'Would you take a pay cut?' Poll results/discussion

Poll ran 28 Oct - 03 Nov 2008:

Would you take a pay cut to save your company?

Due to the economic climate, your employer announces it needs to radically reduce its outgoings to keep the company's head above water. Reluctant to cut jobs, the boss sends a memo asking all 200 employees if they would agree to take a 10% pay cut, which should save 20 people from being made redundant.

Would you agree to the pay cut?

A. Yes 52% (3956 votes)
B. No 48% (3718 votes)

This vote has now closed, but you can still click 'post reply' to discuss below.


  • Ooh, I really, really can't decide. Such a difficult one.

    One of my problems with the idea is that you don't know if the "favoured" staff will get their 10%s back at the next pay review.
  • Hold on, no. I'm voting no.
    There's no way they'd need to cut pay by 10% to save 10% of the workforce's jobs.
    Either way the wage bill goes down by 10%, but by cutting jobs they will inevitably cut income.

    So I think they're trying to pull a swift one.
  • dougk_2dougk_2 Forumite
    1.4K Posts
    Depends who the people are you are saving.
    In most comapnies that size there will be people who frankly deserve the chop, either for a) not being able to do their job properly or b) because really that job should not exist.

    Also you have to consider why the business is not doing well - blaming the "economic climate" in my view is not a valid reason. A good service/product will nearly always sell.
  • The way to do this is to make sure you share in the benefits as well as the losses.

    So I'd take the 10%, but I'd want a share of equity in the company so that I could be compensated later on when the company was on a better footing. I'd expect the management to also take a 10% cut.

    I'd also say that there are always people looking for volunatry redundencies and these should be considered before cutting wages.
  • teddycoteddyco Forumite
    397 Posts
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker
    I wouldn't mind taking a pay cut, if the company could indeed prove that it was almost going to go bankrupt.

    However, I would strike an agreement that when times were profitable again, the company would share any gains evenly with all those employees who agreed to the initial pay cut.

    Perhaps the employees could take a portion of the shares of the company?
  • Jacks_xxxJacks_xxx Forumite
    3.9K Posts
    I'd vote yes so long as it was across the board, and all other reasonable cost cutting options were also being implemented alongside it.

    I think some companies are set up to be optimally profitable at a certain turnover and when sales slump I can see how doing this would help the business survive.

    If the company involved supplied a mid level non essential good or service then I can imagine that orders would be down at the moment but that a lower level of trade could probably be relied upon to continue indefinitely.
    Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. Einstein
  • stevemcolstevemcol Forumite
    1.7K Posts
    Provided management give up 10% of salary and 10% of bonuses, yes I'd go along with it. An enhanced share incentive scheme would be nice though to recognise loyalty and reward employess when the sun comes back out.
    Apparently I'm 10 years old on MSE. Happy birthday to me...etc
  • FrugaldomFrugaldom Forumite
    6.7K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    This is one crazy poll - it is automatically assuming that every single person employed by the 'company' earns more than the national minimum wage, not many of them about as far as I know. My answer would be no - if the company can't afford to pay it's staff then it's whole business plan is flawed, expecting staff to help bale them out isn't a very good contingency plan.
    I reserve the right NOT to spend:
    The less I spend, the more I can afford!
  • No I wouldn't vote to take a pay cut, the way the economy is at the moment the average worker is effectively taking a pay cut due to rising prices & stealth taxes.

    If directors stopped having fancy cars & hefty bonuses they wouldn't struggle to meet the wages bill.
  • SandCSandC Forumite
    3.9K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts
    No I wouldn't because it's doubtful they would ever raise it again, resulting in a nice, cheap workforce thank you very much. A fairer way would be to work a set amount of short time. My company is doing this as from December for a set period. The business saves money and whilst the workers are not earning their full wage, they are not doing the hours for it either.

    Also, how could they justify that there is enough work for the whole workforce when the alternative is 20 redundancies? If the business can sustain workload for all those people then they can find another way of cutting costs.
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides

Fans demand refunds from Leeds Festival

...after Rage Against The Machine pulls out

MSE News

The 'Ask An Expert' event

Check out last week's energy-themed Q&A with MSE's experts

MSE Forum

Free museums & galleries

Where to get your culture fix across the UK

MSE Deals