FabSwingers.com forum: Should people working from home be payed 50% less.....?

By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

Than those who work at a office? I was watching a utube short of mullins, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GZRjSVm4nfA

He is saying that it should be a 2 way tier wage system, 50% less if you are working from home and those that are prepared to come to work, should be payed double.

I dont think it is fair, because lets say that those who work from home and those at the office completes the same task, shouldnt be a difference in pay.

What is your view about?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think no.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *reyToTheFairiesWoman
over a year ago

Carlisle usually

Obviously not.

The work is what's being paid for, and that's being done.

The employer is not paying for the travel time, wear and tear on vehicles and clothing and equipment, extra daycare or any of the other expenses of going to office over working from home, so why should the employee be paid less?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And what numbers did they crunch to come to 50%? I like going into the office once or twice a week as a break from being at home but there's no reason we should penalise those working from home full time if the productivity is the same.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ose-tinted GlassesMan
over a year ago

Glasgow / London

No.

Stupid idea.

If anything, pay home workers more to cover their energy bills for the time spent working. And provide an allowance for proper furniture/equipment to ensure their health isn’t compromised.

Next question?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ister_ee_1981Man
over a year ago

Sunniest Exeter...

No, you are paid for the skills/experience you provide The location has nothing to do with it. Work is what you do, not where you do it, And yes, there is a certain "priveledge" with some roles being able to be done remotely, some can't, but surely, anyone working from home is not adding another car to the streets, or taking up a bus seat.

Sounds like a new attempt to divide the population and get them fighting one another.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ister_ee_1981Man
over a year ago

Sunniest Exeter...

Divide and conquer...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well the fact that it’s the B&M Rod Stewart saying it is enough reason to know it’s a load of bollocks. Always be wary of someone that has millions in the bank that does nothing these days except paid TV / YouTube work making comments that they know will cause outrage or annoyance, knowing full well that it will create more paid media opportunities for them.

If you do your work, you get paid for it. If you don’t, you don’t keep your job. It doesn’t matter what the location is if the job isn’t location specific.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *inda May SimmonsTV/TS
over a year ago

hexham

Oh crumbs !

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ong-leggedblondWoman
over a year ago

Next Door

Hell no.

Due to not having enough room to have a proper office at-home, I had to convert an area in my house.

I pay for my energy bills/internet/stationery etc, and get a very small tax allowance for working at home.

Then you have to take in the fact of mental health issues that arise from the lack of socialising.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"Obviously not.

The work is what's being paid for, and that's being done.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If something like this was to happen, it would encourage employers to force their employees to work from home, in order to pay less.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hmmm, I'll have to ask the boss.

Nope, quite happy to keep paying me the same wage, but suggests I spend some time working and not spending time on Fab.

What a spoil sport.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"And what numbers did they crunch to come to 50%? I like going into the office once or twice a week as a break from being at home but there's no reason we should penalise those working from home full time if the productivity is the same."
I also wonder how he came up with the 50% and yes, it is also nice to get to the office to social with the work colleagues as well

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Hmmm, I'll have to ask the boss.

Nope, quite happy to keep paying me the same wage, but suggests I spend some time working and not spending time on Fab.

What a spoil sport.

Ps - I seem to be the boss.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atnayCouple
over a year ago

STEVENAGE

"Than those who work at a office? I was watching a utube short of mullins, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GZRjSVm4nfA

He is saying that it should be a 2 way tier wage system, 50% less if you are working from home and those that are prepared to come to work, should be payed double.

I dont think it is fair, because lets say that those who work from home and those at the office completes the same task, shouldnt be a difference in pay.

What is your view about?

No. If anything, they should pay more. Companys are saving on the cost of office space and facilities.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *irtyKittenCouple
over a year ago

Southampton

If everyone worked from home they can close the office down so that will be saving them money.

So who pays workers fuel cost of using home as office, and internet connection.

And for meetings need to be face to face there are places you can book as conference rooms.

