Office Jobs and WFH Policies: Mid Year 2024 Status Check

geekcohen on 11/06/2024 - 14:53

So a mid-year check from https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/829282.

Personally, my situation has not changed. My job is completely 100% remote and has been this way for the last 12 months since moving. However, there are some employees who you can tell are taking advantage of this and changes might be coming, however, that won't impact me since I am in a different country and state.

I have friends and family who have been required to spend more time in the office and/or have changed jobs which has then changed working conditions (in most cases for the better).

Continuing questions from the previous thread:

  • What's your workplace doing?
  • Has it changed recently?
  • What's the vibe among the staff?
  • In [present time], would you look to change jobs if required to be in the office full time?
  • What industry are you in? What's your role?
  • What would your ideal scenario be?

Hopefully the poll answers are suitable for most.

Poll Options

  • 536
    My situation has not changed
  • 39
    My situation has changed for the better
  • 78
    My situation has changed and it is worse
  • 15
    My situation is bad, I don't like it, I want to change jobs
  • 30
    I currently do not have a job
Education & Work

Comments

  • Shadowsfury on 11/06/2024 - 15:29
    +11

    We've been 3 days in office (fixed TWT for virtually everyone) for since mid 2022 - nothing has changed since that was implemented.

    Personally I don't mind it - I don't think I'd like 100% in either direction.

    There's still once off flexibility where required on those days in the office.

    • dogboy on 11/06/2024 - 16:57
      +1

      How hard is the 3 days in the office policed/enforced? My workplace has the same policy but most people do whatever they want and there is no policing of it.

      • zanzir on 11/06/2024 - 17:00
        +1

        Depends on if they track office building pass data. Some office buildings provide that data and if people can be bothered like HR, they can dig into it and look at stats for visitation.

        • fredblogs on 12/06/2024 - 16:46

          We're 3 days, it's tracked, and I hear rumors that some people have been fired for low attendance

        • 811b11e8 on 13/06/2024 - 05:19
          +1

          Building passed rarely accurate unless your in a high security area. I know a guy previously who was called into hr for rocking up at 9:15am every morning. His starting hours where 8:30am, however he car pooled with his line manager and was in mornings at 7am, 9:15am was just smoko, and he did smoko with a group exec…

          So yea HR can look at data and still have no idea about anything.

          Once he was in the meeting he called the exec and his line manager. Hr gave him no heads up.

          My guess is they just looked at it for the first time.

          • kyle on 13/06/2024 - 09:47

            @811b11e8: Not a good look for HR!

          • field1985 on 13/06/2024 - 19:59
            +1

            @811b11e8: I've had HR try to pull this on me. Building pass said 9:45am everyday.

            I explained that was because I always walked in behind someone at 8:55am and I took my tea/smoko at 9:30am.

            I asked if they had any corroborating evidence, and the sheepishly said "only word of mouth".

            They couldn't prove it and it was my word against my managers, so I kept the job.

            The funny part is… I actually was rocking up at 9:45am.

            They installed camera's the next week and I went back to 8:55am start times until I found a job a the next week with double the salary those micromanaging tight-arses were paying.

            • Crow K on 14/06/2024 - 10:08
              +4

              @field1985: Joke's on them, though, because now they no longer have a quality employee like you.

      • Shadowsfury on 12/06/2024 - 17:26

        It is indeed tracked but not aware of anything happening with that information, yet.

        I'd say the vast majority of people are following it though

  • askbargain on 11/06/2024 - 15:39

    changes might be coming, however, that won't impact me since I am in a different country and state.

    Don’t act so surprised if they fire all remote workers.

    • geekcohen on 11/06/2024 - 15:44
      -2

      Well I am in management, so I wouldn't be first and the other workers are first on the list. They are the ones who are abusing the WFH privileges.

      • Austin 316 on 11/06/2024 - 16:27
        +9

        How do you know they are abusing the privileges? Has their output reduced? I mean, is it going to be easy to prove that for your company?

        • geekcohen on 12/06/2024 - 08:11
          -1

          Reduced output. Delayed work. We do work in two-week sprints and the start of a sprint is slow, but all of a sudden the end of the sprint all this work is completed.

          They have delayed responses throughout work times when you are supposed to reply within 1 hour of a message (as per company policies), some replies from some employees are taking 2 to 3 hours.

