• CodeBlooded@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Holy smokes, working from home is not a “raise.” You should be compensated for the value you bring, not where you’re sitting when you bring value.

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      1 year ago

      I spend $400 a month on gas because of my long commute. Work from home is definitely a raise in my situation. Gas bill goes down to $100 a month. Works out directly to a 5% raise just in gas alone. Car insurance can be switched to leisure only saving money further. Gain an extra two hours a day which were unpaid before, so my workday is now only 8 hours instead of 10, that is another equivalent to 25% on an hourly rate indirectly.

      Then there is all the other benefits such as just being happier and more productive.

    • ElectricCattleman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it’s basically saying companies need to pay more if they want people in-office. Which makes sense to me. If you want someone to spend time and money to commute they need to compensate for that. You can’t ask someone who has been WFH to start coming in without some incentive or else you’re basically cutting their pay.

      That said, many people won’t switch from WFH to in-office for any amount of money.

    • Marxism-Fennekinism@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It could be considered a raise in terms of the amount of time you dedicate to work and the amount you get paid for it.

      8 hour shift plus 1 hour commute both ways means you effectively dedicate 10 hours to your job. Replace the commute with a 30 second walk from your bed to your desk and you are now making more money for your time.

      Mind you, I still agree that remote work should never be actively viewed as a raise or a perk. It should be the default for jobs that are compatible, which is a ton of them.

    • EssentialCoffee@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      In terms of time returned, gas, wear & tear, etc., I would consider being told to go back to the office as a pay cut.

      If I’m being asked to sit somewhere else, then I would definitely want to be compensated for that.

    • Saneless@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Well, financially it can be a raise

      But emotionally, it has no equivalent and is like losing a toxic work element

      I get paid about $200 (miles, after gas) to go to work so even any office work is extra money for me

    • TheSaneWriter@lemmy.thesanewriter.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      I view it as a benefit, and I’m willing to make concessions on salary for additional or better benefits. Arguably you could have both, but I think unionization is required for that and I’m in a low unionization industry.

    • fidodo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It is in the sense that commute time is not paid so compared to commuting jobs your effective hourly wage goes up. Also, commuting time is actually a negative wage.

    • triclops6@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Especially galling since if I were to move to a cheaper region my company would want to pay me less. It’s “we only pay you for the value you bring” when cost of living goes up, but “we want some of those lifestyle savings” if I can get my costs down.

      How convenient.

    • RandomException@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Many people also seem to forget that not everyone has a dedicated room or otherwise extra space to work in. Sure, if you live alone it doesn’t matter but with other people living in the same apartment/house and perhaps them also working remotely, you suddenly need extra space just for good working conditions. Working space has a cost, be it in an office building or at employees’ homes. Also good ergonomics means one needs a good desk and a great office chair which are not cheap to buy. Sure, I wouldn’t necessarily demand more pay just for WFH, but I would never ever ever take a lower compensation in exchange either.

      That said, I love working remotely from home and wouldn’t go back to office. It’s just that even if you save time and money in commutes, there are other costs in place that wouldn’t otherwise necessarily exist.

    • pingveno@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Holy smokes, working from home is not a “raise.”

      Sure it’s not a raise, but that’s not really the question. The question is the hidden cost that companies are imposing on themselves by demanding that employees come into an office. If employers are going to demand that out of their employees, they should do that with the expectation that employees will ask to be compensated or will leave.

    • joneskind@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Before the pandemic I was spending almost 2 hours a day on my commute to office, while being on site for 9 hours with an unpaid one hour lunch break. That’s 20% of my working hours.

      I can use this time for entertainment and side projects

      There’s not enough money in the world to pay for the time I save.

      Besides, I save a lot on gas and food, and gain much more comfort (my house, my coffee, my chair, my screens, my toilets)

      To be perfectly clear, if my company wants me back to office they will have to raise me more than 30%.