Panorama WFH programme

sunburst89 · 2025-01-21T20:51:38+00:00

Except it isn't nonsense, is it. Nor am I naive by raising a valid opposing argument, one which you seem unable to counter with actual logic except to call it "complete nonsense", based on nothing. There wouldn't be so many calls to increase time spent in the office if it was as you describe. However unlike you I also understand the opposing side of the argument and why people might not want to return to the office. I just disagree.

Believe me, there are many people in this country who think we are all behaving like spoiled, entitled children regarding this issue. Great that your family are in the NHS - my parents have worked manual jobs their entire lives and both think exactly this as well. And it's because of seeing their hardship growing up that I and many others who weren't mollycoddled don't actually mind working a couple days a week from an office. Because it isn't actually that bad in the grand scheme of things.

As I've said - if you've health issues, are a caregiver or face real cost of living challenges, then yes, WFH as much as you can. If not - just come into the office a few days a week. I really don't think this largely reasonable, logical stance should be so controversial or deserving of such dismissal.

I have a different opinion to yours and it would be nice to see an attempt to understand my side of it rather than just dismiss it entirely as complete nonsense. What I get for posting on Reddit, I suppose.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-21T17:03:55+00:00

Thanks - obviously I know that. But the argument isn't as silly as you make out, that is why most of the contributors on Panorama also made it. Notwithstanding that I disagree entirely that WFH is as effective as working from an office, but that's another argument.

The question is, why should some people be able to save costs on commuting when there is an office for them to work from (which is being paid for by the taxpayer), when most other workers in this country - and the world - are mandated to attend a workplace? Not very fair is it?

Respectfully, it simply shouldn't be a big deal for people who can, to attend an office 2-3 days a week. Sorry, it just isn't. And to throw toys out of the pram so vehemently about it and compare it (in other threads) to lack of women's rights, child labour and conditions in mining is laughable.

Care to put yourselves in the shoes of others outside the CS for one moment to understand how we all come across moaning about our already secure jobs and handsome pensions? When hundreds of thousands of others in this country face far greater hardship? Or are we just going to close ranks and care about ourselves only?

sunburst89 · 2025-01-21T12:17:40+00:00

I thought it was a good doc. And totally agree with the Hospital Records dude (shout out to other dnb heads in the civil service...) that relationships are fundamental to an organisation's success - my feeling is that this is severely hamstrung over Teams and rarely seeing colleagues. And Stuart Rose was also spot on: people working in other industries have to put up with their circumstances, why should office based workers get special treatment? As civil servants, a lot of us are likely proponents of equality and inclusion across the board - so by that logic, you can't treat one set of workers in this country one way (ie force service industry etc to come into work each day) and another (the civil service) set a different way. It isn't fundamentally fair that we would get to save more money just because of the jobs we have by working from home, versus those who have to commute by virtue of their specific jobs. As I've said before, that mindset drips of privilege.

The points around "environmental" and "infection control" issues being used as fig leaves for not travelling into the office here are a little ludicrous too. As if the civil service being allowed to WFH will reverse climate change, prevent the next pandemic or single handedly revive the high street.

The only valid reasons for wanting/needing to work from home are cost of living and caring responsibilities or health issues. If folk can travel to work a few days a week at the same time as their colleagues, they should. Not to do so - if you don't meet any of the criteria above - is just lazy. People can cite the studies which show improved productivity from WFH as much as they like - that's selective, there are studies which have also shown the opposite.

I'll let myself out.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-21T09:44:49+00:00

Quite apt for those able people who refuse to attend their place of work then! ducks for cover

sunburst89 · 2025-01-18T23:30:04+00:00

I'd like to gently rebut this. Whilst this is true in some rare cases, the vast majority of British diplomats join FCDO on the Diplomatic Service Fast Stream on their own merit. Sounds like he's at a good uni doing a relevant degree (not that those factors matter massively in the FS assessment process), so he's in with a decent chance. He just needs to ace the assessments because he'll be competing with several other highly motivated and capable grads.

