Last time I had to deal with occupational health at work,i had to wait to recieve a phone call off them because they weren't seeing people face to face,I presume they were working from home,same as the finance department, it was earlier this year,this is in the NHS by the waymy daughter works for the DWP and she works here at home, not a large house but we have a large area on the landing where she has set up office, every time i walk past her computer screen is visable so it certainly must be breaching data protection, just another thing brushed under the carpet to get them all working away from the office
Depends if you own office space or rent it. In my nearest office in York, we've gone from 120 desks to 45 so our estates department are making a massive saving, this has been echoed at a lot of our other offices including London. When its rented space from an accounting point of view they have a figure per desk. Cant remember the exact figure but for London Im pretty sure the cost was something like 6k per yr, per desk, albeit that our office there is a swanky new building near Victoria Station.The key phrase there is 'most of the time'. Unless you completely shut the office then it still has to be heated and cleaned so those costs are fixed and don't change, whether there is one person in or a hundred. Very few places have gone to 100% home working.
C'mon Eccles you're clever enough to understand that its not about reducing cost but increasing margin for shareholders. Thats the primary purpose of major businesses; to increase shareholder value. If the market can support a higher costs to the consumer then they will do it.I know I'm an old codger and I also know I'm probably naïve but can someone please explain to me why some costs can't be reduced if more people are allegedly working from home most of the time?
If they are working from home the cost of electricity in the offices and the cost of heating the offices must have gone down, plus the cost of office cleaning. (I feel sorry for the cleaners who are losing their jobs by the way.) I realise that the rental still has to be paid but surely someone somewhere is saving money? So why is that not passed on to the underdog, the consumer?
I know, I just wish I didn't ..... It just drives me mad!!C'mon Eccles you're clever enough to understand thats its not about reducing cost but increasing margin for shareholders. Thats the primary purpose of major business; to increase shareholder value. If the market can support a higher costs to the consumer then they will do it.
Regulatory bodies are meant to ensure consumers get a fair deal but are quite toothless in the bigger scheme of things.
I know I'm an old codger and I also know I'm probably naïve but can someone please explain to me why some costs can't be reduced if more people are allegedly working from home most of the time?
If they are working from home the cost of electricity in the offices and the cost of heating the offices must have gone down, plus the cost of office cleaning. (I feel sorry for the cleaners who are losing their jobs by the way.) I realise that the rental still has to be paid but surely someone somewhere is saving money? So why is that not passed on to the underdog, the consumer?
They can use whatever excuse they want in my opinion they are just clawing back the money they lost during COVID ,a classic example is most bands have stuck £20 on a concert ticket .petrol is another know one went far in COVID they want there 18 months of petrol sales back .
Some of it is undoubtedly due to quantitative tightening, the government is issuing less bonds and letting others mature which removes money from the system (i e a removal of the cheap money pumped in through quantitative easing post 2008). They can only do this steadily though as you can end up with a lack of liquidity in the markets which in extreme cases causes a financial crash.I agree, the 100's of billions lost and wasted must be clawed back.
why i suspect mortgage rates will still stay high. could be wrong.