but watcha gonna do?

Quit.

I'm sure that seems flippant, but it is certainly a possible choice if OP cannot reach an agreement with their manager. I have always worked jobs (both in person and from home) where I could control my hours. Since flexibility of time is my top priority when choosing a job, if my company made changes that included a more rigid schedule then I would seek other employment that was more suited to my needs.

Is there reason you need to be home? Perhaps the managers see the one with kids need to be home and you can be more flexible. I could see that as not fair, they could see that as meeting the needs of employees.

Is there a reason they need to be in the office?

It seems clear that this company is okay with people working from home:
-- only requesting people to come in 1-2 days per week
-- have a policy for requesting an exemption

I could understand if the company was requiring everyone to be back at work full time, but if they are okay with employees working from home 80% of the time and OP has absolutely no reason to be in the office (doesn't meet with clients or teammates), then it seems like an unnecessary request.

 

[tony67]

Quit.

Honestly this may be what they want - I don't know anything about the actual situation - but this may be what the companies actually wants.

If people quit then they don't have to deal with unemployment or severance - I have seen that first hand.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I requested to remain remote by submitting a formal exception with a full 2 page letter supporting my request however was told it was denied and I need to come in.

All other employees who are 100% remote never submitted an exception request (which was policy to do so). They were just able to.....

I understand how frustrating it might be but like others we don't know whys behind the other groups.

On the other hand you probably didn't intend to come off this way but you sound like above that your performance (I didn't quote that part but it's part of that) and your submission of the request should grant you being 100% remote just based on that and you see others didn't do that formality and presumably aren't as exemplary of an employee as you are did get that request. There may be things you are unaware are working against you that are related to that.

Is it possible there is better rapport those employees have with their managers or are performing differently with respects to their circumstances?

I agree your manager not coming in would almost make me think they were not a team player but it would also be helpful to know how they plan on working with teammates that are back in the office when they are not and what expectations they will have. Is it a micromanaging manager or someone who will utilize check ins sparingly, etc.

You say it's a small 30-40 employees but are you aware of each and every employee's stories to know that you're being treated unfairly as opposed to things you are not aware of? It came off to me that you might have thought having young children at home meant they were granted remoteness based on that but there may be other things going on.

If you're really bugged by this have an open conversation with your manager regarding why your request was not granted that way you can find out if it's performance related where it could be either you're so good they want you in the office or where you need improvement that you were not aware of. I'd keep the business of others out of it IMO as it would just come across like you're feeling entitled to 100% remote because others got it and you didn't. Keep the focus on you.

 

[disneychrista]

It really just depends what your duties are. I work from home 2 days a week but I can 100% do my entire job from my laptop and I am considered essential.

In my case it was a choice made by management that my department come in. We could have worked hybrid.

 

[tony67]

One other question I have.. do you feel like there is a possibility of layoffs coming?

Maybe they are looking to see who is willing to do what needs to be done and who isn't to make the choices easier.

 

[sk!mom]

All other employees who are 100% remote never submitted an exception request (which was policy to do so). They were just able to.....

I’m curious about how you know what others did.

Also, what reason was given for refusing your request?

It does seem that two pages may have been overkill and probably didn’t help your case.

I would love a job that requires only a day or two in the office, but I’m completely empathetic to your new lifestyle and a desire to continue.

I also agree that most companies have thrived with remote employees. The only plausible argument I’ve heard for making employees come back is the difficulty in training new hires with everyone remote. Other than that, morale and productivity have boomed.

It seems that your only option is moving up the chain.

 

[TwoMisfits]

Honestly this may be what they want - I don't know anything about the actual situation - but this may be what the companies actually wants.

If people quit then they don't have to deal with unemployment or severance - I have seen that first hand.

With the OP being 64, and likely not one of the cheaper employees. I agree.

And while it may not be fair, I've seen many employers cut their star employees a break b/c they don't want to lose them and can't pay them more.

 

[barkley]

Having been on the management side and the employee side I have the disadvantage of seeing both

as do i.

i was the 'bad guy' in the manager situation when other managers did not follow a directive or a rule with their staff while i did. i had no control over the other managers and while i could voice my/my 'team's' opinions/frustrations to the shared manager myself/other managers had it fell on deaf ears (or in my case nearing retirement ears of someone who did not want to deal with actualy managing his own staff b/c he did'nt want to 'rock the boat' and have to deal with a potential h/r complaint against him).

if an individual manager is treating their individual staff members differently then there might be a case to go to h/r but if it's different managers treating their staff differently, even in identical jobs with identical job titles/duties/contractual obligations it's a c--p shoot on what if anything hr can/will do.

They are asking people to "lean into" coming back a day or two. Nothing is being recorded or monitored

even is something is said to be not recorded or monitoritored it is frequently being observed for outcomes. in many cases something was being floated around by the powers that be where i worked and managers were initaly told to 'ask' their staff to do it. when the ask failed or if the ask's outcomes proved successful with even a small observed sample the 'ask' was frequently changed to a 'mandate'.

 

[tzolkin]

Also, what reason was given for refusing your request?

I was wondering the same. My first response to the denial would have been a discussion with my manager. If there were a reason that they felt it would benefit the company to come into the office on a regular basis, I may be willing to work out a compromise that still gives me the flexibility I need but meets their needs as well. But, if there was absolutely no logical reason other than control, I would look for another job.

I also agree that most companies have thrived with remote employees. The only plausible argument I’ve heard for making employees come back is the difficulty in training new hires with everyone remote. Other than that, morale and productivity have boomed.

I can definitely understand that for some jobs, but I think in general if you are able to do the job completely remote then the training should also be able to be done remotely. I'm just over 5 years into my current position and have hired a few people that I have needed to train. (All management and office staff work from home so we do not have a physical office.) I typically meet with a new hire once or twice in person, but the majority of their training can be done over the phone while we both walk through screens on our computers together.

 

[Snowflakey]

Honestly this may be what they want - I don't know anything about the actual situation - but this may be what the companies actually wants.

If people quit then they don't have to deal with unemployment or severance - I have seen that first hand.

I don't believe they want me to quit. My manager continually tells me how happy she is with me and the work I do.

This is just a simple thing I posted to see if anyone felt this was somewhat strange - unequal - whatever you all it. When I managed people, they were always treated fair and equal.

 

[Snowflakey]

S

With the OP being 64, and likely not one of the cheaper employees. I agree.

And while it may not be fair, I've seen many employers cut their star employees a break b/c they don't want to lose them and can't pay them more.

SIXTY FOUR????????????? I'm the OP and I sure as heck ain't 64

 

[Snowflakey]

Yeah this is something that really grinds my gears...

People who don't have kids, or their kids are older do seem to be treated much differently....
I've seen people have their PTO canceled because someone with kids wants the time off - its a business and it not right.

Exactly my frustration about this is how they are treating us differently

 

[evilmommie]

Would love to hear the managers side of this situation. They have a reason as to why what you do needs to be in person. Hard to really give an educated opinion when you’re holding back on details.