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?

An ex colleague of mine is till getting a £250 a month car allowance paid for by the charity she works for despite having worked from home for 2 years. To be honest I am quite shocked by this.

But even if she is spending less on fuel, your friend is still having to pay the other costs of having her vehicle.

Actually I think the words “subject to” shows that is rather optional. I think subject to is their get out clause.

@littlepieces

Thanks everyone.

It's an enormous organisation, one of the biggest. They had multiple ads for a few locations and apparently successful candidates will be placed on the most relevant project to their skillet, regardless of location, since it doesn't matter while everyone is wfh. The HR rep brushed over this like it was fine. I don't think that's fine. I'm quite upset and stressed about it. I was really looking forward to starting, it's a slightly new step in my career. Now I'm suspicious this isn't going to be a good place to work. Also I didn't apply for the role for fun, I applied for the increased salary... It drives me nuts when companies brush off salary concerns as if employees are there for fun!

The uplift isn't just for commuting costs, it's for general cost of living right? Unfortunately I'm stuck in London for a while, by circumstance, which is why I applied for a London job. I still have London area housing costs. Like PPs have said, there are rarely salary increases once you're in public sector. Has anyone here managed to negotiate more than base starting salary for a public sector role?

OP I did - I applied for and got a role in NHS comms a a few years ago; I was coming from a higher paid role (not by much, but enough). The job was advertised at a certain band, the salary range was given and it was stated (as it always is in NSH jobs) that the person appointed would start at the bottom of the band. I said (II think at interview, but certainly when offered the role) that as I was taking a pay cut it would be helpful if they could offer me a salary with a bit of uplift. They were able to do this which was great. It was still a pay cut (I was keen to leave my then role) but less of one which made it more realistic. I think it helped that I had very strong skills for the role (and in fact was qualified and skilled for a higher band really). Good luck I would certainly challenge this.

@littlepieces

I work in the public sector and I was clear when I applied for my first role I would not work for less than £X. They still offered me the lowest pay on the scale, apparently they do that to every candidate. I negotiated and got the salary I wanted. Yes this was pre-Covid but if you will go back to working in London you'll need to London weighting considering the rise in costs and train fares over time.

Was the salary advertised as
“£X” or “£Y salary + £Y London weighting/allowances”?

@Cuck00soup

An ex colleague of mine is till getting a £250 a month car allowance paid for by the charity she works for despite having worked from home for 2 years. To be honest I am quite shocked by this.

But even if she is spending less on fuel, your friend is still having to pay the other costs of having her vehicle.

irrelevant. Charities and private companies don't havde to follow the same rules as the public sector.

@littlepieces

No rudeness here *@dguu6u*? I've mentioned the location of the job was advertised as being in London, and advertised as being subject to a London salary uplift. Yes, I also happen to live in London. But if I'd applied for a role in Bristol of course I wouldn't be expecting a London salary uplift because I live London.

I don’t think I mentioned rudeness? I was trying to say, job adverts do refer to WFH and Covid, so you could have put two and two together that LBW is linked to working at the office and you wouldn’t get it WFH

@Babyroobs

It's definitely something which should have been clarified much earlier but I can understand why they would not pay London weighting when working from home. An ex colleague of mine is till getting a £250 a month car allowance paid for by the charity she works for despite having worked from home for 2 years. To be honest I am quite shocked by this.

The organisation I work for is still paying just shy of £1,000 pa essential car user allowance, because it's in our contracts of employment.

Some staff are still travelling and doing some face to face work, some aren't. If they wanted to examine the entire workforce and cut it for those staff who are currently WFH, they'd be a bit fucked if/when someone goes off sick and has an appointment at the other side of the county that needed to be covered by a colleague, which has happened.

If they want to do away with it, fine, but I won't be using my car to schlep to a town 15 miles away that isn't accessible by public transport from where I live.

Surely London weighting is because the cost of living is higher in London? Nothing to do with working from home.

They're knowingly taking the piss.

@doublemonkey

Surely London weighting is because the cost of living is higher in London? Nothing to do with working from home.

They're knowingly taking the piss.

London Weighting is meant to cover higher cost of living needed to be within reasonable me distance of location plus commuting costs, as far as i recall.

I think many new jobs will no longer have / need this (as if you're remote, there's no obligation to live within xxxxx distance / time of an expensive office location) and no travel cost associated.

It would be tricky to change existing staff terms and conditions without due process but not tricky offer new roles without.

That said - OPs role should absolutely have been advertised with the correct salary range, and if it were me, I would 100% raise the issue before accepting.

I was a senior manager in a LA until retirement a couple of years ago. When jobs were advertised the salary range was displayed (in our case the national pay range for the posts). The LA policy was to pay at the bottom of this range unless there was evidence for placement at a higher increment in current post/previous employment. This would include pay slip evidence and job responsibilities, etc. Salaries came from each department's budget and had to be consistently applied. We had an LA scrutiny panel to decide if jobs could be regraded, etc. so it was not up to individual managers to change salary offers.

