No WFH but extra salary?

[joylessdivision]

Just curious as to your thoughts on this?

There was a vacancy in my company that I was interested in purely for a change but the job titles are basically the same, just working for different departments.

Our company has a flexible working policy (not contractual) and this role is quite a bit higher in salary on account of no flexible working.

Is this something that is becoming more common? I think there is potential for issues here down the line.

I would hope to be paid more for less flexibility, I think its fair

Also commuting costs too. Doesn’t cost me anything to go from bed to sofa, did cost me to go across London on the tube though!

I didn't understand the question, maybe missing the point but are you applying for this other role?

I'd say if they are clearly stating no flexibility and paying slightly more that seems really fair, it's being upfront and allowing for expenses if travel and commute.

I guess people can choose their own preferences this way money vs flexibly.

I assume the hours would be the same?

Agree with PPs. Also, less people are open to non-flexible working, so those jobs have to pay more to attract good candidates.

I'd happily go in the office every day for extra money!!

Curious how this would play out long-term. My understanding is that any flexible working requests legally have to be considered and there needs to be a justifiable business reason to reject it.

So, I don't imagine they could have a contract clause saying "no flexible working." What's to stop people taking the higher salary role and then 6 months later requesting flexibility?

I understand that they can reject FW requests if it doesn't suit business needs but it's still a tricky path to tread if they want to maintain inclusivity (disabled candidates, mothers etc). To me, it seems like they are stuck between a rock and a hard place on this one.

I think it's fair and I'd consider it for more money at this stage of my life, I've an older child who doesn't need me there all the time and no childcare costs. I do wfh 3 days a week currently so it would need to be a decent pay rise!

Going to work costs me a lot. Basically each WFH day saves me about £20 possibly more when I factor in eg not wearing out my shoes(!) and being able to cook an evening meal from scratch not buy a ready meal etc.

The way I would look at it now - to go back to an office based job I would want a pay rise that would compensate for both the cost and the time spent commuting.

So for instance a £40k fully home based role (so roughly £20.50 per hour based on 7.5hrs a day) vs office full time, 1 hour commute each way at £10 a day cost I’d be looking at a salary increase of at least £12k to cover the extra hours and commuting cost.

How much more money?
How far is the office?
Is the office a pleasant place to be?

I'd want 20k to go back to commuting 5 x per week

WFH costs you incur are light, heating and power to run any tech required for the job. In winter these energy costs can be substantial and outweigh any commuting costs.
I don't see why you should be paid less if you WFH.
It's just envy from those who can't and keeping an eye on employees by employers.

In my company people appreciate non financial benefits like flexible working. I work in an industry that doesn’t pay particularly well (for the qualifications and hours involved), and this has been a huge boost for people and has stopped people from leaving. Our company has fully embraced it and won’t go back to demanding full time in the office (apart from roles where a constant site presence is necessary). So yes, I would expect a higher salary if they were being completely inflexible and it would have to be a lot!

For me personally, I wouldn't sacrifice flexibility for more pay.

But that's based on my personal circumstances - I don't need a pay rise; I work 90 minutes from my workplace; commuting costs me £25/day; my office environment is shit; I work much better at home; I don't want to leave my dog home alone.
Aside from all that, I know I'd be absolutely knackered and good for nothing at all if I went into the office five days a week. I couldn't physically do it.

What's right for you entirely depends on your circumstances.

I think it’s perfectly reasonable, presumably they are factoring the added cost of fully onsite working, and they would presumably have their good business reasons documented for if anyone took the role and then put in a flexible working request. As for discrimination, they have to make reasonable adjustments, but may be able to show that WFH simply isn’t possible for this role. Do you know why they are doing this? Is the extra salary intended to cover commuting costs? Also is it inflexible with regards to hours as well as location?

With 2 teens and an elderly parent, I value the flexibility too much.

Even if it was only 1.50 a day more?
Or only just covered commuting costs, more expensive lunches coffee etc?

I wouldn't go back to the office full time for a 100% pay rise. WFH offers me so much that money can't buy, I'd just never consider it.

I'd worry about the culture of a team that doesn't offer flexibility as well

Well I don’t buy expensive coffees and lunches and the bus is £2 but I walk more often than I use the bus as it barely takes any longer. Also, in the winter I’d save on heating, i don’t have space for a dedicated office space at home so it’s probably cheaper than the £100k or more it would cost me to buy a property with another bedroom, it’s better for my mental health and better for my career development to be in the office.

I'd totally do it if it was flexible on timings but my commute is only 20 mins by car and I hate WFH (also have no office space at home) so a complete no-brainer. But fixed hours would be a straight no, my current job is totally flexible in that respect.

Imo flexible working isn't just WFH. It's also being able to take a long lunch break to incorporate a dentist appointment or having the kids home sick and working a day at the weekend. No flex working wouldn't be worth it for it but it might be for many

Did you take a pay cut when you started WFH?

I wouldn't go back to commuting 5 days a week for 50% more. I can drop my toddler at nursery, do a run on my treadmill at lunch and get a crack on dinner when I finish for us all to eat at the table together as a family, every single day. Priceless

I don’t disagree. But when I used to live locally enough to commute to work it was Approx £18/day, usually twice a week, so around £150 a month. Invariably there would be post work drinks from the office too so you could add some more on (optional but not really and definitley not incurred if wfh) plus also animal care because I can’t be back in time for them.
That’s definitley more than I pay in electricity by being home based. I’m just powering one laptop, the lights are generally off with the exception of heavy winter where they might be on for say 2 extra hours beyond what they would be if I got home after a commute from the office.

I’m seeing this more and more.. The bonuses and higher salaries are awarded to those prepared to work more in the office.

I really don't notice extra costs when WFH. I set my thermostat to the same temperature whether I'm at home or not so there's no difference, and yes I have to charge my laptop but that's pennies really.