Reject the shift to 60% office attendance at DLUHC

No data to support 60%. Not everyone works better in the office. My productivity is better at home. I work in the office with no one else in my team. Going the office 3 days a week will cost me £150. This will have an effect on wellbeing when I get no benefit of office work.

A lot of people wont be able to afford to go to work, another way of imposing redundancies just naming it differently.

Neurodivergent colleague here, terrified of losing the productivity and quality of life gains home working brings. Office days destroy my productivity and bring me undue stress and conflict

I don't agree that this should be forced upon all staff - people have changed their working pattern following covid and may now have caring responsibilities due to children or parents.

Where is the data to suggest that 60% is any better than 40%? 40% is a good balance. If some staff members, due to personal circumstances, want to attend more than 40%, they should be allowed to do so - everyone's circumstances are different. Similarly, if some people, due to personal circumstances, need to be 100% homeworking they should be able to do so (homeworking contracts?).

The office space is not equipped to cope with 60%, already struggling to find a desk at 40%. I am more productive at home and easily distracted in the office.

We've just refurbished 2MS to accommodate 40% office attendance and we are already struggling to find suitable working space, not sure we are in a position to consider 60% attendance.

This is a bad idea from both a productivity and autonomy perspective. Let people do what works for them! And pls dont force an pointless return to the office that effectively cancels out our meagre sub-inflationary pay increase if you are earning £200K - its just rude.

There is no evidence to suggest that 60% office attendance brings greater benefit than 40%. Ministers would refuse to make decisions without being supported by rigorous evidence, so why have senior civil servants made this decision, working against the civil service value of objectivity?

Expensive and unreliable travel , overcrowded offices.

I have a long commute and caring responsibilities and will find this impossible to manage

This change is seriously detrimental to my wellbeing, the department don't seem to care though

Living outside of London, this will cost me over £100 extra a month. Financial constraints are a valid reason.

What benefit does that extra day bring? I am more productive at home then in the office and adds extra expense.

Rejection of the shift to 60% working attendance at DLUHC

this will cause financial pain and make my week less productive.

No pay rises. Reduced benefits. Offices that can't accommodate 60% attendance. And a blanket policy that is driven by political grandstanding rather than being evidence based. Say no.

An ill judged decision to keep the political elite content.

Thus is unfair

this is an unfair move given no attempts to amend the core hours, etc to bring in line with other employers and the new working world being quoted to us by DLUHC. without amendeding praactices i cannot do my job and be in the office - meetings are out of core hours (9am, 4-5.30pm) for example - and i cannot cummute within the hours of childcare availabilty. . i cant afford extra childcare as my wages havent increased in line with increased costs and cost of living, and extra childcare is not available! also, i'd like to be present in my childrens lives! Civil service seems to exist on the goodwill of its employees doing more with less, for less, often for free , for the good of the country but this goodwill is wearing out and wont pay the bills.