Forced to work from home?

dorme

hi all,

quick one,if a company are wanting employees who are office based to move to working from home,can this be enforced when they impose the following:

loss of extra pay on night shift
employee must have a specific spec pc to use at own purchase cost
use of own internet at own cost
use of own phone line at own cost
must be away from distractions and in own room at home
own home insurance at own cost

? also,dont mortgage companies restrict home working?

DKLS

What a sucky offer I would be telling them to stick it and start looking for another job, Whenever I have worked from home, the company has always paid for the phone line and broadband, they have always provided a suitable laptop and one when prompted paid for a new desk, chair and storage which I kept after leaving their employment as they didn't want them.

My working at home has had zero effect on my house insurance premiums, mainly as my work can be done with a mobile and a laptop and requires no stock or customer visits.

dorme

DKLS wrote: »

What a sucky offer I would be telling them to stick it and start looking for another job, Whenever I have worked from home, the company has always paid for the phone line and broadband, they have always provided a suitable laptop and one when prompted paid for a new desk, chair and storage which I kept after leaving their employment as they didn't want them.

My working at home has had zero effect on my house insurance premiums, mainly as my work can be done with a mobile and a laptop and requires no stock or customer visits.

i suppose if someone declined they could enforce redundancy?

DKLS

dorme wrote: »

i suppose if someone declined they could enforce redundancy?

I don't know about that, am sure someone with better knowledge will be along to answer that one.

How is the company doing?, this would raise questions for me about the financial status of the company, slashing costs isn't a great sign or is it down to some new bright sparks idea about how to save some money?

Undervalued

dorme wrote: »

i suppose if someone declined they could enforce redundancy?

It wouldn't be redundancy! That only applies if the job no longer needs doing.

As to whether it is enforceable or not I would put at 50:50. People are generally surprised how easily an employer can change your terms of employment. Ultimately, if you can't reach agreement and they insist, your only option would be to resign and claim unfair dismissal (not constructive dismissal under these circumstances despite resigning). It would then be up to a tribunal to decide what is reasonable. Even if you won you would still be without a job and you would only get a fairly modest amount of compensation.

There are advantages as well of course. You would save travelling costs and time.

I would be surprised if there were any significant mortgage or insurance implications although you would have to advise them.

tiger_eyes

Undervalued wrote: »

There are advantages as well of course. You would save travelling costs and time.

There are hidden savings to working from home as well. A home kitchen so you can have homemade lunches instead of popping down to the supermarket for a sandwich. Cheap delivery slots if you get stuff delivered. No need to buy and maintain a work wardrobe. You don't pass tempting shop displays of things to waste your money on. Your work colleagues can't drag you out to lunch and/or to the pub. And so on. Just a few more points to consider. I love working from home.

DKLS

tiger_eyes wrote: »

There are hidden savings to working from home as well. A home kitchen so you can have homemade lunches instead of popping down to the supermarket for a sandwich. Cheap delivery slots if you get stuff delivered. No need to buy and maintain a work wardrobe. You don't pass tempting shop displays of things to waste your money on. Your work colleagues can't drag you out to lunch and/or to the pub. And so on. Just a few more points to consider. I love working from home.

I also love working from home and appreciate the benefits, but no employee should be subsidising the company by working at home when they are too tight to pay for the tools required to do the job.

PasturesNew

They'd need to do a Health/Safety Assessment .... and provide suitable equipment.

Surely not everybody's got [a] their own home a spare room [c] space.

I'd look for a new job and take the "working from home" role .... using that as giving me more time to look for a new job.

Undervalued

DKLS wrote: »

....... but no employee should be subsidising the company by working at home when they are too tight to pay for the tools required to do the job.

Yes and no.

You need to balance this against the savings which may (or may not) be considerable and the value you put on any additional flexibility.

There is no reason it should be a totally one way benefit.

dorme

agreed,but not that simple if u have 2 year old at home,plus the outlay which some simply cannot afford.

computer desk-£70?
pc-£300?
chair-£50?

seems only one side would gain here,i think ill advise to fight the costs at least!

Abbafan1972

I don't like the sound of that at all.

What about the extra cost on your fuel bills (having heating on all day in winter months).