With business premises that cost a tens of thousands to rent/lease I would say the employer gains more

I also find I do more at home as I have no one to talk to about non work things so the whole working day is used for work .

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Funniest post of the year.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *haggydogMan
over a year ago

Brooklands/London

Maybe people who work from home could charge rent for office space to the companies they work for?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *MisschiefxTV/TS
over a year ago

London

Well that's the stupidest thing I'll read for the day.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *agerMorganMan
over a year ago

Canvey Island

F*ck no. I’m being paid to do a job, where I do the job is not of concern but the quality is.

I’ve been working from home for almost 4 years now, I’d argue that my quality of work has gone up because I’m sleeping better, able to just get up and walk away from my desk whenever and on top of that, reduced the number of meetings.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *aucy tiggerWoman
over a year ago

Back where I belong

Definitely not. I find I get more done on the days I work from home as there are less distractions.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *entlemanrogueMan
over a year ago

Motherwell

Who came up with this stupid idea? some half wit Tory i expect

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No, it should be the other way round if anything to cover energy bills etc. X

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *untimes wantedMan
over a year ago

Huddersfield

If anything people working from home should be encouraged to and paid more not less.

If it no longer means firms providing company cars,paying towards daycare or providing a daycare centre.In some cases rail tickets.

They can rent or buy smaller office space and smaller overheads for services.

Helps towards them reducing their carbon footprint.

They should be passing on some of those savings to the employee.To cover cost of the increase in household bills working from home causes.

That of course if the amount of work done is the same .in some cases might even increase productivity if the employee no longer needs to travel any distance into work as they would be less tired and not as stressed.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *otsossieMan
over a year ago

Chesterfield

"Who came up with this stupid idea? some half wit Tory i expect"

Yep.

It saves a fortune on office space provision. It just needs to be managed by people who can actually manage.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"No.

Stupid idea.

If anything, pay home workers more to cover their energy bills for the time spent working. And provide an allowance for proper furniture/equipment to ensure their health isn’t compromised.

Next question?"

This.

Excuse me for a moment while I put my professional H&S hat on..

There are countless people working at home with inadequate equipment that's actually damaging their physical health and their general wellbeing.

There's also a huge amount of evidence across many sectors that remote workers are actually unable to properly "switch off" from work as there's no division between home and work.

Their stress levels are often higher as a result which can have implications on their physical health too.

When I work remotely I'm often working longer hours, answering calls and emails at silly o'clock because it's there. I'm not paid to be on call though.

Lastly, there is the isolation and the strain of home working on other relationships.

I could go on and on.

I think it's fantastic that many employers now adopt flexible working and when it works, it works really well but it's gotta work for both parties.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *uriousscouserWoman
over a year ago

Wirral

Each to their own I guess, but I wouldn't work for any company that held those sorts of beliefs. Am I being paid to be present or am I being paid to achieve an outcome?

If I'm being paid simply to have my arse in a chair then it makes sense. If I'm being paid to achieve results and I'm achieving those results, then it doesn't.

Right now I'm in the office, sitting in a pointless all hands lunch meeting and bored witless, so I'm fannying about on here. If I was at home I could have joined via teams and got work done while this was burbling along in the background.

I find my day or two a week I work on site to be so unproductive I spend the rest of the week catching up.

The office I work from wasn't designed for people spending 90% of their time on teams calls, so it's eardrum-shatteringly noisy and impossible to concentrate. To get a coffee or go to the toilet means I have to go to a different building, which takes some time, and I always end up in a conversation with someone when I go over there (rarely work-related, general water-cooler stuff).

I also only work my hours in the office as I don't want to get stuck in traffic which I know I will if I leave late. At home I work longer hours because I can - I deal a lot with the Americas so it suits me to be able to take calls and have meetings late.

I like to be able to use their printer and aircon and heating (and they've provided a buffet lunch for this meeting which is grand), and it's great to have the social element, but it's far less productive for me personally.

