"[A]s remote work looks likely to survive in some form for the foreseeable future," writes Don Lee, "a battle is starting to brew over who should pocket those savings [on commuting, office wardrobe and other expenses], with some employers arguing that working from home is a benefit that should be offset by lower salaries."
Lee notes that the idea hasn't yet caught on that much in the US, "probably because of the tight labor market."
While the labor market is "tight," workers from home should use that tightness to their advantage when their bosses talk about "bringing them back to the office."
Well, OK ... but I'll have to be paid for my commute time.
Well, OK ... but I'll be requiring a gas allowance.
Well, OK ... but if there's going to be a dress code, you might want to start a line of credit and such at a local store, where you'll be paying for my neckties.
Well, OK ... but if you don't have a lot with "free" parking, you'll be paying for my spot.
If the job can be done from home, but the employer prefers having the employee at an office instead, that employer should be willing to cover the costs of said preference. And, while it's hard to find help anyway, probably will either pony up or agree to "work from home" terms, if the employee makes doing so a condition of continuing the relationship.
Especially if it's not just one employee here or there making it a matter of market negotiation rather than just doing whatever the boss wants.
No comments:
Post a Comment