Sharing income when moving in together

JennyJukes

maman wrote: »

I'm definitely not of the 'one pot' camp but I have reservations.

There are people who work very hard and long hours but society doesn't value what they do. That goes for a lot of caring professionals.:(

I really don't admire people who earn low wages from choice and then expect their partners to subsidise them. If you want to work part time {childcare and health issues excluded) then you should be prepared to take the hit financially.

I'd sooner employ a cleaner than cut my hours to do my own house work.

When I worked as a carer I had to work around 55 hours a week to match my ex-partners wage which was a Mon-Fri 9-5 office job. I did shifts so he expected if I wasn't starting until later I could run all the errands and do all the housework but when he was off work he was allowed to chill because it was his "weekend". Clearly I was doing more physically and emotionally hard work but we always split our bills, no matter how much I earned that month. When I was working part time I thought it was fair because I should contribute equally and if I wanted more money to spend on myself then I should earn it, not use his.

Even though I had to work all those hours to reach it and he did less straining work, the money was equal so we put in an equal amount. In this case I think it would have made more sense to just pool all our money together instead but then he wanted to use money for computer games and I resented that because I didn't want my hard work to go onto things like that.

My current job I get paid pretty well and don't work overtime. If my partner worked the same amount of hours for less, I would want to pay more towards our bills as I'm now doing a job that I love and not stressful shifts. As you said, sometimes the lowest paid jobs are the most strenuous.

I've heard some people say they put in a % of their wage each month, eg 70%, and they keep the 30% to themselves. That sounds fair to me - you each sacrifice a percentage of your wage to pay bills and fun stuff whilst keeping a % to yourself.

maman

onwards&upwards wrote: »

Would you count working full time but in a low paid job as a good reason?

It would depend on why they were in that low paid job. I know someone who is a graduate and chooses to work full time as a cleaner. She does it because although she puts in the hours she doesn't want responsibility or to have to take work home or commute or any of the 'arduous' things that would go with the job she's trained for. I know her DH is getting quite fed up with it as he has to work lots of extra hours to keep up the family income. It was something he accepted when their child was younger but now she's 17.

Gavin83 wrote: »

Honestly I think a lot depends on circumstances. I could understand someone being resentful sharing their finances if their partner works part time, out of choice with no real desire to better themselves. However if both work hard and one just happens to earn more than the other then I'd imagine most would be happier to share.

Personally me and my wife keep our finances fairly separate. We have a joint account for the bills and everything else is kept separate. It works for us. We're both reasonably well paid though and have always earned similar amounts, were that different we might take a different approach.



I'd say it's mostly a case of supply and demand. Anyone could be a care assistant but very few could play football for Manchester Utd. The more people who can do a job the less it'll pay.

I agree with most of what you say but I, too, have always earned a good salary which is similar to what DH earns.

Where I can't agree :it takes a special sort of person to be a carer whereas these days just about anyone could play for Man Utd.

onwards&upwards

maman wrote: »

It would depend on why they were in that low paid job. I know someone who is a graduate and chooses to work full time as a cleaner. She does it because although she puts in the hours she doesn't want responsibility or to have to take work home or commute or any of the 'arduous' things that would go with the job she's trained for. I know her DH is getting quite fed up with it as he has to work lots of extra hours to keep up the family income. It was something he accepted when their child was younger but now she's 17.

The country needs cleaners though!

Why is that valuable work not good enough just because it brings in less money?

A lot of people could earn more, for any number of reasons, they could do more hours, they could take more exams, study, change career, have fewer children, take shorter mat leave, where does that end?

trailingspouse

So at the moment you are earning more than her. You don't want the finances to be split 50/50 but rather you would prefer that you each pay your own way and you 'reap the rewards' of your higher paid job.


OK - here are a few scenarios to consider.


Your partner has a baby and has to stop working for a while - would you see her starve while you 'reap the rewards'?
Your partner gets a big promotion, and ends up earning more than you - are you happy for her to 'reap the rewards' and leave you behind?


Or maybe you don't trust her with 'your' money and think she will fritter it away.



I seriously think that you shouldn't move in with anyone until you are ready to talk about 'us' rather than 'me'. And if you don't trust her with your money, absolutely don't move in with her.

ska_lover

onwards&upwards wrote: »

Would you count working full time but in a low paid job as a good reason?

As a good reason for which scenario O&U? (genuine question, I am easily lost)

I work full time in a low paid job (but that's my choice, like I said earlier)

Six months ago, I was earning nearly double what I am now (but no regrets - that's a totally different thread lol)

ska_lover

borkid wrote: »

How about this scenario. Husband graduates first and takes on a trainee post, once quailfied will earn a lot. He also wants children and with his family background there is the potential for a disabled child but he won't agree to genetic conselling also doesn't believe in children coming home to an empty house. Wife graduates a year later and is offered the chance to study for a PhD which would enable her to earn more eventually but turns it down as timing etc would mean difficulties with what the husband would like. She takes a lower paid job but still providing a valuable service to the population.



Should, when the husband is eventually earning a lot more, he not be expected to ' subsidise' his wife if she has missed out on opportunites due to enabling his wishes.


If you are in a loving relationship then both partners should be considered equal, a lot can be brought to a relationship which can't be quantised in terms of money.

That is a very specific scenario...

but generally speaking - My issue with this would be the bit in bold. She turns it down because it goes against what the Husband would like.

What about what she would like? The wife sounds like she is doing what is is told. There is nothing in your post about the wife's ambitions, about her choice of anything. Not cool

Like I say, that is a very specific scenario

MovingForwards

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5467802/thomson-have-put-4-and-7-year-old-alone-on-plane

I assume she is mom, although you could always swap roles?

Pollycat

MovingForwards wrote: »

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5467802/thomson-have-put-4-and-7-year-old-alone-on-plane

I assume she is mom, although you could always swap roles?

My guess is probably not.
That thread is from. 2016 and in a later thread from last year the OP talks about divorce and buying a new house.

ska_lover

maman wrote: »

It would depend on why they were in that low paid job. I know someone who is a graduate and chooses to work full time as a cleaner. She does it because although she puts in the hours she doesn't want responsibility or to have to take work home or commute or any of the 'arduous' things that would go with the job she's trained for. I know her DH is getting quite fed up with it as he has to work lots of extra hours to keep up the family income. It was something he accepted when their child was younger but now she's 17.

I totally respect her decision ref choice of job, but then that respect gets blown away when I read that her Hubby is working longer to afford her the luxury of choices. It is like solving a problem and then creating another one (for someone else to have to deal with)

TELLIT01

I've been married nearly 40 years and for virtually all that time earned more than my wife. For a large part of the time I was earning between 2 and 3 times as much as her. It never crossed my mind for a moment that I was subsidising her, and I sincerely hope that she has never felt that I resented her for 'living off my money'. It's always been a partnership with each of us bringing different strengths and skills to it.
The OP refers to moving in together, so it's the early stages of a relationship. In that situation, given the very clear difference in opinion about finances between the parties, it would seem sensible to keep their wages separate and make a decision on whether household bills should be split 50/50 or more proportionately based on income. How other costs are split is a separate conversation.