Should DH's job come ahead of mine because he earns more?

That is my question though/ was he really in agreement with the pay cut

He will find childcare would be a lot more expensive and general day to day a lot more difficult without you.
Sounds like he needs to remind you how much he needs you.

Ugh I've been reading this thread and there is a huge change in tone after OP announces their financial circumstances. Nobody had an issue with regards to childcare or op still working full time until this came about.

Op, when your husband told you, did you remind him that you already have plans to attend the office?

Yes, his job is more important in the sense that he earns enough to support the family but your job is equally important for your own mental health and he was in agreement about the pay cut, so he needs to be supportive of you being in the office and remember the impact it has on your mental health. He should be working with you, not against you.

I'd have a conversation with him about the difference between flexibility (with respect and consideration) and ignoring anyone else's commitments. This needs to be the last time that this happens.

Suggest that you brainstorm together ideas to prevent it in the future. The shared calendar idea is a great one.

What does he do and where does he work? What are these loads of jobs that are so flexible and aren't deadlines driven? I might need a career change 🫠

There are loads of jobs on 200k+ that are nothing like that.

My DH is more than happy to tell work he’ll be away for a couple of hours for the kids Christmas panto or sports day.

If you’re in a high skills job then employers are more than happy to be flexible to help retain your services.

My DH does school pick up twice a week and blocks the time out of his work diary. It is positively encouraged by his employer.

The idea of long hours, masculine culture died out a long time ago in most workplaces.

You are still working those extra hours, but it's unpaid now.

I'd ask him to start paying you for all your unpaid labour, and to pay double rate when he doesn't check your availability.

I think everyone is getting hung up on OP being a woman. If this was a reverse, and it was the DH taking the 'lesser' role I genuinely think the responses would be the same.

But thats because OP has purposely taken a role for that very reason (work/life balance) so that makes sense and hes probably now thinking he can drop some of those previous duties (ie 50:50 is now 90:10) They just need to talk to each other about what the expectations are, they've both wrongly made assumptions.

There is a difference between taking a role to allow flexibility and the expectation that you will always provide all the flex with no mutual, and importantly, equality based communication about this.

Yes his job pays more but is that the sole provider of value in a relationship? You provide the role of childcare, home management etc which has always been of no financial value to mostly men.

How much childcare and home management do you provide? What would be the cost of that if provided by outside services? Add that number together with your income and that is the financial value you bring.

I'm disappointed that many responses linked income to power (his importance is more). I thought this was the 21st C not the 20th.

My DH is around similar and it would only be in an absolutely emergency he'd say no sorry prior commitment. Ditto with me when I was in a similar role. Unlikely you'll get the sack, but it probably won't work out for you in the long run (unless this is a very rare occurrence). What do you do that's so flexible, because usually in high earning roles you have commitments to your customers and clients that you can't turn down, and equally those roles are usually fast paced and something urgent always comes up at the last minute. I'd love to know what all these high earning jobs are on MN where you can work around school drop off's, pick ups, sick children, school events etc.

But this only seems to have been since she took on a new job. It seems to be totally about his attitude to the new job.

TNo, how much you earn doesn't tell us how important your job is. In some cases obviously it's simply necessary and pragmatic that the higher paying job is protected but I don't see that as being your situation.

But I also don't think your situation is as simple as the question in the OP. What I am wondering is what is the main reason you taking the lower paying job was predicated on you taking on more at home, and how did you guys manage when you had a more demanding job?

Theoretically, if your dh has had to pick up extra work or something like that, it could be that he needs the kind of flexibility he now seems to expect, and it could be that the combination of your two jobs just isn't workable.

I'd also wonder if it isn't possible that he wasn't feeling a little burned out as well and was hoping for some relief with the overall pay reduction, and that hasn't happened the way he hoped.

To me it sounds more like he just isn't taking your job as seriously just because of the pay differernce, and you guys need a discussion, because IMO that's not really reasonable or what you agreed to.

If you are picking up the slack looking after children Etc. Then he should be compensating you for your contribution - including paying your pension as you have taken a hit by reducing your hours.
Any bloke that earns 3x more than the mother of his children should be doing that, if by being a partial or full SAHM, you are facilitating his promotion. The minimum he should be contributing is your loss of earnings and pension…

Well, he could start to change that ‘culture’ from within then.

If op's dh is on that salary then the chances are he works in a hyper masculine culture where even admitting you have dc is probably detrimental. The culture will likely be long hours, being available and present to outdo peers and doing anything remotely feminine like mentioning dc or leaving earlier for a vague 'prior commitment' will mean his colleagues will assume he's lost his 'edge'. And he will be aligned with the culture so that he thinks this is now normal and acceptable behavior - it's 'what you do'.

I understand your conflicting contractual agreements but the crux of the matter here is he didn’t even bother to contact her and ask if she could change, or say ‘I am contractually obliged to do this’.

(But we aren’t talking this kind of money in my house. My husband and I don’t come anywhere near 150K together! Seems like this sort of money would buy some solutions that wouldn’t even occur to me)

I don’t know the details. At my job I can’t do that - if I need to go in, it’s my responsibility to do so for any of my contracted hours. I work from home 2 days a week typically, but not always - hybrid working isn’t contractual and no one needs to give me notice if I’m needed. My husband works from home most of the time, but if something breaks he needs to be available on site with no notice at all. So it depends on what’s contracted and what is required for both of them. If he has a last minute, high demand job without a contractual right to hybrid working, they need to collectively work out those logistics.

Sorry, I still don’t understand why it’s all about earnings and not about breaking an agreement.

Okay,

So yet again the little lesser earning person has to make changes because their partner hasn’t got the guts to say ‘I can’t do that, prior commitment’.

I've done that in the past despite earing twice what OH did. She checked, he agreed, he broke the agreement without even asking her if she could rearrange. He rode roughshod.

From memory he’s on £150,000 so surely is in a position to say 'no - prior commitment' without getting the sack ?

But she now earns £50k as she changed roles which us a significant difference

Well it depends on the job, right? Not all roles you can do that. That's usually why jobs pay differently because some require more skills or commitment. It's not actually a woman thing, so you're getting annoyed for the wrong reasons

For 200K a year you can easily afford to pay for somebody to pick up kids from school(s) and feed them etc so you meet your office commitments. I think this is very much a first world problem and YABU.

So yet again the little lesser earning woman has to make changes because her husband hasn’t got the balls to say ‘I can’t do that, prior commitment’.