          We prove it by using Jira for tracking work and monitoring patterns.

          • NigelTufnel on 12/06/2024 - 10:15
            +17

            @geekcohen:

            end of the sprint all this work is completed.

            Well, sounds like the work's still getting done. What's the problem?
            Sounds like instead of your employees were working at 50% for 2 weeks they now they are just working at like 25% for the first week and 75% for the second week. Doesn't sound like you were getting 100% previously anyway if it still took the same time to get the job completed.

            • Nebargains on 12/06/2024 - 12:06
              -5

              @NigelTufnel:

              Well, sounds like the work's still getting done. What's the problem?

              Sounds like they can easily work at a higher capacity and if that capacity was maintained for the entire sprint then ultimately more work could be achieved in the sprint, more work could mean (without further context) more income generating features on their product for example.

              • NigelTufnel on 12/06/2024 - 12:47
                +6

                @Nebargains: Possible, but what I'm saying is that the same capacity is being achieved now that was then. So WFH hasn't impacted how much gets done, just when the work is prioritised. There was clearly the productivity issue that wasn't being managed before, but it just went unnoticed.
                You might be able to push them to do more in the sprint so that the full 2 weeks is at higher productivity, but you might end up with burn out and turnover too…

                Particularly if that extra income isn't going to the actual workers that are increasing their production (which I can almost guarantee it won't)

          • RTX9090Ti on 12/06/2024 - 11:21

            @geekcohen: You really should move into constructions, so you don't need to worry about this sprint nonsense.

          • crentist on 12/06/2024 - 14:22
            +8

            @geekcohen:

            the start of a sprint is slow, but all of a sudden the end of the sprint all this work is completed.

            That sounds pretty normal. Arbitrarily assigning tasks to 2 week periods sets an expectation that 2 weeks is acceptable for the batch of assigned tasks. But often that can mean simply leaving completed tasks open, because it seems like there is extra time for further testing, tying up loose ends etc.
            Also, it's easy to just run through a bunch of work and forget to update the Jira statuses. That alone can feel like an end-of-sprint task. I found all that to be the case whether in-office or remote.

            The best thing for my (remote) teams productivity was a manager who ditched all the agile nonsense and let us use Jira as nothing more than a fancy to-do list, with expectations based on actual tasks and business needs. Probably more kanban-style.
            Conversely, productivity was massively down with a manager who really cared about the metrics and burndowns. Everyone gamed perfect performance by overstating low sprint goals, and were praised for doing less work than ever.

            Which is to say, if you're unhappy that your team is meeting their sprint goals, maybe you need to consider what that says about the the sprint goals you've set. And whether the feedback this provides actually encourages the performance you'd like to see.

            • 811b11e8 on 13/06/2024 - 05:32
              +1

              @crentist: I've worked at agile for a decade now this is exactly my experience.

              Best teams have always had a backlog of items ready to go, with a strong product owner.

              2 weeks sprint is nonsense. People over bake estimates and then deliver significantly less. I've seen this absolutely fail at banks, retail and health tech companies.

              It does however build predictability, I mean it delivers mayb less then half of a well oiled kanban style but it stakeholders do get a better timeline in my experience. The deliver less is based on if you actually measure by a real metric not a made up fictional number, for example the amount of releases done, the amount of release note items delivered, amount of support tickets resolved, Jesus evens lines of code..

              We did SAFE at one place and if you listen to the consultants you end up so many scrum masters who only work 1 hour a day most days the only exception being the end of program increment. We had teams where they moved on, and those teams delivered more until they got a new scrum master. The change in team is detrimental adding new members when a team is well performing just disrupts. It also levels your teams all teams will deliver a similar amount.

              However it does build predictability your small feature will be ready at end of program increment, your user story at end of sprint etc.

          • randomvis on 12/06/2024 - 18:47
            +3

            @geekcohen: One thing I really hate is it being called a sprint— So you are telling me I need to sprint every day for 2 weeks, then in two weeks start again sprinting.

            I bet that the person who invented this never ran a day in their life.

            AND another thing that annoys me is that stand-ups are rarely done standing up. Additionally there is always someone who likes to talk instead of summarizing their work in under a minute.

