Would You Take a Pay Cut to Continue to Work From Home?

LIncidentalCase on 10/04/2021 - 12:47

I've been talking to some peers at competitors and they have mentioned they are being forced back to the office, much to their displeasure.

I was wondering if you would take a pay cut to retain the increased standard of living you experience at home, e.g. decreased transport costs, lowered risk of flu, increased social life, increased leisure time, and more.

If you would accept a pay cut, how much would be acceptable? I'll let the mods determine whether they want to create a poll.

Disclaimer/Background: I'm both a businessperson and employee. I'm technically an intrapreneur at the moment. Undoubtedly I have seen some people exploit work from home, but for others it has increased productivity. The problem I foresee in growing the business I am part of (have equity), is who to cut and whether we instead keep them on but at a reduced pay packet. Ultimately, reduced pay may lead to better outcomes for the workers as they will have less expenses, otherwise we must let people go.

Basically I want to see what the waters would be acceptable to both employee and employer. A lot of the competition are currently making decisions and it seems like they are going down the path of forcing people back to the office to try and improve productivity, but I personally believe the habits and lost productivity from those workers may not ever return. What are your opinions?

Education & Work

Comments

  • jrvb42 on 11/04/2021 - 14:27
    +6

    You might struggle to keep your job at all if you want to work from home. Why would an employer pay you to do a job that you demonstrate can be done remotely when there are heaps of overseas people who can and will do the same job far cheaper?
    It would be highly advisable to immediately find reasons why your boss needs you to be physically present at the office, surely?
    Unless you fancy trying to match $2/hr. Dangerous times for employees once the penny drops for employers.

    • KLoNe on 11/04/2021 - 19:15

      This.
      Be your own boss or find out you're just a number sooner or later.

  • ankor on 11/04/2021 - 16:02

    If my work suggested this, the entire workforce would see it for what it is, baseless penny pinching.

    Don't be surprised at losing your good performers to more humane, less grinchy competitors in the 6-12m after implementing a plan like this.

  • Leeroy Jenkins on 11/04/2021 - 17:28
    +1

    Nah, no way i'm taking a pay cut to work from home. If they don't allow me to work from home (IT) or they want to reduce my salary for it, they don't deserve my time.

  • KLoNe on 11/04/2021 - 19:14
    +2

    They know you (profanity) plebs aren't working from home, that's why they're getting your fat asses back into the office.

  • bobwokeup on 11/04/2021 - 19:53

    If anything the pay should go up if WFH due to the reduced costs to the business and increased productivity, assuming the business puts the correct systems/processes/management/support etc in place.

    If it means staff will lose their job I’d happily take a pay cut for a set period of time assuming the business starts making more money by that time.

  • conza on 11/04/2021 - 19:59
    +2

    Non-sequitur, absolutely non-sequitur.

    So a business has invested in a workspace (owned or rented) and discovers they no longer need as much or even any workspace, and you're asking on top for people to accept ANY pay cut?

    What the actual (profanity)?

    0%. If not, I'll go work at some other forward thinking company and leave you to suffer brain drain. Good day sir.

  • Slippage on 11/04/2021 - 20:04
    +2

    I’d expect a pay increase to work from home, let me explain:

    I took a job specifically for the reduced travel time and facilities in the work place. If I am to setup or forgo a similar work environment while working from home; (desk,chairs, IT equip) and use my own power/internet, then I’d expect to be compensated for it.

    • geekcohen on 12/04/2021 - 10:36

      If I am to set up or forgo a similar work environment while working from home; (desk,chairs, IT equip)

      IT Equipment should really be provided by the business. I have done that for the business I work with, all employees have been provided with the equipment they require. Other equipment would depend on the business, but again, desk and chairs are tax deductable.

      use my own power/internet

      Fair enough, but it is tax deductable. Even if you don't WFH, internet can be deductable along with power and other house hold costs (heating etc).

  • mousie on 11/04/2021 - 20:16

    The costs of office rent is a fraction of the on costs for an employee which are typically about 20% on top of a perm equivalent salary.

    There is a portion of communication which is non verbal and non written so this can be lost and therefore the dynamic of an office environment is lost.

    I enjoyed WFH but full time it's a no from me.
    Tech companies with permant WFH policies… Look at these companies who are being needlessly celebrated like an Amazon and how they treat worked in other divisions.

    There is so much to this more than saving cents in the dollar.

