POLL: Working from Home, salary reduction. [UPDATE 10TH August 2021]

So - you've been given a choice by your company: you can work from home, but you have to take a pay cut to enable this, and a new contract to make it all legal.

Would you?

-

It's an interesting question, but why the pay cut, you may ask?

A few things:

1) You will no longer be required to get into 'business attiré' to do your job, thus, that element of your salary no longer exists.
2) You will no longer need to travel to work (that's at least 20% mean average - maybe more)
3) You will have more time to yourself when off-duty (due to not need to travel and needing to 'look presentable')

Y'see, employers pay for your time, and for you to look a certain way when on duty/on site - if those elements are removed, you cannot argue that element of your contract.

All interesting - but how about if your company forceably makes everyone work from home, and therefore, for the above reasons (maybe more) reduces everyone's salary as a consequence...

A thought experiment, for my fellow gurus*

*which has now become international news

 

I'm arguing that element on my contract. They're getting paid the same whether I work from home or not, so I'm getting paid the same from them. My incidental costs like travel, clothing, rent, etc are none of their concern. They never thought about them before the pandemic, I have no idea why they think they should be able to justify a wage cut now based on them.

I should be working from home, I did for a time, and I expect to be paid the same, end of story.

 

It would be more acceptable if the salary cut came with more tax breaks for home office gear, etc. That way everything would balance out. Also it's easier for a single person to work from home without distractions, but it wouldn't be the same for people with kids. It all comes down to each employee's situation if it works out better, but in general i do not think salary cuts would be a good thing.

 

No because my job description, duties and responsibilities are the same regardless of physical location.
Definitely not if it involves making a "new" contract as well.

However, if it's due to something like COVID-19, I will temporarily accept remote work due to safety reasons, obviously.
If company needs to save on costs then work out a part time plan or layoffs.
Asking a person to do the same amount of work for reduced pay on the cover of status quo is not the correct way to handle it.

Also as pointed out above, everyone pays for their commute and clothes themselves so arguing it's "part of your current salary" is nonsense.

By that logic if you lose weight your salary should also be cut because you spend less on food!

 

Ah - perhaps you undo your own logic!

IF, when you agree to a contract of employment to work for someone, do you not base the remuneration on external factors; like travel?

If not - why not? If yes, then removing that means you cannot use it in (or as part of) salary negotiations, by your own logic!

Like I said, it's a thought experiment people.

 

As I said to the person above - that is part of your salary negotiation and 'how much am I worth?'

 

Well it goes both ways though.

• No company provided breakfast and/or other perks = Reduction in cost for employer
  
• Smaller office or no office at all = Significant reduction in water/electricity/rent cost for employer while increasing W/E cost for employee

 

When I agree to work for someone I factor in how demanding the work is and my education and experience in same or similar jobs when discussing payment.
Ie. what is expected of me and how well I assume I can perform said tasks, either immediately or with enough orientation / training.
I don't consider how long my commute is to be a part of "how much I am worth".

Other factors I consider include things like likely job stability (and job description stability), reputation of employer and so on.

How far I live from said company ie. how far I need to travel to work I consider to be my own choice.
If I need to commute an X distance daily, that's by my own volition and I accept the expense comes out of my "own pocket".

I don't expect my employer to compensate for that travel. If a potential employer is too far away, then I decline that job offer or don't apply at all.
Have actually refused a job offer once because of this.

As such, in turn, neither should the commute or lack thereof be used as grounds for salary reduction.

 

Once you accept a pay cut. Your pay has been cut.

 

No. I love what I do.

*EDIT*

and the money that comes with it

 

No. Been WFH since April and had 50% cut salary from May to June due to lack of projects (back to 100% now) but we are still WFH

WFH has pros and cons. Its a bliss to not needing to commute to work, being with family, eating lunch and dinner with wife and kid

but

also makes Work Life balance a blur..now its like you are always on-call. even after office hours you receive emails and work just seems to continue (I stop working from 6 to 9PM to spend time with family) but continue work thereafter
so to me, WFH isnt that much to me that I would embrace it over a pay cut.

 

No. I can 100% do my job from wherever I have access to internet so staying at home not only improves my morale, but it also saves my employer money by not having to pay for office space.

