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

orlao

I voted yes......but I would expect concessions regarding flexible working because if I worked a 4 day week for instance I could save my large travel costs for one day which would go halfway towards the 10% pay cut...I'd also have to replace that income somehow so I'd need time to do that

But then I work for a small company that I've been with since startup, if it was a large multinational it might be different

ceridwen

ceridwen wrote: »

Like the phrase "bosses would freeride on the underlings cuts"........probably all too true unfortunately. Look at how many firms have cut back drastically as regards provision of job pensions - BUT the executives in those firms tend to have their own separate pension scheme and that stays the same - ie no cuts in pension for them, whatever they are doing to the workforce.

Been thinking further overnight on this point too - what many people may not be aware of is that, in some firms, the executives in fact go to quite a bit of trouble to hide the fact that they have their own separate (and much better) pension schemes to the rest of the staff. Its information that is not necessarily out there in the public domain. In some firms the rest of the staff can see what the executives have as regards a Pension Scheme - in others it is kept well-hidden from the staff. (Thinks....where's a Private Eye when one needs them?;) )

Plasticman

sdooley wrote: »

Managers on £40,000 will lose more in absolute terms than the single parent cleaner on £10,000. But they can afford to lose the £4,000 on the way down much more than the cleaner can afford to lose the £1,000 (might mean choosing between rent, food or heating).

A sweeping generalisation if there ever was one! A manager on £40K living in the south east (high property costs) with a stay at home wife looking after their kids won't have loads of spare cash from his £40K salary. A reduction of £4K per year could be enough to leave them unable to pay their mortgage. The single parent cleaner on £10K living in a council house is also likely to receive tax credits (and housing benefit?) so the impact of the lower income may well be offset to a certain degree.

One the other hand of course, the person on £40K may well be able to manage with a £4K drop in salary - but a lot depends on personal circumstances.

lilmisstrouble

I worked for Sheffield City Council in the early 90's and the whole of the workforce voted to give up 3% of their wage for a year in order to guarantee no redundancies. It did work and for years the "no compulsory redundancy "policy held. It was a selfless act supported almost unanimously and saved jobs and frontline services to those who needed them most

Jakg

Yes - as i'd be hard-pressed to find a job with my current salary I could fit around School..

Frugaldom

The_Miser wrote: »

nykmedia; if the company can't pay its employees their normal salary then its whole business plan is flawed. Yes - I could say that for 33% of the companies I have had to analyse. Do you want them all to sack every employee and overwhelm the system? Many of those flawed companies will survive into the next upturn when there will be demand for their employees. If your company is flawed then why are you working for them?

I would not expect them to sack every employee, I wouldn't 'expect' anything without knowing the circumstances of the company. Is it a private company owned by one person/family, is it a limited company, what does the company do? In my personal experience, the first salaries to be affected are those of the directors; I know directors who have gone without any income during lean months when staff had to be paid and retained rather than pay anyone off, likewise I have known companies LAY OFF staff with ridiculously short notice. Then there are those small companies who would prefer to pay off all but their very best staff members and then rehire on temporary contracts during peak periods. Business is business and, in Martin's own words,

"The Three Most Important Lessons You've Never Been Taught"

1. A company's job is to make money from you
2. Debt isn't bad, bad debt is bad
3. Loyalty doesn't pay.

As for the possibility of people being offered negative payrises in line with a possible negative inflation rate, who is to say that it couldn't happen? What if your contract of employment states annual incrimental adjustments in line with inflation? Or what if you are on a low wage, inflation's at 5% and you don't get a payrise? Isn't that very similar to taking a pay cut?

mazzyb_3

I'd agree to a pay cut for more flexibility/shorter working hours. That is the more sensible way for employers to approach it and ask staff than threaten redundancies. My employer in these lean times has agreed to shorter hours as a temporary measure whilst i have ill parents to tend to, & both parties benefit.

fudgecat

My agreement in principle would be conditional on the cut being across the board (senior management included) and perhaps some benefits received in return, for example slightly more flexibility in hours if this was workable.
My husband has just joined the trust where I work. He is doing an excellent job, so everyone tells us. Nonetheless the phrase last in and first out tends to haunt...

ceebeeby

No

I'd rather take my chances along with everyone else, rather than devalue my services.

.... However, I would also be job hunting pretty quickly, as if this was the first measure, I'm sure it wouldn't be the last, for a company going down.

geri1965_2

No, I would not. I earn less than most people in my company despite being one of the most productive members of staff in terms of fee income received.

When I see management leading by example, I might consider it.