  • HeWhoKnows on 11/04/2021 - 20:38

    You should be paid MORE (not less) to work from home to compensate you for sacrificing part of your home as an office as well as the additional costs of providing your own internet, phone calls, stationary, electricity, heating and cleaning etc
    You are also more likely to work longer hours from home and they may not [pay you sick leave since you are already at home.

    • ely on 11/04/2021 - 21:33

      You can (and should) claim deductions for those expenses if they're not otherwise covered by your employer - and you're right, the employer should pay to cover those costs.

      Working more from home due to the loss of work/home boundaries and the clear cut off times when those are separate places is definitely a concern.

      Not paying you sick leave would still be illegal, I don't think this will be all that much of a problem.

      For these reasons and more, I prefer to work from the office - have worked from home during the mandatory bits, but have worked from the office all the rest of the time (sometimes having the whole place to myself, which was nice).

  • [Deactivated] on 11/04/2021 - 21:09

    I would have taken a 20% cut but my employer was not entertaining any discussion from the mandatory return to office directive.

    It is a case of like it or leave (quit).

  • AlextheMeertkat on 11/04/2021 - 21:11
    +6

    from my experience (consultant engineering), a good percentage of my colleagues do a bare minimum next to nothing working from home - "Oooh. my VPN connection is slow so it takes 50 minutes to download a single drawing, so I have spent 8 hours so far and can't even start working…" and between the lines "but I have happily booked those 8 hours to the project". to be honest, based on their current productivity, they deserve a pay cut. I suspect they do gardening or something similar during working hours. our office now is a circus with people turning up randomly in the office for few hours and disappearing again.
    I am an employee so don't care at all but such underperformance affects the whole team, and the whole team looks miserable in the eyes of the client.

    • Miss B on 12/04/2021 - 20:40

      People like that deserve a job cut.

    • whyisave on 14/04/2021 - 00:57
      +1

      good, sincere workers are the same everywhere - home or in the office.
      they can work autonomously and take pride in the work they do.
      they might do school pick-ups but still have a sense of duty to their employee, and make it up.

      it's just the insincere and apathetic workers who are the scourge.
      they look for loopholes and exploit the work ethics and trust of others.

      this includes bad managers too, who don't understand their sub-ordinates,
      which creates a culture of distrust, killing any team morale and thus…more apathetic workers.

  • ely on 11/04/2021 - 21:31

    increased standard of living you experience at home

    Wait, what?

    No, as someone that has had the freedom to work from home since 2013, I pretty much always work from the office. To be fair, that's walking distance from home, if I had to commute I might be less keen.

  • scud70 on 11/04/2021 - 21:54

    Ha my work place didn't even have it as an option to take it away lol.. I was stood down during covid for 3 days a week and working the other 2 and still had to go into office for those 2 days… When June rolled around most company was in the office.. They make it known that there is no working from home and never will be… One of the reasons that I'll be handing in my resignation tomorrow… I don't advocate 100% from home for my line of work either as i manage others, but to not even offer ad hoc work from home is a bit over the top. There's pros and cons but if an employee has proven to be reliable and trustworthy through their employment… Then some flexibility should be standard, some jobs are probably fine from home (my wife is 100% work from home and does ridiculous hours)… Other jobs like mine are more suited for a day maybe 2 from home…

    • geekcohen on 12/04/2021 - 06:27

      some jobs are probably fine from home (my wife is 100% work from home and does ridiculous hours)

      This, I am in the same boat. I WFH full time and I do 50 hours a week most week.

  • taoz on 11/04/2021 - 22:15
    +2

    Absolutely No less pay. you are being paid to do a job.
    THe job value does not decrease because you are remote at all.
    If anything you should be paid an allowance, as this saves the business many costs, other than providing internet and office equipment which is paid for anyway at the office.

  • No ONE on 11/04/2021 - 23:54

    Should it be the opposite of what you said about the pay? Business will have less cost and increased private cost in terms of electricity, internet and amenities.

    • AlextheMeertkat on 12/04/2021 - 08:14

      What about the cost of drastically reduced productivity? It is impossible to deny that some take advantage and do nearly nothing. By nothing, I mean, literally nothing apart from a couple of 2 line emails and muted teams meetings.

      • No ONE on 12/04/2021 - 15:07

        Then that is the nature of your work and location does not matter.

      • Zondor on 13/04/2021 - 12:40

        If an employee needs constant monitoring to make sure they are doing their job, then why are you still employing them?