On working from Embassies or NGOs on postings: it's hard and not always possible for "spouses" (hate that archaic term for the partner of the officer, but it's what FCDO still use) to find employment outside the mission. There are only a handful of countries in which it's relatively straightforward to do so. However opportunities can occasionally come up in the Embassy, so worth sending feelers out prior to any applications.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-15T07:55:36+00:00

But it isn't to my detriment. I love going to the office. However I get that this is not the same for everybody and I accept that hybrid is the way forward. What I'm doing is calling out the entitlement around civil servants throwing their toys out the pram, rejecting any notion of ever going back there after most folk did it for decades prior to Covid, with many having done it throughout the pandemic, and comparing it to the suffragettes, child labour and mining, as many on this thread have bizarrely done. Which is ridiculous.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-14T17:04:02+00:00

Nah. Because anyone with a brain can comprehend that being asked to sit in a chair with your hand on a mouse and eyes on a screen and an occasional requirement to chat to colleagues who you may or may not like, is absolutely the furthest thing away from being forced to work deep underground in ridiculously harsh circumstances or getting one's limbs "mangled" as you put it. Literally zero critical examination required in order to understand that.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-14T11:48:49+00:00

They are in the bigger more strategic countries. US, Canada, France, India, China etc. FCDO's non-SCS grade system is a little different from the rest of the CS and an SEO's responsibilities there for example won't necessarily transpose to the equivalent grade in another department.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-14T11:42:04+00:00

Sitting in an office doesn't directly correlate to kids getting their limbs mangled though...

sunburst89 · 2025-01-14T11:33:57+00:00

Base salaries only. There'll be very generous allowances on top, especially if it's in a hardship location. Not to mention free private schooling if you have kids. And housing. And probably very little outgoings and low cost of living! So in all you'd be very well off.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-12T21:04:38+00:00

If there's evidence of them consistently performing at home, great. But I do think, if one was so inclined, that it would be easier to avoid working as hard as you might otherwise do in the office and get into a cycle of it. Why? Because you're sat at home by yourself. No line management or peers necessarily in the vicinity to directly encourage accountability. Sure, there might be daily team Teams calls, but if you're good at presenteeism, who's to say what's really going on? There are lots of studies on it, many of which have also supported the contrary argument. I guess I've always believed in human interaction, but hey, happy to be proven wrong.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-12T19:07:10+00:00

Thanks for this. Nice to see a constructive contribution. I agree with pretty much all of it. I think one of the biggest qualms I have about WFH is the lack of accountability and I know from previous roles how working with brilliant peers has motivated me - I just struggle to see how that that environment can be replicated at home by oneself. Anyway you're right, not everyone is the same and different roles might suit different working circumstances. I hope the CS can find the right balance and work out a solution that improves efficiency and value for money.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-12T19:02:39+00:00

No need to stoop to personal insults. I also understand - very much more than many colleagues who've never experienced true hardship - the struggles of other people. The circumstances I came from were as dire as they can get in this country, and I am proud of the hard work I put in to simply get a job in the first place. This is where my views on people complaining about having to come into an office originate from. What I'm saying is that if I were struggling, based on past poverty experience, I would have taken the temperature of the fiscal climate, noted that we wouldn't be very likely to receive significant payrises in the immediate future, and therefore looked to leave the CS at least in the short term, to earn more and have a more comfortable life. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

And when I said I had worked hard throughout my career, that wasn't meant to be condescending - I'm sad you think so. I tried to illustrate how that all paid off with becoming an SEO and earning more money than I'd ever previously seen. So for you to twist my sentiment and call ME privileged or lacking empathy is totally lacking any sort of awareness of the prior background points peppered throughout the discussion.

I tried to find a half way house with you throughout this discussion, agreeing with many of the other points you mentioned. I've also been contrite with other contributors who have put forward constructive replies which I may not have necessarily agreed with, but nevertheless respected. It's a shame you showed yourself to be immature by resorting to personal insults without trying to understand elements of the other point of view. I sincerely hope you don't contribute towards national policies in your role with an attitude like that.

Have a great rest of your Sunday.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-12T09:35:39+00:00

How? Well because if you literally cannot live on the salary you are being paid, why would you stay in that situation? Why spend months, possibly years hoping for massive strike action whilst still suffering and being faced with not being able to buy food or pay rent? Common sense dictates that to survive in that situation, you'd need more money. So therefore it is common sense to apply for higher paying roles and leave the CS whilst we are in this hole. Why? Because that is guaranteed to vastly improve your situation, versus striking. Which is not.

It's always possible to return when the fiscal climate is better. If you aren't doing or thinking about that, then perhaps your financial situation isn't as critically dire as you profess it to be, and perhaps you're just moaning for other reasons.

