Is the London wages weighting fair?

[Outoutoutshout]

Just had this conversation with a friend and I'm on the fence with this. She does the same job as me but she's in London and I'm not. She gets paid more to do the role that we do despite me having more experience.

She feels this in unfair but I'm on the fence because her expenses are much higher as she lives in London. However, she has a very wealthy husband and I don't haha. She feels guilty but I've told her not to. What do you think of the London weighting?

Well like you say everything is more expensive - rent, commute, etc

It is what it is - people can choose to work there or not

Many prefer slightly lower salary and not have the hassle of London, I know I do

It's reasonable unless you are now 90% wfh like a lot of people I know - their commute cost just plummeted!

My living expenses where I live now are literally less than half what they were in London, and I’m in a three bed house, rather than sharing a flat with a friend. I’d argue they don’t actually cover the difference in cost

I worked in London for 20yrs & got London Weighting. That 'extra' money I earnt would have been used on fuel because I worked antisocial hours & could always get the train or tube. I think it's very fair. Living costs are much higher in London as well.

I think London weighting is necessary - I don't understand how anyone affords to live in London these days! I think the weighting system needs to go further though. As a teacher in the South East commuter belt, my £40k salary goes absolutely nowhere on housing, whereas someone earning a comparable salary in the North East or West would be pretty comfortable. Same goes for nurses, police, midwives etc.

I agree with @Teachertotutor - what about Cambridge, Oxford etc? House prices are just about as expensive as London there but salaries are lower than London.

I think it is fair, however a lot of people work in London but live in commutable cities or towns, so the weighting pushes the prices up to near London prices for those of us living and working here.

Wages are based on the economy in which you live. London is expensive, thus wages have to match. This is a reason why London is popular to work in, particularly for those working from home.

It's really expensive to live in London, London weighting doesn't cover the additional costs at all, and weirdly enough they don't base it around whether your mate has a wealthy husband or not. For those who commute if their contract is now fully hybrid then I can see why it should be taken away, other than that commuting in is also pricey.

Other than house prices London isnt more expensive
Council tax and water typically cheaper
Items such as food or household goods used to cost more but dont any more
Beer is the same as any city
Public transport is significantly cheaper in London
Petrol is slightly more pricey - thats all I can think that is different (live 50/50 London and Yorkshire)

It needs to be re-thought a little.

As a UPS1 teacher in Inner London, I was earning more than I do now as a UPS3 teacher (two pay bands higher). If I was UPS3 in Inner London now, I'd be earning around £9,000 more than I do here. I live and work in Oxford, so not exactly cheap (average house price ~£570,000). Yet I get paid exactly the same as a UPS3 teacher living and working ANYWHERE in the country except for the area in and around London.

It's not exactly endearing me to stay in the job. If it was based on average house price or something, that would be more fair. It's not just "London is expensive and the rest of the UK isn't".