Opinion: Started job but can’t afford to travel to office?

[Bald-Eagle22]

A big corporate can’t afford a few train tickets even if said new employe "did a runner" !

 

[Housey]

EDIT: I won't add details, but there's definitely more examples now of this new employee being particularly worried about lunch breaks, start/finish time etc. None of which you'd expect somebody to raise in their first 1-2 weeks.

As I said in my first post it does demonstrate a mindset as do the replies in this thread. For me I would want to do everything in my power to make the correct first impression and I would find a way to be present.

Make asks when you have delivered value is what most businesses will look for as they will employees who start day one with added complications.

The last 3 years has impacted working culture and mindset massively. Most people are not self motivated and you are naive to think otherwise.

I suspect this employee will continue to be a challenge on this matter. Solving the problem is easy, but I would look for an employee who solved it first frankly.

 

[dlockers]

As I said in my first post it does demonstrate a mindset as do the replies in this thread. For me I would want to do everything in my power to make the correct first impression and I would find a way to be present.

Make asks when you have delivered value is what most businesses will look for as they will employees who start day one with added complications.

The last 3 years has impacted working culture and mindset massively. Most people are not self motivated and you are naive to think otherwise.

I suspect this employee will continue to be a challenge on this matter. Solving the problem is easy, but I would look for an employee who solved it first frankly.

The type of role is key as to whether what your saying is reasonable or not.

 

[D.P.]

The type of role is key as to whether what your saying is reasonable or not.

indeed, the first question is, is there any reason the role is not WFH. WFH or hybrid should be the norm with on site requirements being an exception that needs specific justification .
Most of.my team is remote and all onboarding, training, H&S etc done remotely

 

[sidimmu]

I think we need an update from @Scam

Some of us will be right, some of us will be wrong. I'll have no shame in admitting I was wrong about this individual if they been perfect ever since.

 

[Housey]

The type of role is key as to whether what your saying is reasonable or not.

Not really. It is about the principals of adhering to an ask you signed up to ahead of joining and seeking to change that in your first week after agreeing to it.

For me it isn't about if they can do the job as well in place A or place B, it's about you agreed to this and now you want to change it. The reasons why are secondary for me as this is a first impression (and totally subjective) debate that leaders have to consider. I would not do this, I would find a way to keep doing what I signed up to do, but suspect this person is not 56 so has a different perspective on work.

Hard to make a real judgement as not in the room but the element I highlighted above leads one to think this person is likely to be a cup half empty individual. Gonna have to deliver immense value or have a serious skill that makes up for that. Experience has shown most people only think they do when really suggests they just don't.

 

[Scam]

A big corporate can’t afford a few train tickets even if said new employe "did a runner" !

Why then heck should they? There’s plenty of people looking for jobs, who needs this aggro or charity case?

I suspect this employee will continue to be a challenge on this matter. Solving the problem is easy, but I would look for an employee who solved it first frankly.

I suspect the same. But I’m not sure my other half likes me pointing this out any time the new starter comes up in post work conversation/rants.

indeed, the first question is, is there any reason the role is not WFH.

That’s not the question at all.

I think we need an update from @Scam

Some of us will be right, some of us will be wrong. I'll have no shame in admitting I was wrong about this individual if they been perfect ever since.

Not much more to add, I think my girlfriend is just seeing how it goes what with the probation being so long.

The is still insistent on not staying late/wriggling around staying for later meetings (eg call finishes at 5.30pm therefor newbie wants that to be a WFH day ). I mean c’mon 5.30pm is not even late by anyone’s standards, let alone a London office, let alone a London office that works closely with west coast US!

The one I couldnt believe was that apparently the newbie has very serious hayfever. So brought up in conversation about going to a particular country in Europe for the summer to work remotely!?! Newbie has been there before and hayfever was non-existent. The company has a policy of allowing you to work remotely for up to 4 weeks (no longer for tax reasons) which is very agreeable - however newbie didn’t want this to count towards that - and wanted it to count as an additional “accommodation” as-in like a disability. Newbie unbeknownst to my girlfriend actually reached out to HR about this My girlfriend thinks newbies partner is from said country and hence has family there..

So yeah, my mind was blown with that. Absolutely nuts behaviour in my opinion. I’ve told my other half as much but I think she’s just biding her time. Perhaps throwing in a few late meetings to get the newbie to cause a fuss on record etc. She’s obviously taking heavy notes on all of this.

On the other side of the coin, her other newbie has been taking calls with the US into the evening eg 9pm yesterday and obviously doing really generally.