            Etymology matters.

          • digitalbath on 12/06/2024 - 19:23
            +4

            @geekcohen: “I’m a manager and everyone below me are the only people abusing the system”

          • fredblogs on 13/06/2024 - 13:24

            @geekcohen: Delayed responses - are you talking about emails?

            • geekcohen on 14/06/2024 - 05:57

              @fredblogs: No, Slack or delayed responses to Jira tickets for next actions. Like Error Log check, tickets sit there for hours or even overnight when they should be actioned quickly to keep it moving. This has been raised with the team numerous times on processing these items quicker to ensure that everything keeps flowing without significant blockers/delays.

              • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 15/06/2024 - 10:46

                @geekcohen: Why don't you be a manager that leads by example and jump in to assist your team? Resolve some tickets yourself.

                • geekcohen on 17/06/2024 - 08:48
                  +1

                  @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: Whilst I do this at times, why should I have to fill in the gaps all the time? It just then encourages laziness. The team then gets used to, "Oh, my manager will do it".

                  It doesn't encourage the team to be more accountable and responsible for their work if I constantly fill in the gaps.

                  Whilst I am always happy to pitch in, I shouldn't have to fill in the gaps.

        • Drakesy on 13/06/2024 - 14:25
          +4

          Funny thing is the department (government) i worked for, the output actually increased over covid i guess because the disruptive people could no longer interfere with the people there to work and less people took 15 minute coffee breaks.

          lo and behold we returned to the office and they watched productivity drop and sick days/stress leave increase.

          The data didn't lie.

      • SBOB on 11/06/2024 - 18:46
        +9

        Well I am in management, so I wouldn't be first and the other workers are first on the list

        So people doing actual output rank below management in terms of being deemed unnecessary from the c suite?
        If anything, you'd be the one potentially blamed for those beneath you under performing

        • fantombloo on 11/06/2024 - 19:43

          Actual output is sadly a poor metric for any "ranking." See here for an excellent treatise. Under the current status quo the closer you work to the coalface the less coal you usually get.

          • SlickMick on 12/06/2024 - 08:02
            +2

            @fantombloo: Yes but in many workplaces management are far more replaceable, even if rewards don't demonstrate that.

            • fantombloo on 12/06/2024 - 08:51
              +2

              @SlickMick: That's the point. In many places management is completely dispensable yet still entrenched and highly rewarded.

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 11/06/2024 - 19:18
        +14

        lolwut lower-middle management are always the first to go when sackings/redundancies occur.

        • geekcohen on 12/06/2024 - 08:12
          +1

          I guess it depends on the business and each circumstance is different.

  • bohn on 11/06/2024 - 15:41
    +1

    My wife is one day a week in the office which is good.

  • kerfuffle on 11/06/2024 - 15:47
    +2

    I go in whenever. My entire team aren't in the same state as me.

    • 87percent on 11/06/2024 - 16:52
      +2

      Same. Try to go in once a month, but not forced to. With winter in full effect in Melbourne, no way am I going in

      • kerfuffle on 12/06/2024 - 12:26

        Yeah I only go in when I have something on after work. Very sporadic e.g. one week I'd come in one day, nothing for three weeks, then come in three days in a week

    • Poor Ass on 12/06/2024 - 16:14

      do you work in your pyjamas?

  • Drakesy on 11/06/2024 - 15:48
    +23

    Environment is getting increasingly toxic/low morale.

    People can't leave because wages for equivalent jobs are below what they're on.
    Management feel they don't have to act because of the high demand for jobs. Hence any WFH perks have evaporated along with other lesser perks.

    People who aren't motivated to work but can't/don't want to leave become a drain on the workplace and a negative feedback loop.

    How good is high immigration and wage suppression!

    • zanzir on 11/06/2024 - 16:53
      +7

      Can definitely see the morale and toxicity stuff, when you just interact with people behind a screen you're more likely to devalue the interaction and resort to snarky behaviour since you never need to see the person

      • Ghost47 on 11/06/2024 - 16:56
        +13

        Same here. People are stressed and tired and realise they're mortgage prisoners especially with rates going up.

        I wonder how common this toxicity is becoming?

        • Drakesy on 11/06/2024 - 22:01
          +3

          Yeah, pretty widespread i'd think.

