To find salary offered an insult?

[Willowtree5]

As part of a restructure, I have been asked if I would take on three direct reports (I currently don’t manage anyone, but have in the past - big pull of current role was no line management responsibility).

I said I’d consider it - whilst I know I can manage people, it does add to my workload and the ‘mental load’ of dealing with all the crap around sickness/absence, 1:1’s etc.

My manager said she’d establish what additional uplift to my salary would be possible and let me know.

They’ve come back with an offer of £125,000 (current salary pre bonuses £105,000) which I find frankly insulting given the workload this would add.

AIBU to tell them to stuff it?

A close friend of mine likewise manages a similar number of people on around £60k.

It really depends on the industry. I manage 6 people and earn £68k so that sounds great to me. But I work in a low paid industry so you would need to manage a lot of people for that level of salary

It really depends on the industry. I manage 6 people and earn £68k so that sounds great to me. But I work in a low paid industry so you would need to manage a lot of people for that level of salary. What do you do?

@Willowtree5 My initial response to your opening post is that you're a jerk.

Upon reading your subsequent comments and after careful consideration - as I try to see the best in people and give benefit of the doubt - is that you're a jerk.

You are not being unreasonable. The way tax kicks in over 100k due to the erosion of the tax free allowance it’s not worth it. I wouldn’t do it.

When I worked on an NHS secure psychiatric ward our manager was on about £42K and was reponsible for managing a team of about 25 which comprised of nurses and HCAs. Not London admittedly but it seems very small beer compared with the six figures that the OP is talking about.

Who are you to dictate that nobody needs more than 100k? I am a single woman earning just under that in London and I actually would need quite a bit more to properly enjoy life, eat out, go to theatre, do social activities, go on overseas holidays, have Netflix. Things that make life enjoyable.

@InterIgnis The UK is Capitalist, and OP works in a high paying sector. Wages aren’t decided based on how virtuous you consider a profession to be, no matter how much you would like that to be the case.

That was my point, not yours.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people say "but I need a massive salary to have a normal life," and then they rhyme off a list of luxuries that are out of reach of normal people.

Why is that the wealthy believe that they are entitled to things that most people don't have?

I don’t understand the comments saying “I manage people on less than that”.

So? More fool you.

I was talking to the person who says nobody “needs” more than 100k.

Who are they, or you to say what people “need” to have an enjoyable life. Sorry I am not content to merely go to work, go home and watch TV each day.

What you require to lead an enjoyable life is not what I require. Nobody can say how much another person “needs”.

Absolutely.

It's rare that I read all of an op's posts and find nothing redeeming - but yes, op comes across as a total knob.

I wouldn’t OP. It’s a 25% gross uptick but only a 13% net uptick unless you whack up your pension contributions by the full 25% to keep your full tax free allowance intact, you fall into the 62% tax trap as others have said. And if you put the full 25% in then you get zero net benefit.

Assuming you don’t want to do that, a 13% pay rise for 3 reports and all the extra responsibility that that entails? As I said, I wouldn’t.

Why are people comparing apples and oranges?!

Real lack of understanding of supply and demand basics on this thread.

What do you do to have with such hugs salaries but no line management?? I mean, what’s your job/industry?

@JHound I was talking to the person who says nobody “needs” more than 100k.

This is an open discussion board. The person you responded to is correct in saying that no one needs that kind of money.

Who are they, or you to say what people “need” to have an enjoyable life. Sorry I am not content to merely go to work, go home and watch TV each day. What you require to lead an enjoyable life is not what I require. Nobody can say how much another person “needs”.

I'm pretty sure that I would enjoy all of the luxury items that you have.

You saying that you "need" those luxuries, and it's fine for me not to have them because you think I should just be going to work, going home, and watching TV each day, implies that I am less of a person and that you have special needs that exceed mine. Do you not believe in equality?

Peoolle management isn’t for many people I think , even the ones who want to do it - expecially those ones actually. that’s why there are so many bad people managers losing good team members and ruining companies everywhere!
OP may make decent job of it though.

😂😂😂 are you for real or just on a wind up?

Yeah but I manage 3500 people and the only pay I get is a punch in the face, and spat on at Christmas if I'm lucky. And I'm grateful. I'd happily take on 2000 more direct reports for 5p and a Twix. The OP is a monster.

how do you suggest things are made equal?

@Sickleg how do you suggest things are made equal?

A positive start would be acknowledge equality. You know, perhaps get rid of the mindset of "I need X but I also think it's fine that other people don't have X."

According to who? Who are you to say how much a person needs?

I have not commented on what is “fine” for you you to have or not have. Respond to words written. Not strawmen you have invented.

If you want more “luxuries” work for it.

What about footballers paid millions - are they monsters?

I am sure that was sarcasm….

Haven’t read TWT but can you request bigger pre-tax pension contributions as an alternative?

(I know zippo if that’s even allowed !)