How much is that remote job worth to you? Americans will part with pay to work from home : futurology

[–] Stupidmanager@lemmy.world 84 points 1 year ago (4 children)

No we won’t and this nonsense article tries to set a very bad precedent. I was dealing with this just yesterday, new job offer comes my way last month with 2 salary choices. Come in the office for 20% more pay, work from home for less. I’m already making the higher amount with my current job, working from home. So I pass, They counter and offer other perks, I pass. This goes on for 9 days now. Yesterday, I just told them to stop, I have zero interest in working with a company that tries every way to hire me except for what I ask for.

I might add that the financials of the company were north of a billion. Get paid for what you’re worth, not where you work.

[–] UnknownCircle@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This should be standard, people don't become less productive when working from home. Vast majority of wfh folks I know spend more time and are more productive at home. If my company tried to pull this nonsense (it wouldn't because its actually a great place to work) I'd immediately start looking for a different job. On Linkedin and other platforms I literally don't even consider or look at non wfh positions.

Also I don't know what jobs are thinking. Its stupid to think someone will change jobs for less pay and move into a non-wfh position from a wfh one. Those jobs should always be avoided, because they clearly think you're too stupid to do basic math.

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

I generally tell them X is my floor and they usually do not try to counter then. They just say they can meet it or not.

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd consider taking an in-office position if the trade off was I start my commute at 9, and leave so I get home roughly for 5, so the tradeoff is that my drive is on company time.

If part of my job is to look at the inside of my car for 90 minutes and then remote connect to my home computer from the other side of the city for some reason, and you're willing to pay me more than my currently employer to do so: have at it.

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

this would still require a bump for me. I get to see my wife and dog casually all day. I am able to eat a nicer and cheaper meal at home as well as walk my dog at lunch. Then there is the additional environmental damage that comes out of my commute. That scenario would significantly reduced the bump I would expect from in office though.

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

well yes, I wouldn't move jobs unless they offered a reason to and money is the only reason I have ever done any of my jobs, so...

[–] ares35@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

good call.

an employer playing those kinds of games with job candidates is one that's also fucking with the system for their actual employees, too.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah this is just the bullshit of asserting that you’re less valuable if you work from home. Work from home needs to be seen more like a corner office but in a building where everyone can have one. It’s wonderful and if you can’t offer as much money it may cover the gap, but it’s more likely to cost you someone for not offering than save you money.

[–] Stupidmanager@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

See, my job has me on camera a few hours every day. And then beyond that I’m productive by producing code, or diagrams. So while my work might be “hidden”, there’s a way to track it without me warming a chair in a big office.

[–] ImpossibilityBox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Can I ask what it is you do? I had a back injury earlier this year and it's starting to look like I'm going to have to give up my really good paying job at UPS and I might be in need of something far less physical.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 62 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We've reduced/eliminated our office bills with WFH and the money we saved went to executive compensation. How can we increase our salaries further? Let's just take it from the employees

[–] be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes I feel quite sure the article intends "will part with" as "are willing to part with" when in reality it's going to be "will be made to part with."

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

WFH employees are saving money on gas which easily makes up for the 20k pay cut

[–] be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

You almost had me.

[–] HerbalGamer@lemm.ee 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Less costs for building maintenance means less salary? Fuck off.

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

I think their true motivation is less available tax write-offs for that commercial real estate expense, which seems to me like piss poor adaptability of a company that a free market should eat alive.

[+] NiaTheCat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

[deleted]

[–] sparkl_motion@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago

I’m on board with you there.

They’re trying to bring us in 1 day a week right now because “The costs to remodel the offices and sublet a separate area are the same as if we just keep the space.”

Well, fuck off with that. I find a reason every week to not go in. I think it has been 4 months now.

If my boss gets pissy, so be it. I’m less efficient having to readjust to a separate working environment with all the distractions. I make sure I get less done whenever I have to be there…

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When my job went remote from covid it was like getting a double digit raise if I count the commute as overtime and vehicle costs plus on site meals.

That means working from home is comparable to a pay raise. That does not mean that workers need to give anything up to keep it. It means companies need to pay more to people who are required to commute.

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

yup. I give a rate for 100% wfh and what the bump has to be for each day of the week expected in office. I will work in office but they will have to pay and its not cheap.

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Or…OR!…and hear me out here…we work remotely in jobs where it is sensible to do so, AND keep the pay.

Garbage corpo propaganda piece.

[–] Breve@pawb.social 10 points 1 year ago

Or...OR!...and here me out here...companies demand workers return to office AND cut their pay.

Garbage corpos. Everything is going to shit because already insanely wealthy shareholders demand number go up at any cost.

[+] nobleshift@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

[deleted]

[–] shiveyarbles@beehaw.org 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No way, they should pay me more since they're saving money on office space. Why do the employees have to take a cut by default?

[–] zagaberoo@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because people value working from home a lot, so a company doesn't have to offer as much pay and they're still likely to find interested, qualified candidates.

[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

For remote work, I'll absolutely settle for less pay... Right now. Once my company starts demanding I come in (no talks of it fortunately), I'll be submitting for my hours and mileage. I've been WFH 3 years, at this point it's more I'm going to demand more if you want me in a specific building.

Futurology