Die Labour-Partei verspricht, es den Chefs schwerer zu machen, die Anträge der Mitarbeiter auf Heimarbeit abzulehnen
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/work-from-home-new-labour-rules-5HjdhWB_2/
Von pppppppppppppppppd
Die Labour-Partei verspricht, es den Chefs schwerer zu machen, die Anträge der Mitarbeiter auf Heimarbeit abzulehnen
https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/work-from-home-new-labour-rules-5HjdhWB_2/
Von pppppppppppppppppd
22 Kommentare
>Ms Haig said: “If an employer wants to turn down a request, they will have to sit down with their employee, properly consider and explain why,.
So. Completely worthless as there is no enforcement mechanism. Oh and also the job market is fucked currently so there’s no competition to allow workers themselves to jump ship to employers that offer better working conditions.
That’s fine, they’ll all be replaced with AI anyway.
That’s just going to make hiring more scrutinised.
It’s going to add another soft bottle neck.
It’s amusing how none-committal this is. All the employer has to do is sit you down and say no.
People acting shocked that Labour is representing the working class… that’s the whole point of the LABOUR party, fellas
And another massive blow to productivity, thanks government!
This is good news and the first time in a while I’ve felt the Labour government has acted in favour on a policy issue.
People are saying this is toothless and yes, it ought to go further, but I think by imposing the extra work on the managers and organisation as a whole it does swing the needle. It means that RTO mandates are not simple rubber stamp exercises. It imposes more regulatory burden and time expense on organisations wanting to impose RTO..
Feels like massive overreach tbh. Something for an employee and employer to agree – doesn’t really need government intervention
Work from home sucks for everyone apart from the employee.
„may I work from home?“
„No“
„Legally you have to sit me down and properly consider“
**Sitting Down** „mmmmmm…no“
This should be an environmental directive if nothing else.
They go on about net zero and are willing to sacrifice our industry for it and yet they just let companies make people burn god knows how much fuel making millions of pointless journeys every single day. Twice.
Be careful what you wish for. Anything that can be done from home can be done overseas. And eventually by AI.
As someone who’s partner works in HR… redditors need to learn that there are actually legitimate talking points the company needs to prove… like if a company cannot give incredibly justified reasons why you cant work from home (ie you have to be physically on site if youre an engineer for instance) than, if your circumstances of being able to work at home are present, you have every right to take that company to court over discrimination
Now this is in mostly office jobs that I know this information so Im not certain on a lot of non office jobs… but this articles headline really undersells this… like no the company has a lot to prove and the burden is on them and if they fail to, you have grounds to call them out in court
We have no issues with staff WFH if they want, or they can choose to come into the office like some do. Personal preference
What is frustrating though is when you ask people to come into the office to do tasks that can only be done in the office (yes the NHS still has alot of paper based tasks), and they try and get out of it by coming up with all sorts of excuses despite it being in their job description to pick up the tasks in the office
Would you take a 20% pay cut to WFH.
Because that’s the productivity cost to a business.
This feels like pure political posturing. We’re entering time of huge economic change where businesses need flexibility to adapt, automate and reorganise.
Instead, we get another layer of regulation telling companies how they must justify decisions they already make. Most firms offer hybrid anyway because it suits their operations. Adding more paperwork doesn’t boost productivity, doesn’t help workers and doesn’t solve any real problem.
They should start in house then, 60% is being strictly enforced more so then even most private companies.
If the gov forces employers to develop the management processes to allow for remote working, don’t be surprised if we get more outsourced work to cheaper regions with less risky HR regulations.
For traffic, for oil, for energy we simply have to make WFH more normalised.
I dont think this changes much, nor should it – I don’t really think employers need a justification for mandating in-office work past ‘this is our set of values’. If WFH is better for some companies then I’m sure they will adopt/maintain it! But as a rule, I think we should let the market decide, not the government.
For IT people, if you don’t have a remote plan, you don’t have a disaster recovery plan. It’s right up there with testing backups IMO.
I think bus drivers, nurses, welders and bin men should all work from home as well.