Several centuries ago, when we all went into lockdown, there was plenty of commentary around the idea that Covid-19 would reveal the cracks in our society we simply would no longer be able to turn away from. But amidst the highlighting of structural racism and class exploitation, some of your middle-class chums might have been looking at the silver lining of a future where they didn’t have to go into the office. Working from home is a new, exciting possibility allowing a more dynamic approach to work and you don’t have to put pants on.
Sadly, the belief in this brave new world of rolling out of bed five minutes before you clock in and never having to attend a fuddle (“Food huddle” ...really) again is somewhat naive. Currently, you might be aware of the teething problems with working from home. Endless Zoom calls, IT problems and childcare logistics. These are just problems to be solved as the world of work is suddenly crashed into the home. In theory, these can be solved when the virus is safety dealt with, which could be some time yet.
But what happens when businesses do what they’re supposed to do best; minimize overheads and increase productivity? What if it’s cheaper for companies to relocate their workforce into British homes and working from home isn’t a temporary or flexible solution, but rather the way business always operates?
The first practical worry we have is space. In 2011, in England alone, over four million households had no spare room, with just under two million more being overcrowded, needing one or more rooms. Certainly, not everyone in those six million households will have a job that could be done at home, but the fact remains many Britons would be required to (and indeed have) introduce office space into homes that have no room for it.
A 2017 report by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions found those working from home were more likely to suffer from neck ache, wrist pain and nerve damage. The reason is pretty simple. Most people don’t own ergonomic work equipment. The same report looked at how these symptoms lead to lack of sleep and, although many who worked from home were happy to avoid the commute, they were also far more stressed.
At the same time, these miserable, exhausted and aching buggers work harder—a happy bonus for employers. Of course, this increased work has been associated with an inability to separate home from work (which is hard when your kitchen table is suddenly a hot-desking ideas space) and the feeling your work is being more closely monitored, which it might be.
More and more companies have been looking into software that allowed them to vehemently monitor (or, spy) on their employees through video conference software. Employers can install software on work devices which not only monitors what websites you visit and when, it uses inbuilt webcams to take photos at regular intervals. Meaning, your boss could snap you popping the kettle on because they can see you've stopped working for five minutes. This is only made worse if your personal device is also your work device. If you avoid your boss in the pub (remember them?) what are the chances you’ll be happy with them having a nosy around your flat? And some places already monitor how you manage your work. If they have reason to think you wouldn’t be working properly at home which after all, why wouldn’t they want to monitor you more?
All these are just the problems arising from the blurring of the personal and professional. Capitalism and innovation go hand in hand: imagine how innovative an employer could get if—and I know this is an unthinkable, preposterous, draconian flight of fancy—they put profits before people?
What if a candidate isn’t deemed “suitable” for a job because they don’t already have the equipment necessary to make wi-fi calls? Lower-income candidates will be priced out of applying or workers could have to take on personal cost to buy better equipment. What happens to the work-family conflict when multiple people are fighting for workspace and one person’s work demands strict confidentiality? Will spouses and children have to sign contracts with employers or be security checked when entering the work parts of their own homes? Could there be a hard border on the way to the bathroom?
Seventy-nine per cent of Britons are reluctant to call in sick. How will that change if your sickness won’t spread or it’s mild enough a manager could give you something easy to do. You might be thinking “well, I’m entitled to sick days.” True, but not everyone is, and even then, just under a quarter of employees go into work when sick because they feel pressure from the boss. With the workplace and home merged, the pressure not to fall behind, you might find yourself once again over at your desk (which, if you remember is giving you nerve damage) with your nose dribbling over a couple of spreadsheets because you know the boss is monitoring you.
This isn’t to say any of this is a certainty. It’s future-proofing, a cool sounding word meaning “to worry and prepare for what our hellish capitalist system will throw at us next.” But we’ve got to be careful. Corporate behaviour that makes money is all too quickly normalised and success is measured by how much money is made, not the ability of workers to truly build a life of their own outside the workspace.