          My quasi Gov dept is running at a 30% turnover rate amongst white collar workers.

          Sure enough HR just sends out surveys, results confirm the environment and management is worse than ever and they just continue with business as usual.

      • tonka on 11/06/2024 - 18:56
        +6

        I have less need for snarky behavior with less exposure to the office narcissists.

  • GettingThePlus190s on 11/06/2024 - 15:51
    +1

    Better and worse mean different things for different people, I'd swap for more flexible/WFH and less flex/WFO

  • MS Paint on 11/06/2024 - 16:06
    +8

    there are some employees who you can tell are taking advantage of this

    I assume you are currently on an unpaid break while writing and monitoring this thread?

    • Mechz on 11/06/2024 - 16:11
      +9

      You already know people who actually do their job from home tend to work more unpaid hours than most.

      • FallaM on 12/06/2024 - 08:55
        +1

        That is my experience too in managing. People may not deliver as much work as they do in the office but they're there for way longer and far less breaks.

    • jackspratt on 12/06/2024 - 11:58

      E tu ?

  • [Deactivated] on 11/06/2024 - 16:09

    My work has started wanting more office time to enhance collaboration with your team mates.
    My supervisor and a collegue on the same level as I am are in QLD, I'm in NSW, and the other 2 in my team are offshore.
    I have to go in for 1/4ly meetings but thats about it. If they want me to go in more than that they need to compensate with higher wages to cover before and afterschool care.

  • MaxMuchMore on 11/06/2024 - 16:09

    Switched to full remote 18 months ago when we had kids and my partners work needing us to move every 12 months.

    If it wasn't for full WFH, I wouldn't be working in my field anymore. For now, not much else I can do.

  • Mechz on 11/06/2024 - 16:13
    +1

    I can WFH more since a recent change to being a project resource.

    Though, The only thing that I don't like about the office anymore is the cesspool of sickness that it tends to breed. Even in the past summer it just never really ended IMO.

  • DingoBilly on 11/06/2024 - 16:19
    +4

    Been WFH 100% for 4 years now since COVID happened. Best thing that happened from the pandemic, although was in VIC so not sure it was really worth it as it was a terrible experience.

    Work is trying to nudge us to come back in for the last 2 years but nothing enforced yet. If I have to ever come back into office for more than 1 day a week I'd quit - not worth it.

  • zanzir on 11/06/2024 - 16:51
    +4

    WFH all week long with the odd day in just to socialise and have team events. Used AI to largely automate my work, out of a 40 hour 'work' week I probably do 3 hours tops. Stealing a living at this rate so it feels good. Six figure income. Looking at working remotely in a low cost country soon just to reduce my expenses further and fly into Aus every 6 months or so

    • Mechz on 11/06/2024 - 18:51
      +8

      What industry?

      If you've figured out automation to that level I would think you are on borrowed time. Better upskill or build a side hustle for passive income.

      • zanzir on 12/06/2024 - 00:00

        Software - I wouldn't say I'm on borrowed time in the slightest, in fact if I get made to leave I turn off all those automations and the wider team is stuffed since its all my proprietary tooling I've built to improve productivity

        • tonka on 12/06/2024 - 12:01
          +2

          Just conversation, is it really proprietary, assuming you built some on work time. Some employment contracts will even have specifics around this.

          • BartholemewH on 12/06/2024 - 12:51
            +2

            @tonka: Exactly. Tools built in work time generally belong to employer.

            • zanzir on 12/06/2024 - 15:39

              @BartholemewH: "Tools built in work time" - I built it out of work hours

          • zanzir on 12/06/2024 - 15:38

            @tonka: It's hosted in my own cloud tenant so they can't do much to take it once they realise the hooks require my keys to access

            • tonka on 12/06/2024 - 21:21

              @zanzir: I wouldn't even discuss that on an anonymous forum.

              • zanzir on 12/06/2024 - 23:20

                @tonka: I'm not worried - I run the entire operation and the people around me are largely useless and not motivated to go past more than the required work

    • itsDANNY on 11/06/2024 - 20:11
      +1

      What's the nature of your work out of curiosity?

    • skidexa on 14/06/2024 - 14:31

      Can you get into legal issues if they find out?