Edit: Also apparently newbie also talking (asking?) about how it works to move/work from other global offices. Not really understanding the concept of how these things work for said big corporate and you can’t just move your own role…

 

[peterwalkley]

Wow ... so much for giving the benefit of the doubt as I suggested back in post 9. This one is really pushing it and taking the wee. Your other half is right to be keeping notes as from this latest post I can't see why they deserve to be there even up to the probation let alone beyond it. Give some people an inch and they take a mile At least the company tried rather than a hard-nosed "your problem, deal with it" approach.

 

[sidimmu]

Not much more to add

Then proceeds to drop further red flags about the person in questions behaviour
I suspected it might go a bit like this, but not as far as it has.
The other newbie sounds like a great addition though!

 

[Housey]

Judgement call based on initial impressions. You can usually form a fairly solid view after a few days in their company of the individual, how they act and react to challenges.

I think that opinion is now fairly formed.

I know what I’d do.

 

[Scam]

Yeah indeed. But I can only give my advice so many times. Not helpful that I've never managed anyone too I'm sure my girlfriend has it under control, she has successfully engineered other people in her team to leave before when it was clear they didn't fit!

The newbie is really acting like I (we) probably did in our first job out of Uni. Something in a shift pattern, minimum wage etc. Where you know everyone is out to take advantage of you (well, at least in my industry). Not in a £45k+ (I don't know) tier job in a big corporate for those interested in an actual career. Bizarre behaviour.

 

[HangTime]

The is still insistent on not staying late/wriggling around staying for later meetings (eg call finishes at 5.30pm therefor newbie wants that to be a WFH day ). I mean c’mon 5.30pm is not even late by anyone’s standards, let alone a London office, let alone a London office that works closely with west coast US!

What are her contracted hours (edit: I appreciate this isn't even your company so you might not have the details, so can consider this a rhetorical question if necessary)? If they are supposed to finish before 17:30, then if these are a regular occurrence (the reference to West Coast US infers it might be) then it's not unreasonable for them to request some flexibility around that IMO. They might have commitments in the evening that require them to catch a train that is catchable leaving at say 17:15 but not catchable if leaving after 17:30. Then due to train schedules that maybe means a 40min delay. I think people who are used to London transport and/or drive to work are of the mindset that 15mins delay in leaving the office means ~15mins late getting home, but often it's heavily compounded due to national trains being much less frequent, missed connections being a lot more impactful etc. When I stay in London I never think about timing you just go to the tube/bus stop and one turns up after a few mins so being late is irrelevant, but not for commuting.

The way I see it, if the nature of the office is such that it often requires people to work late then they should ensure their working pattern for new hires covers that i.e. in this case I'd be expecting working hours stipulating a 17:30 or 18:00 finish. So it works both ways on that front, this employee is out of order taking a job and then saying they can't afford to travel to the office 3 days a week as outlined before they took the job, and conversely if the organisation is requiring the employee to work beyond the contracted hours on a regular basis (i.e. more than just the 'by exception' cases they doubtless put in the contract) then they are out of order too.
[Clearly, if she's contracted to 17:30 or later but is moaning about calls ending at 17:30, that's a different matter].

Personally, I tend to approach it from the position of give and take, sometimes I stay late in the office, sometimes I do evening calls from home with the US - equally I'll have a bit of flexibility like a later start on office days (which I made sure to agree with them before accepting the the job offer, unlike this clown) as the earliest I can get a bus to the station is 07:07. If my employer started being more rigid, I'd probably be more rigid from my end too. If I was full time in the office for example I'd basically reject / not propose most evening meetings.

 

[D.P.]

Why then heck should they? There’s plenty of people looking for jobs, who needs this aggro or charity case?

I suspect the same. But I’m not sure my other half likes me pointing this out any time the new starter comes up in post work conversation/rants.

That’s not the question at all.

Not much more to add, I think my girlfriend is just seeing how it goes what with the probation being so long.

The is still insistent on not staying late/wriggling around staying for later meetings (eg call finishes at 5.30pm therefor newbie wants that to be a WFH day ). I mean c’mon 5.30pm is not even late by anyone’s standards, let alone a London office, let alone a London office that works closely with west coast US!

The one I couldnt believe was that apparently the newbie has very serious hayfever. So brought up in conversation about going to a particular country in Europe for the summer to work remotely!?! Newbie has been there before and hayfever was non-existent. The company has a policy of allowing you to work remotely for up to 4 weeks (no longer for tax reasons) which is very agreeable - however newbie didn’t want this to count towards that - and wanted it to count as an additional “accommodation” as-in like a disability. Newbie unbeknownst to my girlfriend actually reached out to HR about this My girlfriend thinks newbies partner is from said country and hence has family there..