I appreciate some people will take the piss when working from home, but these are likely to be the same people who take the piss in the office too, location won't change that.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *isfits behaving badlyCouple
over a year ago

Coventry

Surely your pay is based on the value of your skill/experience as a commodity? Normally dictated by how easy/cheap you are to replace, how long it would take to replace you and the impact you missing would have on output/profits. Companies don't pay your wages out of benevolence. Working at home or not if your getting paid the same then that company needs your skills regardless of the location you put the hours in. Your value as a labour commodity is everything and the more valuable and rare your labour commodity is the more choice you have over the terms of your working conditions and pay.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Than those who work at a office? I was watching a utube short of mullins, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GZRjSVm4nfA

He is saying that it should be a 2 way tier wage system, 50% less if you are working from home and those that are prepared to come to work, should be payed double.

I dont think it is fair, because lets say that those who work from home and those at the office completes the same task, shouldnt be a difference in pay.

What is your view about?

No, you are paid for your skills. Plus more people working from home means less traffic etc, means I can get to work faster.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ittlebirdWoman
over a year ago

The Big Smoke

No. Next question

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ehindHerEyesCouple
over a year ago

SomewhereOnlyWeKnow

"No.

Stupid idea.

If anything, pay home workers more to cover their energy bills for the time spent working. And provide an allowance for proper furniture/equipment to ensure their health isn’t compromised.

Next question?

This.

Excuse me for a moment while I put my professional H&S hat on..

There are countless people working at home with inadequate equipment that's actually damaging their physical health and their general wellbeing.

There's also a huge amount of evidence across many sectors that remote workers are actually unable to properly "switch off" from work as there's no division between home and work.

Their stress levels are often higher as a result which can have implications on their physical health too.

When I work remotely I'm often working longer hours, answering calls and emails at silly o'clock because it's there. I'm not paid to be on call though.

Lastly, there is the isolation and the strain of home working on other relationships.

I could go on and on.

I think it's fantastic that many employers now adopt flexible working and when it works, it works really well but it's gotta work for both parties.

Yes and yes again. There is data supporting that fact. More and. More remote or wfh workers are reporting mental health issues and burnout as the expectations are that they are more available. Some of it is self imposed because of the perception that you should be available.

It’s an issue that hasn’t really been addressed yet

Marc

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atnip make me purrWoman
over a year ago

Reading

Ridiculous. If there is a productivity issue that needs to be addressed as a productivity issue. Otherwise if im working as hard at home at in the office why would I be paid less? Absolute non sensical. I have no idea why so much of management is obsessed with people being back in the office.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *oggoneMan
over a year ago

Derry

Seriously? Anyway where were we?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *he love catsCouple
over a year ago

South Wales

Think we should be paid more in fact for heating etc, for helping with congestion and therefore helping the environment too.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *lovetoowatchMan
over a year ago

Sheffield

You get paid for work you do not where you do it (in most cases)

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orMatureWomenAndCouplesMan
over a year ago

Ipswich

"Than those who work at a office? I was watching a utube short of mullins, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GZRjSVm4nfA

He is saying that it should be a 2 way tier wage system, 50% less if you are working from home and those that are prepared to come to work, should be payed double.

I dont think it is fair, because lets say that those who work from home and those at the office completes the same task, shouldnt be a difference in pay.

What is your view about?

Just another attempt by shitty employers to pay their workers less.

Bring on the fucking revolution.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You get paid for your time, sometimes offert, more for expertise and experience, looks can be a factor, but especially talent.

There is a minimum, but sadly no maximum. Maybe one day we will all exist in the socialist utopia where we all get what we want.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"No.

Stupid idea.

If anything, pay home workers more to cover their energy bills for the time spent working. And provide an allowance for proper furniture/equipment to ensure their health isn’t compromised.

Next question?"
That is also right, they should get more allowance to get those things too

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"No, you are paid for the skills/experience you provide The location has nothing to do with it. Work is what you do, not where you do it, And yes, there is a certain "priveledge" with some roles being able to be done remotely, some can't, but surely, anyone working from home is not adding another car to the streets, or taking up a bus seat.