With regard to allocation of London weighting, I think this would depend on the practice with existing employees. Have they lost theirs during the pandemic and if so, is this documented by HR? (Our posts were not eligible so not an issue for us). It might be worth checking with the LA's UNISON rep for the position in this particular authority before taking action.

Many companies - including mine have only just started hiring external candidates remotely and all none London based roles will have a regional reduction

Very standard

Missing the point. That was not the salary advertised.

@pixie5121 yes if they offer recruitment premiums then that would be available. However negotiating within the band has been massively cracked down. Salaries are meant to be based purely on role and responsibility. Everyone doing the same role with the same responsibility is meant to be paid the same for equality, having been paid more elsewhere doesn’t alter the new job. It wouldn’t be fair to offer one candidate more money just because they’ve come from a higher salary outside the organisation if the job is exactly the same.
Absolutely query it but I don’t think there’s any legal basis to force them to pay more.

Are you currently employed? Have you handed in your notice at your current place or could you stay there? Is this new place counting on you accepting because you don't have anything else?

I would send the new place an email, with the advert attached, and ask them to clarify what the salary is as you expected to receive what was advertised and had not been informed, prior to the call, that this would not be the case. Advise them that this salary would constitute a pay drop for you and you would need to decline the opportunity.

It does sound a shit place to work

I was trying to say, job adverts do refer to WFH and Covid, so you could have put two and two together that LBW is linked to working at the office and you wouldn’t get it WFH

But the job is only WFH for the moment, not permanently, and involves return to the workplace in spring/summer.

Sorry I mean we are all working from home due to covid for the past 2 years. Those who were based in London still have thier London weighting. I agree it would be impossible to take it off people but many already lived far outside London and commuted in or have since moved very far away.
The uplift makes sense when you need to be in the office and therefore pay more for either housing or travel but when working from home it becomes more of a preference of where you want to live.
I applied to work in an office outside of London but currently (and cant see any change coming) work from home.

Fortunately I do currently have a stable job and haven't handed in my notice yet. I'm not in any rush to leave, but my current job and company has stagnated. I've recently realised I could be getting paid around £10k more elsewhere for the work I'm doing.

I'm sorry OP it must have come as a huge shock and I can understand your disappointment.
Are they offering 8k less than the lower £XX number stated in the advert or are they offering you the lower £XX number? Eg if the ad said £52,000 - £71,000 (subject to x% London Weighting) were you expecting £60,000 and they 've offered you £52,000 or have they offered you £44,000?
As the only location was London I would expect the pay range advertised to have included the London weighting, so if they've offered you the equivalent of £52,000 in this scenario then they've honoured the advert. If they've offered the £44,000 then that is ridiculous.

Either way, continuing the above scenario, if you're currently on say £56,000 and were expecting a payrise to £60,000 with this role (and their offer is £52,000) you're highly likely to be able to negotiate to have your current salary matched but far less likely to achieve £60,000. I've been the hiring manager for hard to fill civil service posts in the past and have had to argue with HR to match salaries to ensure we got the right candidates in - and the candidates had to produce current payslips to evidence the salary match. They would not budge on offering any more than a match though.
As per PP you can negotiate within paybands at recruitment stage but not once you're in, there are no pay rises without promotion, and HR is never indicative of the whole department IME. Some adverts clearly state candidates are expected to join at the the bottom of the range, but salary matching is pretty standard - tell them if they don't match your current pay you will declining the offer.

There is never a better time for you to negotiate for the salary you want than right now whilst holding and offer and before signing of the dotted line. Particularly in the public sector.

Just say that the salary offered is below your expectations and it was not made clear at any stage that the salary advertised would be subject to a reduction because of home working.

Tel them what you want and let them decide if they are willing to pay it. Also ask them what happens to the London allowance should they require you to go back to working in the office? Will you have any contractual recourse if they just refuse to raise your salary again (which is, sadly, entirely possible).

@littlepieces

Fortunately I do currently have a stable job and haven't handed in my notice yet. I'm not in any rush to leave, but my current job and company has stagnated. I've recently realised I could be getting paid around £10k more elsewhere for the work I'm doing.

I suggest you don't stop looking as well as negotiating on this job.

You can walk away from this offer, keep remembering that.

If you were commuting 5 days a week you could buy an annual season ticket where you get economies of scale, but day tickets are expensive, and it’s a pain if there are long queues to buy them.

It’s still sneaky of them even if it is legal.

@Cuck00soup

An ex colleague of mine is till getting a £250 a month car allowance paid for by the charity she works for despite having worked from home for 2 years. To be honest I am quite shocked by this.

But even if she is spending less on fuel, your friend is still having to pay the other costs of having her vehicle.

And bear in mind heating a home office all day long with massively escalating utilities. It offsets that a bit.