        • sakurashu on 13/04/2021 - 16:15

          ^ This - you need to fire these people so that you don't introduce policies that causes your performing staff to quit. If you make a blanket statement about reduced productivity and therefore pay, don't expect your performing staff to stick around

  • pogichinoy on 12/04/2021 - 00:39

    No. My office is two blocks away in the cbd.

  • geekcohen on 12/04/2021 - 06:24
    +4

    No, I wouldn't take a pay cut to work from home.

    In NOV 2019 until the start of the pandemic in VIC I was working 3 days at the office and 2 days at home. My car park was cancelled as I moved to a regional area and caught the train. My car park was a part of my contract, so I got that money in my pay which covered my Myki (which was great).

    At the start of the Pandemic, everyone worked from home. Upon further negotiation and discussions with work and a more flexible boss with systems + processes we put in during the pandemic, there are a few of us working from home full time, a few in the office spread over a few days. During the Pandemic, I was given a pay rise which was a huge surprise and I know very lucky for! So did some of the employees because we had actually done very well surprisingly with not too much loss of business.

    During the Pandemic, our NAS server connection broke at the office so I relocated it to my house to ensure that it can stay online and reduce the downtime of driving into the office, fixing it and driving back. I was able to negotiate with work that they pay for my internet connection which I got upgraded to be faster and I pay for the power required for all of the networking equipment + NAS etc saving me over $100 a month.

    So not only did I get a pay rise during COVID, I was able to get my internet connection paid for.

    In addition to that, all staff have a computer at home provided by the business and those in the office also have a computer there (unless they have a laptop, 50% desktop and 50% laptops for staff).

    This is for a business that has about 10 employees, a private office in a co-working space and pretty everything we do is online. The business saved additional money by removing 1 private office and moving into a smaller office (with more WFH full time) and saved an additional $$$ per month on office space, plus reduced the car parks required since we could share 2 car parks instead of having 5.

    The business has been very accommodating for ensuring staff have what they need both at the office now that we are back and at home. Hours are a lot more flexible across the board and many of start earlier and finish a bit earlier instead of staying back which used to happen a lot pre COVID.

    With all that being said, I am a hell of a lot more productive (along with other staff). I work around 50 hours a week without any travel and get a lot more done. Whilst I do sometimes miss the social stuff, I have calls with the team throughout the day and sometimes we talk crap. I get to spend more time with family (I have an almost 2 year old daughter), I get more down around the house since my wife doesn't WFH (she is a school teacher) and I feel better in myself without being exhausted with travel.

    I know I am lucky to get what I have. But if the boss wanted to give me a pay cut, I would be very annoyed because I work a lot more hours than I ever used too.

    Just my 2 cents.

    • petry on 12/04/2021 - 21:14
      -2

      hope you are declaring all your work perks to the tax office.

  • nightqueen on 12/04/2021 - 08:30

    Lets say you are on a full time salary of 100k gross or $50 an hour.

    If the commute to work is 1 hour each way (lets say the time value is worth 2 x $50) and the costs of transportation of petrol, parking or public transport each way is $5/return $10, then its a daily cost of $110 a day or $550 a week or $28 600 a year - this cost is paid after tax

    Lets say your home electricity costs rise from working from home and you now need the fastest NBN internet plan - that may cost you an extra $2000 a year - which is now a tax deductible expense for 8 hours of the 24 hour day.

    So even a pay cut to 90-95k (5-10k cut) you end up 'better off' as you reduce expenses of transportation + your disposable time (over a 30 year career for a 1 hour one way commute, you end up spending 15 600 hours on transport = 650 days - you almost save 2 years of your life from not having a big daily commute) and you end up paying less income tax.

    • Miss B on 12/04/2021 - 21:11
      +1

      That's irrelevant. Employees aren't paid based on their proximity to the office, the costs and time spent commuting are definitely unpaid. I didn't get a pay cut when I moved considerably closer to the office. I don't get paid more because I work further from the office while some people live only a few minutes from the office. When we moved office buildings they didn't work out where everyone lives and if they were getting a pay rise or pay cut depending on if their commute was increased or decreased.

      I would definitely find a new job if the company I worked for pulled that kind of bullshit, thankfully they never would though, which is one of the reasons I like working for them.

      On the other hand if companies are going to start paying people for their commute and make it a clear part of their remuneration, they can then take it away if people are working from home.

