Accepted a low paying job - should my work reflect this?

[bluerooms]

I recently took a low paying job, it pays £13.50 an hour.
I have been self employed but had a dip in client work & was under pressure by dh because we have a wedding to pay for.
This way it's stable income and any client work is a bonus.
Pre self employment days my hourly salary would've been around £20ph (£35 self employed)
Being honest, my heart isn't going to be in this job at all, and the pay doesn't help matters.
Btw I am aware that this is potentially selfish and Ive taken a job I don't want that someone else might've loved but needs must etc.
Anyway, I knew i'd get the job due to my experience vs what they were paying. So now my question is, do I work like i'm worth what i've been paid previously or do I work a bit more than the bare minimum to reflect the £1 more than min wage they are paying me? (From April 25 anyway) ??

I think it depends on the type of job. If it is caring for people do the best you can regardless of the salary, if it is "only fans" type work don't give the full display for less money, if it is creative work then somewhere in between - maybe don't draw the heads on people.

You do the work you're paid to do, within the hours you're contracted for.

I don't know what "putting everything into it" means - but it sounds very much like allowing yourself to get stressed when things aren't done rather than flagging to your employer that you have too much to do and not enough time and allowing your job to fill your brain space and stress you out.

Much like many women I fear.

I think you may feel happier if you do the job to the best of your ability and I am a great believer in you never know where things lead.

Good luck with the job and I hope you enjoy it regardless of hourly rate.

It is ageism to a degree. It's also a case of tarring everyone with the same brush.

I got turned down for many, many jobs in the past due to being "overqualified" and would therefore leave as something better came along. I was totally ignored when I tried to explain not only had I been there, done that & got the T-shirt, but also had the accompanying total breakdowns - not from how hard I had worked, but the responsibility & stresses of those jobs. I wanted something I could work hard at but leave behind me at the end of the day, something where I had no authority but all the responsibility, something where I was having to try and satisfy multiple stakeholders with different agendas, and something where I didn't have to play office politics all day to survive.

Though I may have burnt out for those kind of jobs, I had (and have) no intention of coasting until retirement. I still have the mental energy, the desire to work hard, and if required can still bring my skills to bear at no extra cost to the employer. But still the assumption would be either that I would get bored & leave, or that I would just be waiting until state retirement age - I love my current (badly paid) job, and will happily carry on at this same level until well after retirement.

In my many years of work experience I have rarely seen this quality in "older people".

If anything the attitude to always do the best days work you can, everyday, seems to be in their DNA

@bluerooms I took a lower paying role myself because i wasnt getting any offers post a long period off raising my children. Discrimination was ripe and ready in my case as i was far more experienced than others but the message was how would i manage deadlines when i was a single parent. My agency said they had experiences of once someone is in, if your work is recognised, things may improve and gave me the experience of a lady quickly becoming a financial head after starting at a low level. Same thing, single parent taking whatever she could get to keep her family afloat.

I took the next role and lo and behold ive stayed on for years and eventually negotiated a very good contract which takes me beyond what i was making pre kids.

My message is do your best but keep an eye out elsewhere. The market i feel is tough out there and will be for a few years, so appreciate what you have

I'm sorry but this is comment offensive:
"So now my question is, do I work like i'm worth what i've been paid previously or do I work a bit more than the bare minimum to reflect the £1 more than min wage they are paying me? (From April 25 anyway) ??"

What I find offensive is the suggestion that people who are paid a min wage work to the bare minimum to reflect the wage - maybe some do but there are many many people on min wage jobs that do their best. They work hard and they need to be respected for being contributing members of the community.

Your employer advertised the job which did not need the level of experience you had - and you applied for it. You knew the salary and you knew the conditions. By the sounds of it you are being paid by the hour so you are being paid for you time rather than a salaried position.

What you are really asking is a moral question about your character and only you can decide that. But I tend to think if people show they are capable of more they tend to be valued and are giving more responsibility and pay.

You seem resentful - but your this is being wrongly being directed at your employer.

The lower the wage, the higher the employers expectations is something I've found. I tend match my coworkers, as doing less will get you kicked out, but doing more makes you unpopular.
When I need a top up job to my freelancing, I tend to pick physical roles, it's busy without the mental stress and no way will I take work home for a low wage.

Sorry I absolutely didn't mean that people that only get min wage do the bare minimum as that definitely isn't the case, but what I meant was, presumably they would expect a highly experienced and competent employee rather than someone new to the role and therefore on min wage.

I am a book keeper but I have taken an accounts assistant role basically.

In the interview they were asking if I could do things that is really accountant level not assistant but because they know I have that experience, this is now why I feel I've been short changed. I do accept though it was my choice.

In the interview they were asking if I could do things that is really accountant level not assistant but because they know I have that experience, this is now why I feel I've been short changed.

If they ask you to do tasks outside the Accounts Assistant role, you would be perfectly reasonable to say you'd be open to discussing taking that on for an appropriate increase in salary.

While on the paygrade of an asistant you are happy to stick with the assistant role; if they'd like you to take on more responsibility that can be negotiated.

What is the difference between an accounts assistant and a book-keeper - I stupidly thought they were the same thing - is the definition that strong?

What a vulgar offensive Thread.

If you've said in an interview you can do those things, you don't have a leg to stand on after you start suddenly refusing to do it, regardless of your job title. If you started making noise about not doing it, as a manager I'd fail your probation very quickly. The time to negotiate salary or the role itself has gone.

I would do what I'm paid to do and that's it. Ofcourse you're not going to be very invested if you don't like your job but it really doesn't matter to the employer as long as the work you're paid for is done.

At the end of your probation period, might be a good moment to look at the work you are de facto responsible for, and if it’s above your pay grade by common consent within the industry you would probably have a strong case to ask for a raise. Concrete examples of tasks that you can point out should be remunerated at a higher rate.

Should have just held out for a position at your level.

Would you be happy for healthcare professionals or your children’s TAs to give minimal effort for minimum wage?

I’d hate to get to the stage where I go to work in a job I don’t want, simply as I was under pressure at home and aim to do the bare minimum

what a miserable way to live.

Lots of people are working in a job they don't like. It might be a miserable way to live but atleast it pays your rent and food🤷‍♀️

You also need to think why have you had such a dip in clients that you need to go from £35 to £13 ph ?

Is it because you are not particularly good at what you do , or your fees are too high or there is no longer as much call for what you do? If it's the 2nd option can you lower your fees to £30 or £25 and would that then boost your client base. If it is either of the other 2 options then I would be inclined to say work to your best standard because that is the best way you will improve your chances of getting a higher position or better hourly rate

Funnily enough, I was thinking of health care workers who are unappreciated.

I did something similar recently. I lasted four weeks. The manager liked the idea of having someone with my experience, happy to work for a lower wage, but the reality was she wanted a "yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir" type of employee and felt it necessary to belittle me and attempt to "bring me down a peg or two". Just watch out for this.

As others have highlighted, this is why a lot of people would hesitate to hire someone over- qualified for a role. I've been stung like that before - ended up with a lazy, arrogant member of staff who acted like we were lucky to have her and she could basically just dial it in. It's a rubbish attitude and you shouldn't take the job if you're not going to do it to the best of your ability.

Well if anyone wants to know why 'service is shit' in low paid sectors like we keep seeing threads about, here's one of the answers, people working in those sectors to 'get by' and as a stepping stone to something else because they're low paid and not respected.

If a job's worth doing and you expect to have good service wherever you seek it from, then that needs to change.