Would you work an extra 3 hours a week for £132 a month increase?

[DogHasAStick]

I really hope this doesn't sound goady, not my intention at all. Just interested in other people's opinions.

For context...I have a Masters degree in my career subject, which I have worked in for 5 years. I have been offered further development experience in another team, which I really do need to secure a senior post. I WFH 3 days and have flexibility at work, i have been offered more hours. We also want to move, so would like to sell my house this year.

On the flip side, I am a single mother to two boys, youngest has AuADHD. Youngest had an absolutely awful time for years, but is currently doing the best he's ever been. I don't have time to look after myself and have let myself go somewhat, but a lot of this is because I am throwing my resources at work and my sons. I get no practical support, have a 30-40 minutes round trip school run twice a day, boys have clubs five times a week.

Because I get a universal credit top up, and a student loan, I would earn approximately £132 extra a month, for an extra 3 hours work a week. Would look better for mortgage and would allow me to spend more time at work of course, but unsure if it's worth the additional strain on my time?

It's not about the immediate impact on your take home pay though is it. This is a stepping stone to get a senior role so of course it's sensible to do it.

Yes.

That works out at £10.15 per hour so under minimum wage.

3 hours for 132 a month increase,it's a no brainer really init

It's not under minimum wage. OP says it's what she'd take home after tax etc.

If it would be good career development then I’d negotiate an appropriate rate of pay for it given your qualifications and experience and do it.

it is hard working with kids with additional needs while lone parenting - trust me I know - but you have to think about future benefits.

3 hrs per week of extra time is barely noticeable. Many people’s work varies regularly by more than that depending on how busy the workload is at the time, to get the job done. However, I’d not be prepared to work for an employer suggesting such an insulting rate of pay.

Just seen that, apologies. It’s still derisory, though, isn’t it?

This is one of the problems with the cliff edges and insane marginal rates of tax in the tax system. Of course people will make these calculations of whether something is worthwhile based on the net difference in income, so the punitive tax system is holding back productivity and also individual career progression as it’s hard to think long term when in the trenches of lone parenting kids with additional needs, as the OP is.

This is a really good summary of the issues that Rachel Reeves would be fixing on Wednesday if she had any sense, for anybody interested. However, like Hunt before her, it seems evident she does not possess any:

https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2024/10/17/reform-income-tax-end-the-scandal-of-high-marginal-rates/

OP - my advice would be to think long term and take the opportunity but also negotiate hard on better pay. If they won’t pay you appropriately take on the learning opportunity anyway and then once you have what you need from it seek a promotion with a better employer who’ll pay you properly. The company/ organisation deserves no loyalty from you if they won’t pay you a sensible amount of money.

Yes I would because I would want to move off UC. The fact that is influencing you shows that UC can have perverse incentives

it sounds like this will also be a stepping stone to promotion as well and a good long time choice

The employer isn’t suggesting that rate - OP what is the UC you are losing? Because the rate of pay is UC lost + 132

Yes because of the investment in your future.

That's not what the employer are paying her though. OP has included the effect of losing UC.

Also, if you are getting penalised excessively by any combination of higher tax rates, CB withdrawal, personal allowance withdrawal, childcare funding withdrawal, universal credit taper or student loan repayments and do not urgently need the additional earnings it may make far more sense to pay the additional earnings into your pension scheme via salary sacrifice. You may find you can make an additional pension contribution several times the size of what you would receive in net income after the punitive taxes per my link above.

it is a ridiculous system and egregiously unfair to single adult households who are taxed far more on the same household income than two adult households, which is particularly ridiculous in the case of lone parents who are already doing twice the work of the adults in two parent families.

Thanks. Already responded to above.

I have no idea why someone reported my post above which was providing helpful advice and a link to information on tax rates implications for the OP! How bizarre. I will contact MN directly to find out why on earth they’ve “hidden” my comment.

Mumsnet - please explain per above.

I don't think it's been reported, some posts get hidden automatically when they contain certain links or words.

Yes, it is additional income which gives an opportunity to gain experience for a more senior post. Unless my mental or physical health was at risk, I'd take it.

Yes I’d do it for career progression and to lessen my reliance in UC.

@TheCastleDoesNotReply £132 a month is still £1500 a year - enough to pay for a nice holiday, for example. For many people, it's the equivalent of an extra months' salary each year - not an amount to be sniffed at.

I’ve just made a decision on something similar.

My decision was based on what I actually want and whether this other work is a good fit. It’s not and I’ve declined the opportunity. Always put yourself first when making decisions. Other opportunities will always come up.

Not worth it for me personally. I hugely value my non working time and 3 hours per week for an extra £132 per month isn’t something I’d be looking to pursue. I’m not interested in career progression, I like my job and it pays me well.
However if circumstances were different for me, if I needed the extra money, if it was a stepping stone to something that I was looking into, i’d maybe take it on.

For me, for the money, no.

but it depends on if the role is better and would be good for progression.

but based purely on 3 hours more work for £10 p/h, when you are already rushed off your feet, no.

Opportunities for extra income are rare

Yes I would do the work

This post sums up everything that is wrong with the benefits system. OP thinks she has a right to others people money because working more would inconvenience her. And then people say that the benefits system isn’t being abused.

I would have to weigh up how much I needed the money compared to the impact it would have on me and the DC.