      • sakurashu on 13/04/2021 - 16:20

        It's truly irrelevant as anyone who was decent at a company who got hit with a cut to work from home would go to a different company to get that amount back again. Companies even considering these types of calculations really need to consider the motivations from differently performing staff and realise that this petty saving can really destroy them….

        It would also be a major downside for anyone who went out of their way to be closer to work if you averaged it and applied this sort of thinking across the board

  • Trying2SaveABuck on 12/04/2021 - 08:41

    I would WFH full time - I would not take a pay cut

  • readyState on 12/04/2021 - 09:19

    Last job change I took a paycut and switched to a remote position with only occasional travel. But I think my overall savings has remained about the same as my expenses for work travel, clothing, take away lunches have reduced drastically.

    Not sure I'll happily be able to switch to a lower pay packet with same employer though. Will depend on the job market…

  • suchan on 12/04/2021 - 09:34
    +3

    , increased social life,

    not sure how WFH can increase my social life? it certainly didn't for me.

    That's why I mixed it up by going to the office twice a week to ensure I get that face to face interaction with colleagues / ex-colleagues / mates.

    Having said that, I think we should rethink the term WFH to now be working remotely. From various conversations with random stranger or with colleagues, I found that it appears to be acceptable for work to be conducted outside home, e.g the random stranger I met while on holiday mentioned he took his work calls while walking at the beach & enjoying the view.

    Another example was one of the executive director at my place of work, took her work calls while on snowboarding trip! When asked by other meeting attendees about the background noise, she apologised saying it was the wind as she's on the chairlift. Unconventional and probably not something to be done on a regular basis but hey, i'd love to try it one day :)

    • eek on 12/04/2021 - 11:48

      I think increased social life if your friends are also WFM but not actually at a desk…seems less productive in nature than being in an office.

  • Brianqpr on 12/04/2021 - 09:43
    +1

    No. I get more work done at home than I ever did in the office (no travel time, less interruptions etc) and the company can choose to use less office space if more people WFH. If anything they should be paying more.

    I understand that providing office space, a desk etc can add around 30% in costs over and above what an employer pays you in salary. A lot of that expense can go away if people WFH.

    My employer did a survey about returning to the office and the results were overwhelmingly in favour of WFH. They've left it up to individual teams and managers as to what works for them. Looks like for me this will mean going in for one day a fortnight. Happy with that.

  • Dr Prepper on 12/04/2021 - 10:00
    +2

    WFH is one step closer to uberisation of the workforce. The government is resistant to complete uberisation of the workforce because it becomes harder to tax the work force. Right now taxing lower and middle income workers is low hanging fruit for the ATO.

  • kogi on 12/04/2021 - 10:41
    +2

    The way I see it is I am paid for my work and not for my attendance.

    I should get a pay raise for WFH and saving them real estate money

  • [Deactivated] on 12/04/2021 - 11:08

    For me it makes no sense to work from office when all the work can be done from home. Will I take a pay cut for that depends on many factors but my answer is most likely to be nope. I would rather have my employer provide me all amenities and pay for office they want it like that but not going to take a pay cut. That would effectively mean me looking for another employer who gives me more pay. Prices of goods, services and land has not gone down so don't see many people taking a pay cut for anything.

  • willister on 12/04/2021 - 11:14
    +1

    In our workplace, we are lucky enough which I wouldn't classify as progressive but we were given the option of working up to 2 days per week from home a week for non client facing staff.

    WFH suits me better, in an ideal world I'd do 3 days wfh and 2 days in office but that won't float. I'm not a socialiser.

  • eek on 12/04/2021 - 11:31
    +4

    Those with children under school age must pay for daycare otherwise it's literally impossible to work from home. Office is still more productive.

    • bobwokeup on 12/04/2021 - 11:38

      That all depends on how you raise your kids and if you’re prepared to work later than usual to make up for a difficult day with the kids.

      • eek on 12/04/2021 - 11:46
        +3

        I could. But what if there is communication and correspondence that needs to be handled during business hours? Clients can't wait until you're finished babysitting and start work at 8pm.

      • 91rs on 12/04/2021 - 12:15
        +2

        Comments I'd made from other threads seemed to put me in to the group of "you're the only person this is happening to", but since covid the creep of hours to be made available had increased, that increase has been pushed heavily by those in the company with children (the majority) who they're looking after during the day.

