Splitting the bills? Is anything other than 50/50 unfair?

skintchick

ska_lover wrote: »

You ask a question, then jump to a conclusion and an insult in the next sentence without awaiting a response? Says more about you, than it does about me.

I am not sure why a stranger having a difference of opinion upsets you so much that you need to hurl insults. Why does it upset you, that others think differently? Interesting stuff

It is just the the way the world works - not everyone will always agree with you. You are not correct, your opinion is not a fact...it's an opinion - same as mine.

Do I know you in RL? I have an ex-friend who responds to people in this kind of way when she doesn;t want to engage with the actual subject being discussed any more.

I'm neither upset nor "hurling insults" but what you said is incredibly naive and many women would find it insulting, in fact.

so answer the question then - Do you really think that people usually have the choice of picking and choosing their employer, even if they know they are being paid less than a man in the same job?

jaylee3

BigAunty wrote: »

Seriously, he is commuting so far that he cannot spend 10 mins making his lunch or ironing his workshirts or pick up the hoover at the weekend?!

With one partner, the way we settled this disparity was by paying half of our net wages into the joint account which paid all household bills and if there was anything spare, would be used for social funds/holidays.

With another, we did a fairly proportional contribution based on salaries so if my partner earned x3 the sum, they paid that higher ratio of bills.

For gawd sake agree this upfront - read some of the posts here from women who routinely earn the same or less than their partners but who end up paying the majority of the bills while their partner indulges expensive hobbies and won't lift a finger round the house.

I would 100% echo this. I have lost count of the amount of women I have heard say that their husband/long-term partner earns a lot more and is incredibly selfish with his money. He works full time, and she works part time (as they have kids,) and 'hubby' picks up say £300 a week and she picks up £170 a week. Their weekly outgoings (bills, rent or mortgage AND food,) cost around £300, and they pay half each. Leaving her with £20 and HIM with £150! (Figures are approximate and only meant as an example.)

For some unknown reason that I have never been able to fathom, the woman's partner often seemed to think that this £150 is his, and should not be pooled into the household/home/family, and they went on to indulge in expensive hobbies, spending 1000s of pounds while their wife/partner lived in tatty old clothes they'd had for years, buying sun-in for their hair and cutting it themselves because they couldn't afford to go to the hairdressers, and frequently turning down invites for nights out, because she hadn't got a spare fiver for a few drinks.

Meanwhile, as I said, 'he' was spending frivolously on his hobbies and interests. Because he was earning more money, in HIS mind, he was entitled to spend it. Forgetting that she was often doing almost 100% of the housework, and almost 100% of the childcare.

In reality, HIS money and HER money should be pooled into ONE ACCOUNT. Separate accounts have no place in a marriage or a long-term relationship, especially where children are involved, (as the woman will almost always be the main carer for them.) So a JOINT ACCOUNT, all monies go into it, and both partners have a debit card to it and access to it, and they should both use it whenever they want, for whatever they want, without asking.

Of course, if it's something not necessary or overly frivolous, then both partners should discuss what to do. But I have seen too many women go without over the years, because their other half thinks they are entitled to keep more money, just because they earn more; not taking into account the fact that their wife/partner does the vast majority of everything.

Some men, especially younger ones (like under 30) have a tendency to be very self-centred. Too many women let them get away with it. DO NOT BE ONE OF THOSE WOMEN highjewelgreen!

fabforty

Seperate accounts are fine if that's what the couple concerned want and are happy with. OH and I do not have joint accounts and neither of us want them. I earn twice as much as he does and pay the majority of the bills. We both have more than enough disposable income to spend each month and we both have access to all accounts. We just dont have one joint account - there is more to an equal relationship than joint bank accounts.
ETA - saying that wife does 'the vast majority of everything' is a bit of a sweeping statement.Nor should we assume that the woman is always the lower paid of the two or that the higher earner earner does less of the domestic/housework, or that the lower earner does not have the ability or opportunity to earn more. That might be true in some cases but not necessarily in every case.

Gloomendoom

PasturesNew wrote: »

One anecdote isn't data... as they say.

Only by people who don't know any better.