  • JIMB0 on 11/06/2024 - 17:34
    +1

    I go in 2 or 3 days and take the rest of the week off to do my own things.

  • Dominus on 11/06/2024 - 18:04
    +1

    Our recent agency agreement enshrined a 'no limits' flexibility approach by negotiation, so essentially up to 100% WFH. We were previously on a largely unenforced 2 days WFH / 3 days WFO, so arguably it's an improvement, but to be honest very few people were coming in on their mandated days.

    I've settled on 4 days WFH and go into the office on a nominated anchor day to be with my team and some other stakeholders, works fine for me so I'm happy, and I've not heard any of the previous productivity/culture grumbling at the exec levels so I guess everyone else is ok with it too.

  • mskeggs on 11/06/2024 - 21:22
    +16

    My workplace is still 100% WFH, there is the option to attend the office, a handful attend one day a week. One or two go in a couple of days, but usually because they have poor WFH circumstances. A final decision isn't made, but I gather when the lease expires the 100+ seat office will be replaced by a small office with some hot desks and meeting rooms, or maybe a WeWork style setup.

    I'm later in my career, and work fine remotely. My kids are early in their career, and full time WFH would make it harder for them to get the mentoring/cultural stuff that helps develop expertise.

    I think the way it will shake out longer term is there will be employers that are viewed as good "launchpads" for young workers, a bit like big consultancies, banks, law firms etc. that have good graduate programs have been, that will probably have a fair amount of office attendance. Graduates will continue to compete for those types of roles (and continue to be worked hard!) and will accelerate their early career in those hot boxes.
    When they are a bit more experienced, they will go work for more flexible employers.

    • yokel on 14/06/2024 - 08:12
      +1

      Your comment is interesting. You are ok with others having to go into the office and your adult children get the benefit of being mentored. Do you ever get the opportunity to develop the younger employees? Disregard my comment if there is something legit stopping you from participating in the office.

      • mskeggs on 14/06/2024 - 08:59
        +1

        I have a 2 hour commute, so I’m reluctant to commute unless necessary.
        I agree the young people mentoring thing is an issue, hence why I mentioned it. The team members I work with who might benefit from my in person mentoring are 1000km and 6000km away, so my personal circumstances aren’t relevant.
        It’s an aspect that needs extra thought and attention to ensure the next generation are looked after.
        If you are working from the office a lot to mentor less experienced staff, thanks for your service, I hope your employer recognises this.

        • yokel on 14/06/2024 - 10:56

          Yeah fair enough that’s where remote is only option. Any way I do what I can working with the new gen when it’s wanted. Personally it would suit me to be WFH caring for my young family at start and end of day.

  • xuqi on 11/06/2024 - 22:58

    Go in to the office whenever I feel like it or have something delivered there to pickup. Usually once every couple of weeks or so (when not travelling), just so that perople know I'm still employed.

  • IndigoHarlequin on 12/06/2024 - 07:38
    +2

    State government - technically no job is 100% WFH, however I work so far from my team that going to the office would be a pointless exercise as none of them are based anywhere near me. This was the case when I took the role.

    I travel for occasional meetings, once every 6 months or so.

    My productivity is through the roof, smashing goals. I would be pretty unhappy with a mandatory return to the office as it would add zero benefits to my role. I don't think I'd look elsewhere, it's a great role, but I would be more tempted in the future.

  • FimpBARGAIN on 12/06/2024 - 08:12
    +2

    Been at current job just over 2yrs now.
    Has always been a 4day compressed week (mon-thurs), but that meant my wife was doing the bulk of drop offs/pick ups.

    A few months ago started doing Wednesdays from home and it's made a huge difference. It's hard to fit 9.5hrs in around driving to school and kids sports etc but really worth it.
    A few of the more senior people who are parents of young kids are gradually getting more flexibility, think work is seeing it's good for retention rate.
    Tricky as we are in manufacture and have machines which need attending, so can be offered to everyone.

  • FallaM on 12/06/2024 - 08:50
    +2

    New job and it's still 2 days WFH per week which I think is a perfect balance for me. Doing a few weeks in the office full time just to get to know people and the place.

    2-3 days a week is ideal IMO, feels nice to get into the office during the week but also have a few days of sleeping in. Makes all the difference.