        Moving meetings to earlier and later times (from 5am till 11pm start times) which have become regular and the normal for the last nearly year now.
        Those same people are nearly impossible to contact or get a useful response from during regular working hours now.

        Unreliable parents from the workplace have (in my situation) become more unreliable and uncontactable since covid.

        • Miss B on 12/04/2021 - 21:28
          +1

          The parents where I work do normal hours, occasionally they'll need to deal with child stuff, most childcare arrangements are back in place though. There was a while there when people had to have their children at home, but it wasn't very disruptive. A child might pop up in a meeting or someone needs to step away for a few minutes and the meeting continued without them. Sometimes they'd take a few hours out and get back to work after the children had gone to bed, but it was their individual work so no impact on others.

          Occasionally there was a bit of humour with a child calling out for their bottom to be wiped or they started undressing in the background while their parent was oblivious and someone would have to let them know, or their children would jump the fence and they'd have to go and chase them. Sometimes they'd get up and come out for a morning cuddle. Honestly, it made the day slightly less tedious when we were on a very stressful project in the middle of a pandemic. The parents in the team were doing an incredible amount of work to a high standard as usual.

          I think the parents are grateful to have childcare arrangements back in place though, it was more work for them. Working from home they still get to spend more time with their children though, just not juggling children and work and having to make up time later.

      • sakurashu on 13/04/2021 - 16:23

        Most company policies don't allow you to be the primary carer of children while at work - nor should they but this hasn't really been enforced during these difficult times. For young children that need proper supervision this is either a disaster waiting to happen or a complete lack of focus and productivity at work (where the latter is the preferable option of the two).

    • petry on 12/04/2021 - 11:39
      +2

      as borne out by multiple studies. its sad that those in employment constantly belittle welfare recipients, whilst wanting the same pay for being less productive if working from home due to covid.

    • Rarak on 12/04/2021 - 19:36

      Depends on the person. I have 1-2 little kids at home some days and can work effectively with them around. My wife can't however.

  • jaimex2 on 12/04/2021 - 12:57

    No, I'd find work elsewhere that would accommodate.

  • bobolo on 12/04/2021 - 13:37
    +6

    As a business owner, having staff work from home has decreased staff productivity significantly.

    Even with all systems in place and endless zoom meetings, you just can't get away from the fact that MOST people are never going to be as focused, working in PJ's, stuffing around with kids and dogs, watching youtube here and there, being on socials, running errands that would've normally been put off to the weekend and so forth.

    Hell even I find it a challenge working at home and its my business!

    Also being in an office surrounded by your peeirs and managers just makes things so much more efficient - and a proper culture can be built/maintained.

    The extra "expenses" it costs to have people working in an office pales in comparison to the increased productivity.

    • petry on 12/04/2021 - 13:46
      +2

      I'm afraid that in this forum even though everything you write is entirely logical that you are in a tiny minority. Way 2 many still employed without penalty have had a great time.

    • CocaKoala on 12/04/2021 - 13:47
      +3

      It looks like you just have the wrong kind of people working for you. Productivity in our workplace has increased significantly since we started working from home, and we intend to keep it this way. If someone won't do their job unless they're being "supervised", they probably should be asked to leave.

      The only people who are asking for working from the office to be reinstated at our place seems to be some managers, because they're probably afraid that it would become apparent that there's no need for them to "manage" anyone.

      • petry on 12/04/2021 - 13:52

        not all businesses work in the same way or perform the same functions. what exactly is your business?

        • CocaKoala on 12/04/2021 - 14:11

          what exactly is your business?

          Research, consulting, software development.

          I'd agree with you on the fact that the nature of business will have an impact on this. I am also curious to know what exactly do you specifically disagree with in my comment above, if any? (disregarding the fact that the nature of business will of course matter)

          • petry on 12/04/2021 - 14:17

            @CocaKoala: Issues of control relate to dispersed working. These can be controlled via software in some very specific situations. Survey work these days is a bit of a joke though well paid.

            When workflow is not tightly controlled with checks and balances then it is only of subjective value. Many clients don't care.

            • CocaKoala on 12/04/2021 - 21:58

              @petry: That's my point. When there's an issue of control, it becomes a matter of time before entropy takes over.

              People like that they do where I'm at, and there's hardly any need for one to control another. Things just get done as always regardless of where everyone is working from.

