At what salary would you consider unpaid overtime acceptable?

[glowingstars]

I’ve recently noticed my colleagues (in office-based, annual salary type roles) are now being much stricter about leaving on time i.e. only working their contracted hours. And if they do end up working late in order to meet a particular deadline, they’re much more likely to ask for time off in lieu at a later point, and managers are agreeing to this.

Obviously this is no bad thing! But it’s a noticeable shift from 2-3 years ago when unpaid overtime was seen as an expected part of the role.

All of these people earn above average salaries, I would guess between 35k and 75k.

It got me thinking, is there a salary point at which you’d consider a) some or b) a lot of unpaid overtime is acceptable? So for example some unpaid overtime should be expected at 50k and a lot at 100k?

Obviously I know this won’t bear much resemblance to how it actually works in the real world (for example I know that teachers do a lot of unpaid overtime and don’t earn high salaries) but I just thought it would be interesting to hear thoughts!

I stopped being paid overtime at £38k, now on £40,500. I started my current job in March and will probably do about a months worth of overtime over the year. I’ve always had a clause in my contract that “overtime will be required to meet the needs of the business”. There is 2 months in particular that a lot of overtime is required in my job!

When I was a trainee I got overtime paid or time in lieu (which I used to study).

None. Been there, done that, didn't benefit from it in the slightest - quite the opposite. I was a mug. Won't happen again. I work for money first and foremost. I do good work, and am ethical about my time, but I don't work for free.

Swings and roundabouts work overtime when required but go early when needed win win for all. I did do free overtime when training wasn't happy about it they wouldn't get away with it these days. 9am to 12 midnight paid till 5.

I don't. If you are under-resourced and needing people to do regular hours more than standard then you've hit a business model issue.

Another civil servant. Terms and conditions change when you get to senior civil service so you're expected to work the hours needed to do the job...until then if expect overtime/flexi.

Anyone giving their time for free to an employer is a mug.

I think it’s give and take, at our company we have flexibility in our working hours, no set holiday allowance and can take appointments/go to sports day etc during work day without issue.

But I agree, if you want to progress be that person who puts the extra time in when needed.

Same. I’ve never done it.

This.

No employee should ever work unpaid overtime, regardless of position or salary.

Mid 5 figures so 50/60k I would say myself. It is industry dependent though, dp gets some time in lieu eg travelling on weekends but doesn't clock hours and always works on holidays grrr!

I'm a high earner and refuse to do anything other than core hours. I have never had any complaints about my work. My family life is too important to me.

I'd only do it if work was flexible back or I'd see it reflected in my bonus and would expect the same of my team. I negotiate payrises for my team members if they're working above their pay though which if hope most managers are doing.

I m in higher education and fairly well paid now (but not before).
overtime is standard in my sector across the board for all researchers and academics, regardless of salarg or seniority. Some manage to keep a good worklife balance, but they are the minority.

overtime is not paid, and most often not taken in lieu. it s just done, to the tune of 5-25+hrs per week.

since having DCs and parents who need help, i now do an unofficial "in lieu" where i try to recoup the time i spent working whilst on A/L as we re always "on"

Exactly this.

So to answer your question - none. You want me to work, you can pay me.

I work for myself now and charge my clients enough that I'm never working for nothing. Fuck that for a game of soldiers - life is too short.

I earn £120k pa, I am 28 and fairly new in my current company, I worked til midnight last night on calls with the US team. I was happy to because I love where I work and want to make a good impression. However, it’s also because I know days where I won’t be busy and will do an hour or two and then just chill at home. I would never work anywhere for any amount if it was constant high pressure and workload.

I started my career at a Big 4 and set boundaries too there, but sometimes it was inevitable and had to suck it up, you’d be working 14 hour days and then revising at home for weeks. But it was temporary. No regrets, but I’d never work like that again!

I'm minded to say never, I don't work for free. I'm civil service so I work flexi, sometimes I need to work more but I claim it back. I'm very strict about it with no shame ( I earn £50k, and would expect this arrangement up to G6 c£60-65k)

That said, I do want to be SCS one day (Senior Civil Servant), you're not entitled to flexi at that level so I will need to decide if I'm willing to extend myself (that'll be £70k+) , my kids should be (late) high school plus by that stage so I may well be willing to put more hours in if I'm feeling strongly about what I'm doing and not being pulled at home quite so much. But time will tell, not there yet and enjoying flexi in the meantime!