Person_one

Gloomendoom wrote: »

Only by people who don't know any better.

No, you're right, the fact that you and your partner earn the same definitively proves there is no gender pay gap.

Are you going to tell the UN or shall I?

double_mummy

in our household i am the higher earner by quite a bit

we have separate accounts and i pay 100% of the bills - everything that we need

hubbys money then goes towards everything that we want - savings days out takeaways treats etc

also he does about 80% of the household stuff (i work more hours) and tbh he is better at it than i am lol

it depends on the couple and it is down to them to find a way that BOTH people are happy with

Gloomendoom

Person_one wrote: »

No, you're right, the fact that you and your partner earn the same definitively proves there is no gender pay gap.

Are you going to tell the UN or shall I?

It does prove that there are some generalisations being bandied about. Not all women earn less than men... despite what the statistics prove.
.
.
.
.
.

Snakey

Well definitely don't march up with a pre-prepared speech about how you can't be expected to do X but that you'll do Y if he does Z - this is supposed to be a big, happy step forward for you both as a "we", and you should be sorting it all out together! If you don't usually communicate about the important stuff, or have just never needed to before now, there will never be a better time than this to give it a try. Go out for lunch somewhere relaxed and private-ish, ask a nice, open question about how he sees things working, such as bills and housework, listen properly to what he has to say, and go from there.

You know the big things you need to bring up, and if he doesn't mention these, then you will have to. Raising concerns in advance so that you can discuss them together as a couple is assertive and respectful - and a vast improvement on seething in silent resentment and then walking out/blowing up one day without ever having hinted that there's a problem.

My advice for housework: start as you mean to go on, also known as not making a rod for your own back. Even if you don't mind now, you might mind in five years' time, and it's a lot harder to get from A to B than it is to just start off with B.

My advice for money: things should be broadly fair because it is a big red flag of selfishness/disrespect if one person is trying to benefit financially at the expense of the other, but remember also that this is not a business arrangement - rough splits of expenses according to income levels are good, keeping a running total of every last penny you're "owed" is not.

I'm sure you can sort it all out and will feel much better for having had the chat. Good luck!

dearlouise

Personally I would approach it by considering percentages... You could put equal percentages into a joint pot of money, which is enough to cover all of your bills.

Yes, essentially he will be paying more as his wages are higher, and his percentage will be 'worth' more. But that way you are both *actually* contributing equally.

The chores, commute etc shouldn't even be considered in financial discussion. That's a separate issue. Don't try to put monetary value on chores, it will only end in a mess.

maman

fabforty wrote: »

Seperate accounts are fine if that's what the couple concerned want and are happy with. OH and I do not have joint accounts and neither of us want them. I earn twice as much as he does and pay the majority of the bills. We both have more than enough disposable income to spend each month and we both have access to all accounts. We just dont have one joint account - there is more to an equal relationship than joint bank accounts.
ETA - saying that wife does 'the vast majority of everything' is a bit of a sweeping statement.Nor should we assume that the woman is always the lower paid of the two or that the higher earner earner does less of the domestic/housework, or that the lower earner does not have the ability or opportunity to earn more. That might be true in some cases but not necessarily in every case.

Totally agree with that. It's an old chestnut that seems to crop up regularly as some seem to see having a joint account of proof of commitment!


I've only read bits of the thread but it got me thinking. My DH has some newish friends and the man commented recently that he wants his wife 'out of the house and earning some money'. Now we're assuming it was probably a joke but it got me thinking that some men might be genuinely fed up with having to be the main bread winner and would love a part time job. We know a couple where she stopped work to have a child 13 years ago. She's since taken on a bit of part time work but has loads of spare time to be a 'yummy mummy' and go for lunch and coffee, trawl round shops and do IMO unnecessary housework. If she was a man she'd probably be called a free loader.


My point is that there are lots of women out there who could be higher earners but choose not to be as it gives them an easier life. I'm sure there are people who've taken conscious decisions as couples for someone to stay at home and care for the house and family but there are others who lead a charmed life. I can see why many men might not want to subsidise partners like these.


P.S. I appreciate that in some households the man/woman role could be reversed. It's just that I wanted to redress the balance a bit in favour of men.