              • petry on 13/04/2021 - 13:44

                @CocaKoala: 'It will be all too easy for our somewhat artificial prosperity to collapse overnight when it is realized that the use of a few exciting words like information, entropy, redundancy, do not solve all our problems.'

                shannon

                • CocaKoala on 13/04/2021 - 14:45

                  @petry: I like sweet potato fries, if we are going to talk about things that are not relevant to this discussion.

                  • petry on 13/04/2021 - 15:59
                    -3

                    @CocaKoala: If claude shannon isn't relevant to entropy, which was your choice of relevant words to this subject, then clearly remote communication with your is near impossible. i wish your 'employees' better luck.

                    • CocaKoala on 13/04/2021 - 16:26

                      @petry: I should have made it easier for you to understand.

                      What I meant was that your picking on just one word that I used and quoting something on that as if it somehow invalidates my core argument was a strawman, and highly irrelevant to the actual discussion.

                      My teammates seem to have good luck (I did mention our productivity has surged since we started working remotely), and thank you for the wishes anyway.

                      • petry on 13/04/2021 - 18:16

                        @CocaKoala: Bait away - you wrote 'That's my point. When there's an issue of control, it becomes a matter of time before entropy takes over.'

                        Claude shannon's work on entropy is famous. I quoted him in response to you about getting carried way with the concept, and his desire for people to focus on scientific methods to which you replied was off topic when it wasn't - 'sweet potato fries, if we are going to talk about things that are not relevant to this discussion.'

                        Now you deny your own comment, and claim Shannon is irrelevant both to entropy and isolated working, which conceptually is incorrect.

                        • CocaKoala on 13/04/2021 - 18:23

                          @petry: I stated that if people needed to be constantly "controlled" in order for them to do their work, it's then just a matter of time before entropy takes over (as in the team eventually gets disintegrated because they don't love what they're now doing). I am not sure how much simpler could I make this in order for you to understand it.

                          You then come around quoting on one word, as if it is somehow adding value to the core of the discussion, or as if it logically opposes the crux of my viewpoint (which is that if people need to be controlled to do their work, there are bigger problems).

                          • petry on 13/04/2021 - 18:28
                            -1

                            @CocaKoala: You play with rayguns whilst eating sweet potato fries like marvin the martian? - how entertaining and creative.

          • sakurashu on 13/04/2021 - 16:28

            @CocaKoala: While most good software developers won't have an issue with getting their work done from home - complex design, whiteboarding and associated discussions along with promoting and maintaining a good and cohesive team culture is much, much more difficult to achieve fully remotely.

            If you're interested there's a study using chinese data (albeit skewable metrics like commit counts etc.) that looks at wfh vs in the office that concludes it's really only the very large projects that suffer.

            I also don't know how I would create and maintain good relationships with my co-workers and network properly without working at least sometimes face-to-face; have you ever joined a new company or new team while working fully remotely?

            • CocaKoala on 13/04/2021 - 16:32
              +1

              @sakurashu: You are making a very valid point. It helps in our case as we've been working together for at least 5 years, so perhaps that's definitely helping us.

              • sakurashu on 13/04/2021 - 16:36

                @CocaKoala: I moved teams 6 months ago and even though it was an internal move I'm only just now meeting some of my team who i've worked alongside for months and it is very weird. I think for day to day work you're on the money (at least for software development) but I would be worried about some of the longer-term implications of having my career entirely wfh if industries went that way

                • CocaKoala on 13/04/2021 - 16:44
                  +1

                  @sakurashu: Another valid point, but only time will tell what way we could go.

                  The flipside of it being that we are super lucky as we could continue working and putting food on the table as if nothing has happened (at least for the most part). If it were between choosing to have an earning or doing nothing because it's somewhat unusual to interface and work with people only over webex or teams, then I know everyone will pick the ability to earn.

                  The "lockdowns" had hardly any impact on us, and as I said several times, the whole thing has only helped us perform better if anything.

                  But yes, I do not claim to know what the long-term impacts will be. Happy to take things as they come though, there's still a physical office and two people from the team actually got worker permit issued even during lockdowns and went to work there, which I'm fine with. We also have one team member working from NSW as they moved there (3 years now), and another working from WA (1 year), and we haven't seen any changes that could impact the team's output. Not that 3 years is long-term, but just putting it out here.

    • taoz on 13/04/2021 - 17:40

      If it was my business, if be more concerned that has happened with the staff I have.
      If they aren't responsible or can't manage there time at home to do as they normally should, provided all equipment etc works as it should the same as being in the office. Then that be my main concern. Have I got the right people working for me..