So yeah, my mind was blown with that. Absolutely nuts behaviour in my opinion. I’ve told my other half as much but I think she’s just biding her time. Perhaps throwing in a few late meetings to get the newbie to cause a fuss on record etc. She’s obviously taking heavy notes on all of this.

On the other side of the coin, her other newbie has been taking calls with the US into the evening eg 9pm yesterday and obviously doing really generally.

Edit: Also apparently newbie also talking (asking?) about how it works to move/work from other global offices. Not really understanding the concept of how these things work for said big corporate and you can’t just move your own role…

For the time of calls, it may simply be that 5:30 is difficult because it coincides with things like kids daycare finishing and needing to get home and cook dinner for the family. They may be perfectly happy to have a later call. In our team we often try to avoid calls between 4 and 7pm but happily have calls 8-9pm once the kids are fed/in bed. Likewise in the morning, usually no calls at 9am but sometimes some at 7am before school drop off

 

[HangTime]

we often try to avoid calls between 4 and 7pm but happily have calls 8-9pm once the kids are fed/in bed.

Same here. I don't want 18:00 calls but 20:00 - 21:30 is OK on an adhoc basis provided I'm working from home that day (I wouldn't be home by 20:00 if in the office).

 

[Scam]

For the time of calls, it may simply be that 5:30 is difficult because it coincides with things like kids daycare finishing and needing to get home and cook dinner for the family. They may be perfectly happy to have a later call. In our team we often try to avoid calls between 4 and 7pm but happily have calls 8-9pm once the kids are fed/in bed. Likewise in the morning, usually no calls at 9am but sometimes some at 7am before school drop off

That's fair enough but the newbie doesn't have kids and just seems more concerned about what time they will get home. And again, this is all that should have been brought up at the interview stage. Along with being in the office 2/3 days a week, it was made very clear that is a big element of working with the US, particularly as their HOD is in the US.

 

[swillsy]

Called it

It's under 2 years, just get rid without reason and try and get some discount from recruitment fees for the next guy. People should stop trying to make up excuses for everyone.

When you're in a new job you aren't expected to do a lot initially apart from create a good first impression and fit in. This person hasn't got the common sense to do it so see ya

 

[dlockers]

That's fair enough but the newbie doesn't have kids and just seems more concerned about what time they will get home. And again, this is all that should have been brought up at the interview stage. Along with being in the office 2/3 days a week, it was made very clear that is a big element of working with the US, particularly as their HOD is in the US.

It clearly can't have been made clear. If it had, she'd be matched to HR and let go immediately. Working out of hours is specifically called out. Days in the office is explicitly called out. If she is contradicting both she needs removing.

If it hasn't been made clear and she's chancing it, that's a hiring problem not a her problem. A lot of folk now aren't in it to burn midnight oil for a salary that barely covers their rent.

 

[Scam]

@dlockers it's less that they're refusing to do it, because the newbie hasn't specifically been asked to do any meetings that are "out of hours". It's more the comments like "oh we have that meeting that doesn't finish until 5.30pm so I'll make that my WFH day so I'm not late" or another which I can't remember if I said.. When the newbie was coming in on the cheaper trains (before getting paid), they weren't getting into the office until 11:30am ish. When discussing, the newbie flippantly said "Oh since I'm starting later I'll take my lunch later at 2.30ish" Who would be talking about taking a lunch break if you're getting in that late?

It's just odd behaviour.

 

[Stu999]

@dlockers it's less that they're refusing to do it, because the newbie hasn't specifically been asked to do any meetings that are "out of hours". It's more the comments like "oh we have that meeting that doesn't finish until 5.30pm so I'll make that my WFH day so I'm not late" or another which I can't remember if I said.. When the newbie was coming in on the cheaper trains (before getting paid), they weren't getting into the office until 11:30am ish. When discussing, the newbie flippantly said "Oh since I'm starting later I'll take my lunch later at 2.30ish" Who would be talking about taking a lunch break if you're getting in that late?

It's just odd behaviour.

They do sound like a chancer but you still get a lunch break if you start late (assuming they are doing a full day and finishing late).

 

[Scam]

They do sound like a chancer but you still get a lunch break if you start late (assuming they are doing a full day and finishing late).

They weren’t finishing late, I think the agreement was to do a bit of work at home/on the train to make up for not getting in first thing. I just think it’s odd. Like I say, this isn’t some first job out of Uni. This is a FTSE/Nasdaq sized (I can’t remember) household name company doing an office job where it’s entirely possibly to eat a sandwich whilst doing emails or reading documentation. I just wouldn’t dare of bringing it up if I’d already stretched policy and got an ‘out’ to get into the office 2hrs later than everyone else.