Best way to approach work scheduling discussion

[Backroads]

So, I split my time between two different offices. With the busy BSA charter season upon us, we are soon to have a mini-meeting to see if I should spend all my time at the bigger office--which means more of a commute for me. Honestly, I'm down with whatever the big boss ultimately decides, but having the long commute 5 days a week would be a bummer. For my side, I am prepared to argue about the needs of the smaller office as well as my ability to bring work back/forth, but I'd like some input on some other things I've considered bringing up and whether or not I should.

1. Gas money. We were doing pretty well for a while, but are now paying on my husband's student loans. We do not have budget for fun money or clothing, so it's not like we really have something "extra" to delve into. The extra gas for the commute is really going to bite (probably doable, but it would probably be through blessings). Is it appropriate to bring up "I don't know if I can afford the extra commute"?

2. The woman I work closely with at the big office. The idea behind me spending more time at that office would be to keep on lots of work, but I've complained about this woman before and... she is kind of lazy and just this morning was thinking she would spend tomorrow cutting out snowflake decorations for the office instead of working charters. However, she is a mother who does a lot for her kids during the work day. I hate to ask "Why can't Co-worker put in more time/put a limit on her family-time-at-work?" but I also feel I do need to defend my own needs and wants.

Thoughts?

[Guest]

1. Did you know about the distance of this office and that you'd have to work there when you were hired? Did they discuss how often you'd have to go? If it changes the terms set when you were hired, it's appropriate to bring it up. If no terms were set, I'm not sure. If you were aware that you would be working at that office and there were no perimeters set for how often, you don't have much leverage.

2. Leave her out of it. You'll just come out looking immature if you start with "But SHE gets to. . ." and "Why doesn't she have to. . .?". Keep your discussion to your needs and wants, sure, but not based on your issues with her.

[Backroads]

1. Did you know about the distance of this office and that you'd have to work there when you were hired? Did they discuss how often you'd have to go? If it changes the terms set when you were hired, it's appropriate to bring it up. If no terms were set, I'm not sure. If you were aware that you would be working at that office and there were no perimeters set for how often, you don't have much leverage.

This does indeed change the terms.

2. Leave her out of it. You'll just come out looking immature if you start with "But SHE gets to. . ." and "Why doesn't she have to. . .?". Keep your discussion to your needs and wants, sure, but not based on your issues with her.

This is what I was thinking. I still hate to be out of money and time when there is someone who could be working and want to know if there's a way to suggest a different work balance without blaming anyone.

[Guest]

It definitely sucks to work with someone who isn't pulling their weight. But hopefully management is aware enough to recognize some imbalance, and when you state your needs they will (again, hopefully) look to her to help meet their own.

[Backroads]

Yes, I believe I shall keep it to my case for all that I can do via two offices rather than the co-worker.

[Guest]

Good luck!

[Backroads]

Turns out it I didn't wind up presenting a darn thing.

Boss basically said he figured I could do the same tons of work between the offices as I did in one office and that he has apparenatly had me doubling as my stated job and a mental health assistant to the co-worker in the smaller office. (Had really no idea about the latter, but apparently he thinks she's less stressed when I'm with her).