Get ready for a new unwanted policy in the office
Of all the staff who returned to English shops and pubs after easing the lockout rules last week, I wonder how many are like Ross Hanbury.
He is 39 years old and has been a fitness coach in London for almost 20 years, in gyms, schools and rugby clubs.
He sees a lot of people from many different backgrounds, so he knows that the pandemic has affected people in many ways. This helps explain what he did last Monday, when he finally returned to the gym in west London where he does personal training. “I asked people the first question,‘ How was your closure? ’” He told me the other day. “And then based on their reaction, I gave my honest answer or a poor answer.”
His honest response is that the pandemic has been pretty good. He has not lost business. The disease has not left the rails, nor have any close friends or relatives. But there’s no rush about it, as Covid knows a lot of people who have poleaxed. The mourners. Unemployed. Who has failed. Patients. I think Hanbury’s thoughtful behavior makes sense when thousands of employees are thrown out for the first time in months, often without a trace of what each has experienced.
Unfortunately, his approach is by no means uniform, which is why human resources experts are ready to repeat the temperatures and angry words that erupted when people returned to work after lifting previous closures last year.
“We saw quite a bit of friction in organizations,” says David D’Souza, a member of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. “You had a group of people with very different perceptions about each other’s experience, and they got in touch with each other.”
This created what D’Souza calls a “reckless organization” between different employee camps, and it looks like it’s re-emerging this year. The gap between those who could and could not work at home has long been great, especially if the frontal stalwarts are paid less. This time you expect a gap between the embedded and the uninserted.
However, one of the most serious threats to the harmony of the offices is to distinguish between those who have worked in government schemes and those who have not been, who are paid for hours without work.
Parents need to know that the schemes have created a “new distinctive group and group” of employees, he says Pearn Candle, business psychology company. For full-time employees during the crisis, the idea of paying to stay at home seems like a vacation. So when employees who have worked in the spring come back again expecting free time in the summer, it hasn’t always gone down well, as several friends on Twitter made clear last week.
One was confused because they were not forced to leave the holiday. “I am very happy that I have worked every damn week of this pandemic to make the furlough scheme work well,” wrote another.
Even for those who haven’t worked, the people who kept their jobs at full pay can happily look like that.
Consider Scott Walker, another 39-year-old Londoner I spoke to recently. He closed his first career as a stonemason in the 2008 financial crisis, changed his heel and spent four years earning a degree in engineering, eventually getting contract work to design mechanical systems for theme parks and large rock concert venues. The job was rewarding but unsafe, so he was relieved to finally be working full-time at an engineering company in London – before the pandemic broke out.
The father of a two-year-old boy, who has a new child on the way, has spent more time at the forum than at work, Covide has played at concerts and theme parks. “It’s been extra stressful,” he says, adding that there has been a constant fear of losing permanent jobs. “I was starting to think I would have to change professions again. But I was happy, I’m too old to do it again. ”Walker will have to go back to work soon. I hope he finds more understanding than reluctance when he gets there.