AIBU to think if your boss wants you in the office, they should help pay to get you there?

[bigred26]

Barclays has delayed moving UK staff from two to three office days after thousands asked for help with commuting costs, and TSB staff are reportedly preparing legal action over a similar plan. In one survey, 29% of UK office workers said a subsidised commute would get them in more often.

One side says more office days is effectively a pay cut. The other says getting to work has always been the employee's cost.

Should employers chip in, or is that just part of having a job?

If they do, it counts as employment income and the employee would be taxed on it.

Depends on the contract really.

mine is a pre covid contract so they could demand i go back in full time but they seem quite happy to keep us all at 50% and reduce office space

commuting costs are the employees cost and paying would create a BiK and resentment from those whose commute is £7.20 per day versus someone who has chosen to move out somewhere cheaper but has a commute at £40

It is part of having a job imo. It's something you consider when applying for jobs and choosing where to live. If it isn't affordable for a majority of people companies could help by raising this with rail companies. Rail travel in this country is an abomination and if big business names called for change imagine the progress that could be made

If their contract says their workplace is in the office, and they’ve been allowed to work from home some of the time but it’s not a contractual entitlement, the employees absolutely should pay to go to work.

What?!!!!!! People are expecting companies to pay them to get to work?!

I was in the office 5 days a week before lockdown. My salary stayed the same during lockdown when I had no commuting costs…I don’t expect more money just because I now have to go back to the office 3 days a week! However anyone that was hired as a permanent Work from Home employee and is now asked to go in, that would be a change of contractual terms and they could negotiate extra pay for commuting costs

When did getting to work become a cost the employer was responsible for?

My first instinct is really that it’s always been a cost of working, the travelling to said work, and really, if people went from being in the office to being allowed / asked to work from home, they effectively had a pay rise, if we’re going to count the other way around as a pay cut, iyswim?
Honestly, commuting time and cost has always been a factor in applying for and taking jobs. I struggle with the notion that everyone is entitled to work from home at all costs, personally.

No, don’t agree. Before Covid people attended the office when their employer said, up to 5 days a week. Now they think they can make demands of refusing to come in and moaning about costs. Going to the office is part of your contract unless you’re a home worker in your contract.

I suppose it depends whether they've always worked from home and it's changed to in office then a help with costs would be ok but if they're hybrid or have worked in the office previously then they've had a good deal up to now and should suck it up.

Sorry but this is ridiculous.

Before Covid most people went into work every day (with some exceptions obviously). So the way to look at this is that current flexibility means that people may save on commuting costs a couple of days a week if they can WFH. Enjoy that benefit instead of asking for something unreasonable.

They do pay you to go to work. It's called a salary.

I think the issue as a pp alluded to is the high price of rail travel, and a season ticket costs the same as 3 days a week. So if you go in twice a week you are saving money but if you go in three times a week you may as well go in full time. I have a Network railcard which means I can get a discount on the journey home and that adds up over the year.

Before covid my DH's season ticket was £4K a year out of taxed income.

Edited: and if your employer does make a contribution to your travel you get taxed on it. OK you still get something out of it but it's not ideal.

I don’t think anyone genuinely believes the employer should pay. On the off-chance they do I would advise resigning and see how they get on with another more amenable employer.

My initially thought is that it’s ridiculous, however i suspect a lot of their employees will have made certain commitments based on being able to work from home. Therefore if this is the long term plan, they should really give them a certain period of time to change those commitments, or find another role that suits them better. Or if they want to keep employees it is in their interests to offer financial support for a certain limited period.

People have got too comfortable about working from home, if your commute is too expensive move back closer to the office. I always had an expensive commute my choice my problem, my employer would have laughed if I said I wanted them to pay.

I am in the office full time but the majority of my colleagues are not. The nature of my job means I need to be in 5 days, but others don't. I don't mind that they save on the cost currently, but would mind them being paid to commute in a few extra days when I get no contribution to it.

I don't think it is unreasonable to be in the office 3 days out of 5 and I think it is reasonable to pay your own commute as has always been the norm.

Both things can be true: more office days is effectively a pay cut, and travelling to work is the employee's cost to cover. Assuming that the employment contract entitled the employer to require more office days then there's no obligation on them to provide additional compensation for this. But some employees may decide that the extra costs mean that the job is no longer financially viable for them and look for work elsewhere. The employer has to weigh up whether it's better to let those employees go, and face the costs of recruitment to replace them, or whether it's actually more beneficial to the business to pay them more/ keep the office day requirement as it was.

Plenty of others will apply for the jobs if they're sacked for not meeting teams of their contracts.

The organisation I work for has asked us to go back 3 days a week. During the time I worked there they have got rid of bonuses and changed our pay and conditions. And they want us to go back for collaboration which is rubbish as we sit there on another call at our desks. We have had a real time pay cut so I don’t blame those workers for wanting to be compensated.

AI is coming for your jobs.

It’s the cost of having an office-based job. If people don’t like that, they can choose jobs that pay more or that allow more WFH days. Employers competing for the best talent will offer it.

My company merged so when I go to the other office I can claim for mileage. If they’ve been working from home, it sounds like a change of terms and conditions.

Depends on your contract. Mine says I work from home, so if I am asked to attend a meeting in the office (fifty miles away) I can claim my train fare and my travel time counts as working time.

No they can use the money they are not spending on heating and electricity at home to pay the fare - swings and roundabouts