      • bobolo on 13/04/2021 - 21:40

        Lucky its not your business! Like I said, even as the business owner I notice my productivity level decreases at home. The mindset, the focus, the attitude and environment is nowhere near being in a dedicated work environment.

        And there is never going to be an employee that's going to care about their business as much as you! Assuming they will is just silly.

        I think the trend will definitely be a return to office once things go back to 'normal'. There will be some industries where WFH will be more flexible - but this will be a minority. Business owners have everything on the line. They simply will not take the risk of having a complete remote workforce to jeopardise the amount of risk, money and effort they've put in. Employees being paid a comfy salary with almost no risk are simply going to be expected to show up at a place of work, and if they don't, someone else will.

        If I had to have a completely remote workforce, I'd probably just outsource overseas for 1/4 of the cost of having local employees. Literally the same thing

        • taoz on 13/04/2021 - 23:12

          It may not work for you, but it does work for others.
          I know many where they work full time remote now. Whats best is different for different people and workplaces.

          In most cases the owner will care more, but not all. There are owners out there with multiple business etc out there who don't. There are people working for owners who rely on the income to pay there bills and feed there family so the company going ok does mean a lot to them.

          Getting back to the office will definitely be pushed no doubt, but alot of companies will offer option of WFH, be it 1 days a week or more.

    • Mrgreenz on 14/04/2021 - 09:42

      I feel like this would be the view of the majority of buisness owners, although ozbargain would have you believe otherwise.

  • parismeow on 12/04/2021 - 15:34

    No way! If i am producing the same amount of work - or even more, then i woul not accept a pay cut. Pay should remain the same and shouldn't be dependant on where you are working.

  • cdkane on 12/04/2021 - 15:51

    In some cases you should pay employees more for them turning their house into a workplace at their own expense. You can pay more for my increased utilities, also I can sub-lease you this room which is now a dedicated home office where before it wasn’t.
    The savings you make from tea, coffee, milk and all those other things you can hand over too. They were not part of my salary, but they were part of your expenses which you now don’t have to pay so cough up (like it is my expense to travel to work and pay for public transport).

    Seriously though comments would indicate that it really relies on the type of tasks people are doing, the culture of your workforce, and the nature of your business.

  • kiwimex on 12/04/2021 - 15:55

    If you are saving, parking fees, train fares, fuel and maintenance on your vehicle and travel time to and from work……Why should you not take a pay cut, or do you think it is a one way street?………In many instances workers are less productive working from home, and if you think you and your co workers are more productive, does this mean your employer can reduce staff numbers?

    • cdkane on 12/04/2021 - 16:56
      +2

      People could also move closer to work and make those savings, does that mean they should take a pay cut because their costs of getting to work are reduced? I don’t see the relevance. Transport and parking to a place of employment are at the personal expense of the employe so an employer can’t just turn around and now claim that it was all part of their salary to begin with (unless of course travel time etc is specifically paid as part of their contract, in which you could argue they can no longer claim).

      • petry on 12/04/2021 - 18:17

        moving costs a lot of money

    • Miss B on 12/04/2021 - 22:20
      +1

      The company I work for has stated many times that productivity has increased across the board and they are extremely pleased. They don't fire people despite increased productivity. Instead they get ahead with the workload, SLAs are around 5-14 days so there are several extra days of work there while they reallocate people. In the past they've hired temps for busy times of year, different teams have different busy periods and this past year they managed to use existing employees from other teams to manage the extra workload, normally they wouldn't have had capacity to do so.

      They have a number of projects going that require people from various departments. Normally their positions would need to be filled while they were on the projects, but they don't need to at the moment. Three of these projects they've wanted to do for 5-10 years and will lead to significant improvements in productivity and generally making the work easier to manage. They will also make the company more competitive in the market.

      If someone leaves they don't fill the position if they no longer require it. If it's a higher level position they'll fill it from below and not replace the entry level position.

      They're not the sort of company that would ask people to take a pay cut for working from home though, which is probably one of the reasons there isn't reduced productivity. It's a good company to work for, they are good at hiring quality people, they support their staff well, they've built a great culture where people want to do their job well. Adults can get their work done without having a babysitter watching them, if you need a babysitter to watch your staff in order for them to do their job then you didn't hire adults and/or it's a shit place to work.