Sounds like a new attempt to divide the population and get them fighting one another."
That is right as you are payed for the skills and experience, yes, it does sound like an divide attempt there.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"If something like this was to happen, it would encourage employers to force their employees to work from home, in order to pay less."

That is very true!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *egasus NobMan
over a year ago

Merton

Working from home is usually more hours than not.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *egasus NobMan
over a year ago

Merton

but more relex

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Than those who work at a office? I was watching a utube short of mullins, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GZRjSVm4nfA

He is saying that it should be a 2 way tier wage system, 50% less if you are working from home and those that are prepared to come to work, should be payed double.

I dont think it is fair, because lets say that those who work from home and those at the office completes the same task, shouldnt be a difference in pay.

What is your view about?

No, pay per work done. Next

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *lan157Man
over a year ago

a village near Haywards Heath in East Sussex

There is a growing school of thought that says that if work can be done at home then that home could be anywhere therefore why not relocate the job to a cheaper country i.e. where staff hours are cheaper..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Than those who work at a office? I was watching a utube short of mullins, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GZRjSVm4nfA

He is saying that it should be a 2 way tier wage system, 50% less if you are working from home and those that are prepared to come to work, should be payed double.

I dont think it is fair, because lets say that those who work from home and those at the office completes the same task, shouldnt be a difference in pay.

What is your view about?

Nope.

Companies should be more flexible to work with their employees' approach to getting the job done. Whilst it will suit some to be in the office on a daily basis, it doesn't work for others. COVID has highlighted that flexible/hybrid methodologies can work just as well, and companies should embrace that or risk losing staff.

It costs far more to recruit and train new staff than it does to adapt in order to retain the existing workforce.

Plus, they are able to save money on other overheads so it's a win win.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orl1971Couple
over a year ago

Glasgow

"There is a growing school of thought that says that if work can be done at home then that home could be anywhere therefore why not relocate the job to a cheaper country i.e. where staff hours are cheaper.. "

Was going to make exactly this point. Many industries have been moved from the U.K. to lower cost countries. Shipbuilding, manufacturers and call centres to make a few.

More companies are looking at offshoring jobs now that communication is pretty much the same whether you are in Bishopbriggs or Bangalore. Offshore remote workers might cost the company 25% of the cost of a U.K. person.

Oh and AI is coming to get your job unless maybe you’re a dentist or a tradesman. But if you are one of those you’re not working from home anyway.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Absolutely not

It's swings and round abouts those who are working from home are using more gas/electricity than those who travel, while those who travel are paying for petrol/public transport

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 01/06/23 20:00:03]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No fucking way.

I genuinely feel so much rage thinking about how much some workplaces can't stand the thought of people being comfortable at home. If the job is getting done as it does in the workplace then what is the big issue? It's like they want to suck the life out of you and work you to the fucking bone for the bare minimum.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough

"No fucking way.

Like the people who work on ferries and cruise ships, that pay far less than the minimum (maximum-you'll-get-from-us-excuse-excuse-of-a-wage)?

P&O anyone?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *acey_RedWoman
over a year ago

Liverpool

Why though?

We do hybrid working and sometimes I have to be in the office for meetings or appointments but otherwise I get more work done at home because it's quieter.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I believed that being in a comfortable environment can boost your productivity.

Working hybrid is a win win for everyone.

No less pay for working from home

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *aitonelMan
over a year ago

Travelling

Of course not. Technically they should/could be paid more since in some cases there are less outgoing costs on certain things based upon office premises situations (does not apply to all!)

One thing that does annoy me about some (not all!) of those that work from home, that despise about having to return to office/business premises is that they think it makes no difference.

It makes a huge difference in some cases - the no need for office/business premises has a knock on effect for some.