 

The parts that no longer exist because one is working from home has now been replaced with other items. Still need to look presentable because of video conferencing, internet connection is now necessitated, what about business lunch meetings (food cost is now borne by employee), Utility bills have increased because of not leaving, Hazard pay if needing to be in the presence of others while conducting business, still need a place to live and now that am telecommuting, part of mortgage payment or rent should now be part of compensation (income tax break for home office will cease to be). That is just a few items off the top of my head. The more things change, the more they remain the same. So no pay cut is acceptable.

 

So - if your company were to move an extra 1 hour commute time from you, you would accept no increase in your salary and just cover the cost + time as part of your current contract?

c'mon...you must factor travel time and the value of your time as part of your remuneration, that's just standard practice to protect yourself.

That is what I meant when I said 'how much am I worth?' because your time has value, and traveling impends that...chipping away with every commute, that you are paying for! AND yes, some companies do have an increase in salary if you work in London, for example (a nightmare if there ever was one) and the reason is cost of living, or/and, cost of commuting.

Your time has value.

 

Line by line:

1. Still need to look presentable because of video conferencing
2. internet connection is now necessitated
3. what about business lunch meetings
4. Utility bills have increased because of not leaving
5. Hazard pay if needing to be in the presence of others while conducting business
6. still need a place to live and now that am telecommuting, part of mortgage payment or rent should now be part of compensation (income tax break for home office will cease to be).

1) Mostly not, just wearing non-business attiré is fine, unless you need a uniform. Less formal is more formal, oddly.
2) I agree - hence why the company will put in a VPN/Leased business line as part of the contract - but mostly for security, and you will be using a virtual desktop/environment. If any other equipment is needed, it should and will be provided.
3) Tax write off - who cares?
4) I agree - which is why a new contract would be needed.
5) Talk to legal, but it mostly will depend on the fact your home contents insurance provider might ask the question why your house/home has hazards inside of it in the first place, but mostly your home insurance would cover SOHO operations with no need to alter insurance...unless your job is a seamstress working from home...or a welder or something...then that is a much different story, perhaps just think of basic SOHO operations.
6) I nether agree or disagree - make that part of the negotiation of your new contract of working from home - if you do not get the right number of the contract, then you do not sign it, and keep working in the office as normal!

 

Point 5, not that in the presence of others that live in the same house, more like current pandemic situation; being in the presence of others away from home. Company just approved hazard pay for all those that remained working in the office; retro back to March 17th so last payroll in March.

 

After being "working from home" since March aside from the occasional site visit, my work productivity has actually gone up.

Alot of this is around the social aspect. Lack of interacting with people and the fact your work please is more integrated with your home, could imo, lead to longer term issues mentally.

 

Fully agree with what you are saying in principle, however the "paid" more in London argue doesnt stand.

This is due to the generalised idea that living in London costs more than outside etc.

Well actually i find that the meal deals etc in London are cheaper than what i would pay in say Milton Keynes / West Midlands areas etc.

The role reverse for getting paid more for a longer commute doesnt work if you live in London and work in say Norwich. Same distance on both ends of a commute, but one gets an extra ££££ to accomodate.

If the company moves, if you are in a good company and/or with a good trade union, you are most often compensated. Funny how you dont get a salary reduction if they reduce your commute.

 

Exactly, as an employee and someone who would interview people, i dont care where they live in general (within reason, fatigue is often overlooked on long commutes). Its the skills they bring and the ability to do the job that counts.

 

If they're going to pay me less, they need to clearly demonstrate how the work I'm doing from home creates less revenue for them, and how that decreased value relates to my decrease in salary. If they want to pay me 10% less, do they have some evidence that the value of my work is 10% less valuable because I'm working from home?

If not, then they don't have a justification for paying me less. More than likely, they're just looking to cut costs because the business is suffering as a whole. That shouldn't be my problem. The leadership of a company is responsible for driving enough revenue to pay the employees. If they can't do that, either the business model is no longer valid, or the leadership doesn't have what it takes to make the business successful.

In this case, I would likely accept whatever they offer because it's probably going to be more money than unemployment. But I would be putting in the bare minimum effort at that job. My top priority would be polishing up my resume and LinkedIn accounts, finding a good consultant who could advise me on recruiters, social media, review my resume, do some role playing exercises with me to simulate an interview, etc. I would be full speed ahead on finding a new job.


I work in software as a manager for a group of Developers. If my team is still producing code at the same rate and quality, why should I get paid less? While it's true my costs may have gone down, and there may be some perks to working from home, that doesn't justify cutting my pay.