      • Rarak on 13/04/2021 - 09:08

        Well said.

  • Cyphar on 12/04/2021 - 18:34

    I'm technically an intrapreneur at the moment.

    So you're unemployed? Seems like you have the time on your hands to learn to spell it correctly ;)

    • Brick Tamland on 12/04/2021 - 18:56
      +2

      So you're unemployed? Seems like you have the time on your hands to learn to spell it correctly ;)

      An entrepreneur is an unemployed person, OP is an intrapreneur so probably an employee that spends more time talking and networking rather than doing any actual work AKA the person that distracts everyone in the office thus making everyone love working from home to avoid said person

      • Cyphar on 12/04/2021 - 22:33

        Ahh, well now I'm feeling a bit like an idiot over here. First time I've heard the term. Thanks for clarifying lol.

  • roweysvn on 12/04/2021 - 18:48

    No, it works out beneficial for both the employee and employer, as long as the employees output is the same (or more)

  • DeeTrance on 13/04/2021 - 07:13

    "Would You Take a Pay Cut to Continue to Work From Home?"

    Absolutely not. Working from home is a punishment.

    • serpserpserp on 13/04/2021 - 16:43
      +1

      Sounds like you need a better home.

      • DeeTrance on 13/04/2021 - 16:57

        You have no idea where I work

        • serpserpserp on 13/04/2021 - 18:49
          +2

          I guess somewhere that is better than your house?

      • bobwokeup on 13/04/2021 - 21:16

        This made me laugh out loud!!!

  • Brick Tamland on 13/04/2021 - 08:30
    +1

    I love work form home but if I need to take a pay cut I'll see you at the office!

  • Dack Smith on 13/04/2021 - 08:56
    +1

    Pay rise to work from home, at least 25% increase

  • duluxe2000 on 13/04/2021 - 11:20

    As long as I get a pay rise, I will wfh or office as my employer wishes :)

  • RocketSwitch on 13/04/2021 - 12:50
    +4

    Paycut would be ridiculous for WFH. Makes zero sense.

    If anything, should increase pay.

    We still have bosses who want to make us come in for NO reason. Wacky way of thinking. They allow us 3 days at home, but the work can be done 100% from home. They allow different people to work from home at different days. So it's practically empty in the office at times. So what the hell is the point of being in the office? Those bosses are dictators! They say, ah I like talking to people face to face and catch up for coffee with friends. Errr, how can you when you put people on different days in the same team? Coffee? You guys look down at us for talking or taking a coffee break. Their agendas are purely evil. THEY'RE NOT EVEN IN THE OFFICE HAHA

    Anyway, I'm work WFH all the time. And if there's a brainstorming session, or team catch-up for a meal or whatever that actually requires you to be in, NO WORRIES!!

    But the sake of having us there FOR NO REASON AT ALL is ludicrous!

    • whyisave on 14/04/2021 - 01:05
      +2

      that's what you get, when bosses don't trust their workers.

      the bosses just feel good able to control someone 'under' them,
      because at their own homes, their spouses boss them around.

  • ddn2004 on 13/04/2021 - 14:52

    Paycut? We talking reduction in responsibiities/tasks?

    • smartazz104 on 14/04/2021 - 08:37
      +1

      Apparently people aren't productive when working from home, must be projection…

      • richmond12 on 14/04/2021 - 09:00

        Unfortunately sometimes it is about projection

  • tintin7 on 13/04/2021 - 15:52

    It all depends on how the project/work is managed by the team/company. If the project management is solid, then it doesnt matter where you are working from. And, for a smart manager, WFH scenario gives better opportunity to over utilize the resources. As a resource, you commit to what you can do - nothing more. So, end of the day, you save time and money on travel. Thats all.

    • petry on 13/04/2021 - 18:32

      yep project management is key. if you can't meet your deadlines, that will be dealt with.

  • serpserpserp on 13/04/2021 - 16:41

    I'm full time work from home. Our managers treat us like adults and allow us to have whatever arrangement we want.

    I actually want to go back to the office 1 or 2 days a week, but I sure don't want to commute for 2+ hours a day to go it. When I have to go in for half a day to see clients that is draining enough.

  • axlfan on 13/04/2021 - 18:32
    +1

    I guess I am very lucky to work at a company that has allowed me to wfh for the rest of this year if required.

    • serpserpserp on 14/04/2021 - 07:59

      What happens next year?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join