People are so often their own worst enemies and end up ruining the best ideas for themselves and others.

The phrase my grandmother would use is “being given an inch and taking a mile.”

One of the best outcomes of the pandemic has been wrecked by those it was designed to benefit, because of a lack of respect and all-round selfishness.

Employers are so fed up with workers taking the mick while working from home – WFH – they’re calling time and demanding they return to the office.

Talk about self-sabotage. It doesn’t take Inspector Clouseau to smell a rat that the fictious Teams call on a calendar is really an eyebrow appointment or an extra hour at the gym.

Skivers and shirkers have been busted and others who abide by the rules are paying the price.

Nationwide, the world’s biggest building society, is the latest - after HSBC, BT and Black Rock - to scrap its “work anywhere” policy and ordered thousands of staff to the office at least twice a week to boost productivity. 

A few years ago, the prospect of such a work-life balance was a pipe dream. A privilege that would give employees more time by cutting out travel time and all those other benefits like being at home for the plumber, deliveries and putting the washing on.

It is also a privilege for only some, though. Front line staff in any sector must be on site. You can’t do your bit in manufacturing a Rolls Royce at home, so those who could do it should have felt fortunate.

But instead, they have mucked it up for everyone.

Friends in other sectors speak of employees insisting they cannot return to the office three days a week because they have bought a dog, have the school pick up to do, have sold their car, and all types of excuses that they believe is their right.

Quite simply, too many people are happy to take the money without doing the work, and using employers’ time as their own, with the result that they are ruining a system for those who do the right thing.

Former Nationwide chief executive Joe Garner clearly had more faith in people than most. He allowed staff to work anywhere in the UK in a policy in 2021 designed to put staff in “control” of how they balanced their work and home lives” when 57per cent of his staff wanted to work from home full time, and 36pc wanted a mix of home and office work.

As is human nature, some messed up and everyone pays.

WFH does have a downside. Workers become invisible, are overlooked for promotion and can face the chop when redundancies happen.

And it’s not just British cheek and idleness. In Australia, employers groups say WFH staff are most in danger of job cuts. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry blamed falling productivity levels on staff working from home.

At the front of the resistance to get back into offices are Gen Zs who find the 9-5 the schedule soul-crushing. Diddum.

Remote work gives them time to cook, exercise, and socialise, which travelling to and from work denies them, they say.

Their lives are their full-time jobs, with work as part-time. They also want a four-day working week.

What people forget is that the needs of a business must come first, and unproductive businesses can’t compete so there will be no business if everyone pleases themselves, so no jobs.

----------------------------------------

We’re not privy to the ins and outs, but the news that the chief executive of two of East Anglia’s biggest zoos quit because she had received “widespread abuse” following redundancies of 10pc of staff is horrendous.

Claudia Roberts, director of the organisation for four years, quit after receiving “unacceptable” abuse when she had to make cuts at the Zoological Society of East Anglia (ZSEA), the charity that runs Banham Zoo and Africa Alive, as it faced “significant cost increases”. 

Once again, it cannot be ignored, if Claudia had been Claud, would he have been subject to the same, mostly anonymous, abuse? I think we all know the answer.

A female leader making difficult decisions or voicing opinions attracts far more backlash and nasty comment than a male doing the same thing.

I know because I’ve experienced it – misogynist anonymous attacks focused on my gender, character and appearance rather than my actions and views, simply for doing my job.

And I’m not saying all anonymous abuse comes from men. Women too, for whatever unfathomable reason, hide behind a pseudonym to attack other women. Again, I know that for a fact.

I really felt for Claudia walking away from a job she clearly loved because of pathetic individuals.  The board had not asked her to leave, and said still had “full faith in her leadership”.

No one should receive abuse for doing their job. It is wholly unacceptable.

These people should be sought out and identified so everyone who knows them, their families, employers, friends, know what they have done and are too gutless to voice their opinions in person.

There must be zero tolerance and anyone who is behind this abuse should hang their heads in shame.