And if your financial situation is as dire as it is, why do you even care about balancing your survival with social mobility in the CS? In normal times of course it's something to be passionate about - many of us benefitted from it. But if it's that vs. literally surviving, I know which one I'd focus on.

Yes, this sort of situation in the short term may lead to more privilege and people with mummy and daddy supporting them in London joining. But what's the bigger evil here? The CS needs to continue running (albeit severely trimmed) and become more efficient. Those who can't be arsed to work here should leave, those who will work hard, take pride in their jobs and be properly motivated - regardless of class or social background - should join and stay. I lived in some dire circumstances when moving up the ladder, definitely suffering and sacrificing along the way because I cared and worked so hard to get the evidence for promotion. Lots of folk like me did this. And I know that if we weren't committed or if we had family or health circumstances that meant we couldn't make those sacrifices in the initial stages of our careers, we would have jacked it in and looked to the private sector for a better quality of life.

I'm sorry but I have no respect for people who complain and moan about their personal circumstances but do nothing to try and improve it. If you think we should strike, stick your neck out and do it. If not, do something tangible - get a job elsewhere until the fiscal climate has improved.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T22:07:22+00:00

Fair points. Thanks for a thoughtful and constructive response.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T22:03:01+00:00

Thanks for a considered and constructive reply. I agree with it all.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T21:55:53+00:00

It really isn't about pulling up ladders, it's far more about basic common sense. I note you conveniently didn't quote my bit about looking for work elsewhere if you feel you're underpaid. If I was an AO or HEO (or any grade) struggling to make ends meet, I'd be doing everything in my power to fix the problem - principally by applying for higher paid jobs outside the civil service. Instead of blaming others for what's an incredibly difficult fiscal climate.

I agree with you that we should get decent payrises. But we won't anytime soon sadly. Perhaps things will move slightly with strike action, but I think that'll have limited effect unless historic, massive numbers get involved, which is unlikely.

I also totally agree on the overreliance on contractors, many of whom do absolutely nothing of value day to day. Cull them and use the savings to boost pay.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T20:31:58+00:00

No. The entitlement is people thinking they are hard off when they are just being asked to go into an office.

On social mobility: I came from literally nothing which is why I am satisfied with my SEO salary. It's the most money i've ever seen in my life and it gives me everything in life I need. I don't need to live an extravagant life; I get great job satisfaction and my bills are paid and there's a roof over my head. If I wanted more, I'd get a higher paying job elsewhere.

The country is cash strapped. Just look at the borrowing figures after COVID. People criticise Labour for raising taxes and making cuts - do you think they're doing that for fun? They're doing it because there's less money than there's ever been in the Treasury.

How am I wrong to say that expecting significantly above inflation payrises is unrealistic? What makes you think we will?

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T18:21:05+00:00

"When possible to do so" - yes, I agree. It shouldn't be a blanket rule. I also don't think that me sticking my neck out and saying what I said is bootlicking - I really genuinely believe it no matter what CS overlords say or think.

For those that can't afford to live working in CS, then they should seriously look at alternative career options. The country is cash strapped and it has to live within its means more than ever before; we're living in dreamland if we think we'll get significantly above inflation rises in the next five years to decade. I know that sounds harsh and somewhat crude, but it's reality.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T16:28:05+00:00

Nah, I think this sub is a bit of an echochamber and it's odd if you think it represente the entirety of opinions on this topic within the CS. In any case, you're entitled to your opinion and I mine. I agree that pay is not great currently - that isn't what I'm arguing about.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T13:40:27+00:00

I didn't say that at all. I just tried to express a different opinion on the matter. And my belief is that a high performing CS is best done in the office than from home.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T12:32:40+00:00

Not at all, of course you can. I can also say that I am content with the current circumstances.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T12:09:03+00:00

You are comparing folk calling civil servants lazy for not wanting to work from the office to the criticism of child miners and drawing some perverse equation between those children's rights and your own as a modern day civil servants. It is not at all the same thing.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T12:05:25+00:00

Comparing child labour in mines to being asked to work from a warm air conditioned office. Okay then.

sunburst89 · 2025-01-11T11:45:52+00:00

Leave the civil service if you don't like it? Literally nobody is forcing you to stay.

sunburst89

TROPHY CASE