Business have less need for security, cleaning, and maintenance personal. That is people losing jobs because there is less need for them. This is potentially happening to my workplace in the not to distant future. Most certainly can see it heading that way.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *den-Valley-coupleCouple
over a year ago

Cumbria

No but people who cannot work from home should be paid More...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No. Totally unfair, T works from home and I work in an office. We both have highly stressful jobs, but T doesn’t have to commute. Salary should entirely depend on the role, responsibilities, your capabilities and your performance (in my opinion).

Mrs

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *obilebottomMan
over a year ago

All over

Oh dear, some people really don’t think before they speak. A job is about outcomes and doing what you are paid to do. You can be in the office 24/7 but not doing what you are meant to do. And in all honesty, working from home might have some advantages but can also be more expensive with heating bills etc. as well as isolating. Incidently its not a bmnew thing, just more than it used to be. There is however also a danger of companies taken advantage and many have already closed offices and this yet again can be as damaging as what happened with the closure of high street shops and devastating the city centres. Lots of other businesses depend on commuters, lunch time shoppers etc. A bitvof balance must prevail

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *allsendmaleMan
over a year ago

Wallsend

I’ve been doing hybrid working for a while and now I’m over the novelty of working from home I find that I’m more productive at home.

When I go to the office I find it hard to concentrate now and I spend most of my day chatting and wondering where the time has gone!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"Hell no.

Due to not having enough room to have a proper office at-home, I had to convert an area in my house.

I pay for my energy bills/internet/stationery etc, and get a very small tax allowance for working at home.

Then you have to take in the fact of mental health issues that arise from the lack of socialising.

"
That is good points and yes, as one who works at home have to pay for those things too.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *olf and RedCouple
over a year ago

Nr Cardiff or at Chams Darlaston

Absolutely not, my job is based from home. I work in the community though and it’s a stressful occupation. It can be lonely as well not being based in an office and for some, that adds to the stress.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The only way this could work is if the employees are paid that less amount..... But then the employer pays an amount for using employees premises, internet etc and the employee doesn't have to pay tax on that other half - absolutely!

Ps I don't work from home sadly

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I don’t work from home but I work in peoples homes and all the people I’ve met say the same thing, it’s still work, there’s pros and cons to home working but my take is less travel, less congestion smaller office space and the kettle is twenty yards away, the majority says they are more productive working from home too, stay home, mines a Yorkshire tea

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ama bamaMan
over a year ago

dalkeith

Maybe they should send the electric,phone and Internet nill too their employer.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"No. Totally unfair, T works from home and I work in an office. We both have highly stressful jobs, but T doesn’t have to commute. Salary should entirely depend on the role, responsibilities, your capabilities and your performance (in my opinion).

Mrs"
You are right there as well, as salary should depend on that too

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *arko2020Man
over a year ago

Sale

Nope, definitely not. You're paid to do a job not to sit in a specific location.

Yes, if the location you choose negatively affects your ability to do that job, then something would need to change. But otherwise, where you happen to sit is irrelevant

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *aggonerMan
over a year ago

for a penny

I worked from home for thirty years.

Mind you, as a self employed, I probably got paid far less than if I worked for a company.

If there was to be a tiered system, people who cycle or walk to work should be paid less than those who rely on public transport.

Either home workers get paid for the extra cost of heating, lighting etc or those who work on an office or factory should contribute to the energy they use there.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ichaelangelaCouple
over a year ago

notts

should be paid 50% more as you're saving the company money in rent for office, electric, heating, insurance etc.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orny PTMan
over a year ago

Peterborough

Royal family? Yes.

Farmers? No bloody way.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Than those who work at a office? I was watching a utube short of mullins, here it is: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GZRjSVm4nfA

He is saying that it should be a 2 way tier wage system, 50% less if you are working from home and those that are prepared to come to work, should be payed double.

I dont think it is fair, because lets say that those who work from home and those at the office completes the same task, shouldnt be a difference in pay.

What is your view about?

It’s based on the assumption that working from home you do less. Which tbh is true for a lot of people I know.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's a stupid idea. So its a No.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ansoffateMan
over a year ago

Sagittarius A

50% I am sure that figure is the result of a thorough and comprehensive economic analysis.

