Earlier this year, British comedian Steve Coogan underscored a growing trend to rethink the OOO when he used it not to advertise his own absence, but rather the return to our screens of his blazer-clad alter ego, hapless media personality Alan Partridge. Written in the broadcaster’s inimitable voice, it had stern words for anyone who dared email him: “I’m not in the office so both cannot and will not respond to your email,” it began. “If your email is urgent, perhaps you should have tried calling instead. The very fact you were content to type out your query long hand and settle back to wait for a reply suggests you can wait, even if you’ve put a red exclamation next to your email to make it stand out in my inbox. Won’t wash with me, that.”
But really, I think people who know you WFH will get your meaning and people who don’t know you WFH won’t care or feel misled if they find out you really work from home.

Rather than clutter your general greeting, set an auto-attendant for a campaign-specific phone number. You can assign a unique number to each of your campaigns. Record a voicemail message that helps callers to learn more about your marketing campaign.
There’s a grim, apologetic vibe to these messages — I’m sorry I’m taking time for myself but I’ll try to check in on occasion! They’re a vivid reflection of a work culture that valorizes constant productivity and the near-total overlap of work and life. But they’re also do a terrible job of what they’re intended to do, e.g., set realistic expectations for both sender and recipient. A vague OOO message traps both parties in an uncomfortable liminal space where both productivity and rest go to die. The original sender is left unsure if they’ll be getting a timely response or a whether the email will go ignored for a time or forever. The original recipient has taken what is a rock solid excuse (time off) and cheapened it, offering a backdoor for email guilt to creep in.