To think the real salary should have been advertised?

[littlepieces]

I've just been through over four months of interviews, reference checks etc. for a public sector job. Yesterday HR called me to confirm details and casually dropped the bombshell that they're offering me a lower salary than was advertised. I was meant to qualify for a London salary uplift, as it's a London based role, but because the department is working remotely due to Covid that isn't happening now.

BUT, the department has been working remotely since the start of the pandemic, March 2020.

So why didn't they just advertise the remote salary? I would never have applied and wasted my time if they had. Without the uplift I'll be taking a pay cut. AIBU or would I be right to challenge this?

I’m actually blown away by people telling you this is ok. It’s not.
Lowering a salary without a conversation and not based on an applicants experience is a big no no.
It’s actually really dishonest and I’m so surprised that people are just trying to brush it off!
I’d be bloody furious if I were you. All that time wasted (time is the most precious thing!). I would definitely have a conversation

@TrophyWinner not paying people a fair market rate for their skillset is not ‘a good use of taxpayers money’ … all that happens is that the good people leave for better pay and the cost of recruiting and training remains. Far more efficient to pay people what they are worth ime

Also if the long term plan is hybrid working then you’d need to either already live in commuting distance of London or move to commuting distance. With the higher living costs. Surely that’s what the uplift is for?

If they were saying no you can definitely work from home for ever and never come to the office that would be different .

[quote Policyschmolicy]@TrophyWinner not paying people a fair market rate for their skillset is not ‘a good use of taxpayers money’ … all that happens is that the good people leave for better pay and the cost of recruiting and training remains. Far more efficient to pay people what they are worth ime[/quote]
Of course, but the fair market rate is different if you're not recruiting for work in London.

Which is why I queried the hybrid working.

When you were informed that you were successful at interview were you given an offer to accept? And if so did the offer include the salary?

I work in recruitment in the public sector and I would guess that about 25% of new starters don’t start on the bottom of the band due to previously earning a higher salary in a similar role so it might be possible to negotiate.

But they are recruiting for work in London. The OP will be expected in the office two to three days when WFH formally ends.

@Snowiscold

But they are recruiting for work in London. The OP will be expected in the office two to three days when WFH formally ends.

Yes, I said that

It's possible their policy re London Weighting changed after the advert was placed, if that was months ago. Although in that case it was unprofessional of them not to mention it earlier, and indeed a poor decision to apply it retrospectively to vacancies already being recruited.

How big an organisation are they? Public sector is usually heavily unionised and I'd be surprised if they had got this past the unions easily.

Ask them what the policy is - it should say when it was introduced, whether it applies only to new starters, whether LW will be reinstated when people return to working onsite and whether there's a difference between people living in/outside London in the event of hybrid working - will they weasel out of paying LW to people who live outside London by saying their main base is their home? If the latter, that's a warning that they're a shit employer.

If you would walk away now anyway, what is there to lose by negotiating?

And dont think take the lower salary and there will be pay increases. There wont.

And with energy prices set to rise so significantly, wfh is about to get incredibly expensive.

That is really not ok and you would be a mug to accept anything less than the advertised salary. What a total waste of your time.

Don't worry about any pool of other candidates or your expectations of their standard practice, stand firm in asking for the full amount advertised. You are worth that, the job is worth that and that is the condition under which you decided to go for the job. Recruitment is a two way street, you don't have to accept shoddy treatment, especially before you even work there.

I could have written your post. Also in public sector applied in August, interviewed in September, now telling me they cannot honour the advertised T&CS. What a waste of everyone's time.

Yanbu. This kind of crap sets the tone for how they'll be as an employer. I would bail unless you really want it.

You do need to decide how badly you want the job. If you kick up a fuss and they continue to refuse to change the salary, then that’s the end of the job. Unfortunately you can only do this if you aren’t that bothered.