No my answer is no and I would go so far as to say the vast majority of people are grossly underpaid. Which creates unnecessary hardship, negative social consequences and stifles the economy due to the lack of disposable income.

The idea of reducing income is a race to the bottom mentality from people who lack the ingenuity to be creative and so penny-pinch from others pockets.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

Only if people who go into the workplace are too. After all they're not using their utilities all day.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I work from home and my productivity is far higher than my colleagues who are office based. I may save on commuting costs but it costs a hell of a lot more in energy over the winter months, if you work in an office you don’t have that cost. I’m also a lot more flexible so if I client wants a meeting at 7am or 7pm it’s easily done.

On top of all that my work/life balance is great which means I perform better when I am working, cos I’m happier in general than when I was office based. So why do I deserve 50% less?

Thankfully my company does pay increases based on output and as mine is a lot higher than others, my wage increases are higher too and I actually earn more than my office based colleagues doing the same job.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I work from home and my productivity is far higher than my colleagues who are office based. I may save on commuting costs but it costs a hell of a lot more in energy over the winter months, if you work in an office you don’t have that cost. I’m also a lot more flexible so if I client wants a meeting at 7am or 7pm it’s easily done.

On top of all that my work/life balance is great which means I perform better when I am working, cos I’m happier in general than when I was office based. So why do I deserve 50% less?

Mr "

How can your work life balance be better if you’re working the same? Unless your commute was hours ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

That’s the problem, where I live (slightly rural) the commute is so busy that it’s at least an hour to any of the local cities so I save the extra couple of hours a day. Plus not having to go into the office means I don’t have to waste time getting ready, simple shower and change. I can also take my kids to school and pick them up which I couldn’t do before and that extra time with them is great for me and them.

Those couple of hours saved on commute make a big difference to me and my life.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *dmundwilsonMan
over a year ago

Llandudno

No. More.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *hagTonight OP Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"That’s the problem, where I live (slightly rural) the commute is so busy that it’s at least an hour to any of the local cities so I save the extra couple of hours a day. Plus not having to go into the office means I don’t have to waste time getting ready, simple shower and change. I can also take my kids to school and pick them up which I couldn’t do before and that extra time with them is great for me and them.

Those couple of hours saved on commute make a big difference to me and my life. "
Those are good points and yes as those couple of hours would make a big difference to you

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No.

Next ridiculous question.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *oubleswing2019Man
over a year ago

Colchester

"I have no idea why so much of management is obsessed with people being back in the office. "

Because most management is poor management, and wedded to the idea that overseeing bums in seats in an office is "Managing". It's not. That's nursery care. To be fair, I wouldn't trust most managers with the latter either.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *orks and Scots girlCouple
over a year ago

leeds

Absolutely not..!! I work from home as he’s away with work a during the week, why the hell should I be paid less, I work very hard and I’m more productive and don’t have the office knobheads or sleaze balls to deal with.

Totally ridiculous to even suggest it ..!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *e renard de la campagneMan
over a year ago

Surrey mostly when over

"No.

Stupid idea.

If anything, pay home workers more to cover their energy bills for the time spent working. And provide an allowance for proper furniture/equipment to ensure their health isn’t compromised.

Next question?"

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ohndom2023Man
over a year ago

Hastings/Greenwich

I despair at the absolute bollocks these idiots talk

I suggest a 50% tax hike for the bollox talking elite who have never done a days work in their life.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *eryCuriousCouple2012Couple
over a year ago

Funville

My view is erm, no, he is clearly an idjit.

When the employer pays for the employee to travel to/from work and all the sundry excesses when WFH ie increased gas/electric, food, internet then maybe it would be reasonable to two-tier it. Until that happens, again, it's a resounding no.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If proven the home worker does the same amount of work whether in office or home, then no.

If found out not to be so, a good talking to!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *tooveMan
over a year ago

belfast

They should get paid less.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread