BaronSmoggie
Well-known member
Obviously all the people who can WFH can afford to take a pay cut since you are no longer need to spend money commuting. I’m sure your employees will think the same come your next review or pay rise. Also you might have to pay more tax for the 10 million people who can’t WFH so they can get their benefits.
You are paid for your skills and experience, not because you have to commute to an office. If the company can downsize its building space, it saves a metric ton of money in insurance, facilities management and utility costs. If they need a hot desking space for people, they can maintain a small presence for this or rent out spaces on an ad hoc basis as they need them. WFH, industry dependent can be a bit of a boon for a company that wants to reduce its operating costs.
You've worded it in such a way as to imply its the employers that work from home, not the employees. Apologies if I have that wrong, but that's how it reads and that doesn't make sense either.
Paying more tax isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'm continually flabbergasted by politicians constantly harping on about a low tax economy and people thinking that's a good thing when scenario's like this occur and we have to borrow beyond belief to support short term schemes like furlough. Imagine if we all paid more tax and the loopholes were closed, that support net would be much greater for longer without the excessive borrowing.
Oh I can but dream.