Teaching. From an NQT I've always done about 25 hours a week on top of core hours. The higher I've got in my career the less happy I am to give my time for free but can't seem to reduce my extra hours however organised I am.

''@LearnerCook · Today 18:55
Anyone giving their time for free to an employer is a mug.''

Completely agree.

To me the concept that you would work for free is just bizarre.

I am a Senior Manager. Never done any unpaid overtime.

It depends on the nature of the work imo. My line manager works and takes TOIL and I would guess they earn between 45 - 50 k. So I certainly do.

If you're salaried, then normally that means no paid overtime. Overtime pay is more normally applied for hourly paid staff.

When I worked in industry, that was the distinction. The more senior you were, the more unpaid overtime you were expected to work - the lesser paid junior and admin staff weren't really expected to do any overtime, maybe just the odd hour occasionally to finish an urgent task - the managers etc would typically work a bit longer every day, maybe an hour or so, or would come in sometime over the weekend for a few hours. But they weren't paid for it. Those on salaries got paid their salary, nothing more, nothing less.

We certainly had a few "good" hourly paid workers who refused promotions onto "salary" graded supervisory or management roles because they'd lose their overtime pay (it was a busy, growing firm, so plenty of paid overtime was the norm for the hourly paid staff!). The extra salary for the seniority/management "promotion" was often less than they earned on the overtime!

The salaried staff could get TOIL (time off in lieu), but the first 20 hours per month of overtime was forfeit, so you only got TOIL if you worked more than 20 hours of unpaid overtime, basically, an hour per day. So that basically sent the message that you were expected to do an average of an hour per working day as the norm.

@ladymacbeth

Not about salary and about ambition for me. Want to move up? You put your all in.

See, I think this is a bit a case that you have drunk the Kool-Aid. Why is 'putting your all in' equated to 'working for free'? Why is working for free seen as essential to 'moving up'? That's a completely un-level playing field.

I'm a teacher. Imagine I told my students: 'to get 8 out of 8 on this exam question, you need to cover the following...' then when I mark their papers I add a comment saying 'this would have been an 8, but you didn't put the extra work in and do something I didn't ask for when I laid out the terms of the question. There'd be riots!

A job contract specifies required duties. If those are completed, you have done your job. If they can't be completed in the hours allotted, the hours are at fault and need to be changed.

@HereBeFuckery I'm very grateful for teachers putting in overtime because I can't imagine where our kids would be if they didn't. That said, I think it's scandalous and I agree with the pp that people shouldn't work for free, putting your all in shouldn't mean putting more time in, it should mean putting your best effort in, showing initiative, training etc, not giving yourself up on a plate. We are not paid enough in the public sector for it to be justified; I'm not sure where the line is as the OP is asking, but it's certainly not where most of us are.

I don't think it's salary.

Lots of TAs use to arrive 15/30 minutes early and stay the same after school although only paid per hour for school hours.

Lots of people in these jobs that require goodwill for low pay and are essential so not go the extra distance now because the pay freezes meant goodwill went.

The government is at some point going to have to realise calling a job a vocation doesn't pay bills!

Some jobs the hours are extremely long and demanding and the pay not reflective of that (lawyer, teachers, nurses, blue light services to name a few) and they are jobs that don't have a clear cut start and finish and because what was always a lot of goodwill has become expected - again for very poor pay rises way below inflation for over a decade people are leaving.

I don't think anyone should be "expected" to work overtime.

If your boss expects you to work 9 hours a day because that's how much work is needed to do your job then it's pretty poor to say they are only paying 8 though.

20 years in HE admin where I always worked extra hours. It was just expected, no other way to do the job.

now in the civil service where no one works more than they need to and the culture change is… odd. But it’s good to have my evenings back.

I'm in my mid 20s and find this is more generational than salary.

older millennials-boomers have an attitude imo of working OT to get a promotion etc but I've found young millennials and gen-z are not the same.