Why have they removed the London weighting just because people are temporarily working from home? Is that really what has happened, or are they trying to sneakily pay less. I live in London, and no one I now (public sector or not) has had their salary reduced due to WFH! Everyone is expected to go back into the office at some point (if they haven't already), even if only a couple of days a week. Everyone still needs to live within a reasonable distance of London so still needs to pay the higher cost of housing etc. What are they going to do when you do move to hybrid working, pay you an extra £8k? (That's a rhetorical question btw, it's the public sector, they have no money, so if they've hooked you in on the lower salary, they aren't going to increase it). I'd decline the job offer, if they're so short of funding that they're trying to pull these kind of moves, they'd probably be a nightmare to work for anyway.

*And dont think take the lower salary and there will be pay increases. There wont.

And with energy prices set to rise so significantly, wfh is about to get incredibly expensive*
This is my thoughts-they effectively want me to step off a nationally agreed payscale (this is what was advertised) for an increase of 2K( £600 after tax and deductions) I have just emailed to say it's not happening.

For 8k I’d be having the conversation. The job was advertised at x salary and that was the basis of your decision for applying for it.

@hettie

My organisations HR department once accidentally put out a job advert with London weighting on (we were not a service based in London). It wasn't until the candidate queried their first month's pay that it came to light. HR told us we had to honour the advertised pay to be on the right side of employment law. It's also currently a good job seekers market. I'd push back and tell them they need to honour the advertised salary (they will have budgeted for it for this financial year and next year's budgets are probably being argued about currently). Don't get into discussion around WFH costing less etc, just keep repeating advertised salary ...Be prepared to walk (if you've handed notice in can you reverse or temp?)

Your organisation's HR department sound like they are talking out of their arse (FCIPD HRD here ). It's the signed contract that dictates obligation not the job advert.

OP, it's worth asking- there's normally a salary range in PS so even if they can't add London weighting back on for a remote role (this will happen more and more with WFH roles IMO) they may move you up the band if you can demonstrate why they should- ham up your skills and relevant experience.

Just because public sector don't think there's no wiggle room at all, they can for example put you at the top of your band. It's definitely worth a conversation especially at this point in recruitment, they are not going to want to go back out again. Ask to speak with your recruiting manager who can then lease with HR.

I have London Weighting. Haven't been to my office in London for 2 years. .. live in the Home Counties and wfh../local office if need the network. (Public sector) . Same for all colleagues hired before pandemic. There is no mention of it being removed. (There would be uproar) as the choice to wfh is not ours.

Meanwhile we have had a massive recruitment campaign and LW not offered to new people unless they are expected in the office. Which is no longer on the cards. 2 days a month perhaps at most. But that is stated on the advert.

Do not accept this - challenge it. They do expect you to come to the office when WFH ends, and in any event they advertised salary X.

Believe in your own self worth. They try this crap because they know many will fold and accept crappy pay. Don’t be one of them.

Wow also agree not okay.

I would send a short email outlining everything. Either ask for the advertised rate or state your current pay as the minimum you can accept.

It seems very off too to remove the London weighting for existing staff. It's not like they can move away because the medium term plan is to move back to the office. So they still need to live in London.

It could well be that the recruiting manager has only recently been told that the uplift has been removed for that role. At this time of year, budgets etc for the next financial year will be considered. Due to remote working and public sector efficiencies, the decision to remove the uplift may not have been in question at the start of the recruitment process.

I’ve been in the public sector for nearly 20 years, and have probably recruited people in every one of those years, there is very little room to wiggle with public salaries.

@littlepieces

As it's public sector with set salary bands and starting salaries, I don't think there will be any room for negotiation.

There will be. I would go back and negotiate with who will be your actual line manager rather than HR. They may have room in the budget for the uplift and if they want you would be willing to pay it to keep you there. Ask if the current members of staff working remotely receive uplifts (I suspect they are).

I work in the public sector and it is typical that departments don't speak to one another about stuff like this.