    Any employer who is looking to scrap the concept as a whole should reassess their mental state.

  • sicarius on 12/06/2024 - 09:05

    White collar in the construction field. Was WFO full time due to being on site. Recently moved to a smaller company at various stages of smaller projects. Now WFH 0-3 days a week as I require and really appreciating the flexibility.

  • Bob Svargis on 12/06/2024 - 09:23
    +2

    We've had it pretty good for a long time - some people never go in. About a year ago, CEO implemented the following:
    - Software devs 1 day a week minimum. New graduate devs - as often as your team lead requests, generally a day or two per week, but more is encouraged due to them being new grads.
    - Finance - 1 day a week, although there's many who don't
    - IT - 1 day a fortnight, but aim for at least 1 day a week
    - Others - depends on job role, generally 1 day a week or fortnight

    We've had a lot of staff move out of their capital cities during the last few years, so in some situations it's managed on a case-by-case basis.

    I'm still doing 2 days a week in the office. I'm not a sociable person but one needs to be seen in my role as I deal with all business units and meet with vendors - and it makes some meetings so much easier being in person. I think 2 days a week in the office is a good balance. It also gives me good one-on-one time with my Manager and Director for those ad-hoc conversations that you just cannot have working remotely (I try to reserve a desk near the rest of my broader team).

    I left my previous role a couple of years ago because they removed all WFH rights - they treated it like an entitlement and were so inflexible. As my role is quite specialised, they haven't been able to fill the role for almost 2 years because nobody in my area of specialty would accept a non hybrid role. The only applicants they're getting are shotgun applicants who aren't suited, because nobody who's suited is interested.

  • Spootage on 12/06/2024 - 09:28

    I was in a role before that did not allow WFH due to the nature of the role. I have since changed jobs and the new business allows everyone to WFH 40% of their time, which is only loosely monitored.

  • Steamed Hams on 12/06/2024 - 09:34

    Previously my role had flexibility with WFH but not to the extent it is offered now. Education industry.

    Three days in the office, two days WFH since late 2021. Can vary depending on the week, workload and other commitments so the split may change. I may do an extra half day or less for example. Staff are generally happy with this arrangement and the flexibility.

  • gromit on 12/06/2024 - 09:58

    I always find it interesting, my team definitely performs better remotely, but the team are all self starters, don't need supervision at home or at work and if they finish what they have allocated they find something else that needs doing. By contrast I see so many teams in other organisations and the Public service where the performance plummets while working from home. One Agency I work with it is now just an endless series of excuses why work wasn't completed for various IT teams, another private sector organisation I work with the procurement teams output almost halved and it got to the point they were again mandated to work from the office (much to their objections and whining of it being unfair).

    WFH works exceedingly well for some, for others it absolutely hammers productivity.

    • justworld on 13/06/2024 - 00:41

      For people who are paid on output, WFH is great. For those paid solely on time, it's of less value (to their employer), because the tendency is to slack.

    • aboogee on 13/06/2024 - 18:44

      Therefore have always been surprised how people claim that productivity increased
      May be true for a group of people starting from a low productivity base but in general its a decline.
      And there is definitely a people factor in it as well - WFH or WFO doesnt matter when you have a self-motivated team.

      • gromit on 13/06/2024 - 19:43

        yep, a LOT of the APS will slowly transition back to WFO I expect as the productivity loss overall is absolutely massive in a lot of departments and the APS weren't exactly high performers to start with.

  • jugsy on 12/06/2024 - 09:59
    +2

    IT, same company for almost 7 years, they are now trying to reduce/remove WFH days. My boss hasn't been able to give a justification other than "I dont seeee ya much". Add on top of this, many promised raises/promotions/perks have evaporated. All our money is being spent on consultants without clear objectives, so double slap in the face that the money is being wasted.

  • freedomofspeech on 12/06/2024 - 10:05
    +1

    IT, fulltime work from home

  • reactor-au on 12/06/2024 - 10:16

    Depends on the cluster within the company but most have been forced back 3 days a week.
    Problems with reserved seating, parking, etc.
    I'm still remote since I'm not in the same country as my team.
    I don't mind an office but I can't handle traffic and long commute.

  • Powershopz on 12/06/2024 - 10:16
    +1

    Policy hasn't changed since January 2022. 3 days in the office, 2 days WFH.

    Most people do Mon/Fri as WFH however you can pick whatever days work best for you.

  • mooodeng on 12/06/2024 - 11:12

    Work within aps so full remote for me.

  • colossus on 12/06/2024 - 14:45

    I.T., I WFO 4 days by choice but rest of my team lucky to make their 1 day prescribed for all to WFO together - it seems car services, deliveries, tradies only occur on that day of the week!

  • Nebargains on 12/06/2024 - 15:31
    +1

    Personally my situation hasn't changed much as I have always preferred to work from the office and the company has no choice but to be reasonably flexible as we have more employees than we do desks. That has not changed.

    However it seems the higher ups are getting fed up with those who don't even make the effort to come in a few days week, the official policy was always like 7 days a fortnight or something (but realistically 3 days a week) but there was a not small number of people who had not even been to the office once in the last few months and as such everyone was kindly reminded that they expect people to come in at least 3 days a week and given examples of when it is suitable to WFH if you would otherwise be in the office. Didn't really hear much grumblings from people, there were one or two that kicked up a stink about it but that is about it.

    It is still very informal and not really policed, probably because of the lack of desks, but most people are doing what they were asked and are coming in more.

  • justworld on 12/06/2024 - 17:02

    I work from home 80% of the time - in fact I can work completely remotely most weeks. I only have to attend in person if I have a trial on, which isn't too common.

    I have set up a home office and can deduct living expenses accordingly.

    I like my job as I am self-employed and get to set my own rates. I've put up my fees about 30% since covid and will put them up another 7% on 1 July.

    I'm a lawyer.

    Ideal scenario would be to make silk by my 40s and then retire.

    • Lucille Bluth on 12/06/2024 - 18:02
      +4

      I work from home 80% of the time

      Then

      I like my job as I am self-employed

      Then

      I'm a lawyer

      Then

      by my 40s and then retire.

      Your entire post should have been structured in reverse.

      • gromit on 12/06/2024 - 22:51
        +2

        He said he was a lawyer, didn't say he was a good one.

  • iLikeSales on 12/06/2024 - 17:39

    100% in office at all times. Mr I.T over here!

  • acersaurus on 12/06/2024 - 19:46
    +1

    I work in local gov and go in 2 days a week. I live far from the office, so they let me WFH more than most who go in 3 days.

    The organisation has generally been encouraging/infact requiring staff to come in more. Most staff were WFH for 3 days and now most are WFH for 2 days. At my organisation you enter into a 1 year agreement for the amount of WFH days - which is then reconsidered every year and must be signed by the manager.

  • pahuang on 12/06/2024 - 21:32

    I am in a different country and state.

    I am curious to know how can someone manage that, in a legit way? I used to work in a company and one of my colleague had to work in a different country due to family reasons (where the company has a branch/legal entity there too). But he was told that it's only legal to work maximum 6 months a year outside of Australia. I forgot whether that's due to tax reason or company policy or what. I thought for you to be considered as an employee in an Australian company (or maybe tax resident?), you can't work over 6 months in a different country? My current company allow us to work overseas 2/3 months a year. I guess if someone purchase an esim with enough roaming data and use that while overseas to hide his real location, then no one is going to find out? You still pay your tax as you would though.

    • zanzir on 12/06/2024 - 23:22

      You can get purchase a VPN with a kill switch and work overseas, I've done it a few times with no issues. You come up on the company login as whichever country you connect from.

      • pahuang on 14/06/2024 - 10:01

        yep that's not a "legit" way though. You are basically hiding from employer or tax man while doing work overseas. If caught (not sure if tax system connects to border security etc), may need to face serious consequences

        • zanzir on 14/06/2024 - 13:39

          No…tax system doesn't connect to border security LOL. If you are a tax resident of Australia then you pay tax wherever you work from since you would declare that on your tax return

          • tonka on 14/06/2024 - 16:49

            @zanzir: So you personally pay the local tax (wherever you work from) for your income. Isn't your employer paying tax on your behalf to the ATO, so you would end up paying double tax. I don't see how that would work, the ATO wouldn't refund it without expecting the employer to correct their record, STP data, of you being an Aust employee. Which after 6 months you're not.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join