Connect with us

Finance

Many workers would take a pay cut to work from home

Published

on

Coroimage | Moment | Getty Images

Many workers value remote work to such a degree that they’d take a pay cut to be able to work from home, even on a part-time basis, studies show.

The prevalence of remote work ballooned during the Covid-19 pandemic. Many experienced telework perhaps for the first time in their careers; employees cite work-life balance as by far the biggest perceived benefit, according to Pew Research Center.

Some researchers have quantified the financial value workers assign to telework.

For example, about 40% of workers say they’d accept a pay cut of at least 5% to keep their remote job, according to a recent study by researchers at Harvard University, Johns Hopkins University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

About 9% would trade at least 20% of their salaries to preserve telework, said researchers, who polled more than 2,000 workers.

We're in the 7th round of the return to office prize fight, says Korn Ferry's Alan Guarino

Put another way, workers see the ability to work from home — even two or three days a week — as equivalent to getting a raise, according to Nick Bloom, an economics professor at Stanford University who studies workplace management practices.

Data that Bloom has collected in recent years suggests the average worker equates remote work to about an 8% raise, he said.

“That figure seems remarkably stable” over time, Bloom said in an e-mail.

“For some subsets of workers you can find higher numbers,” relative to the pay cut they would accept, Bloom said.

For example, a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper published in January that looked at workers predominantly in the technology field found they’d accept an average 25% pay cut for a job that offers fully or partially remote work.

“The reality is: It is a very attractive feature of a job,” said Zoe Cullen, an assistant professor of business administration at Harvard Business School, who co-authored the NBER research.  

The paper examined data on almost 1,400 workers from the U.S. tech sector. The average person was 32 years old, and had about seven years of work experience. Researchers gathered data on the job offers individuals receive and the jobs they ultimately choose, with the average gig offering $239,000 a year in total compensation.

More from Personal Finance:
What the ‘mother of all trade wars’ can teach about tariffs
L.A. wildfire victims face financial anxiety amid recovery
How to check the status of your federal tax refund

Of course, not all Americans prefer out-of-office work.

About 41% of workers with the ability to telework — but who rarely do — say in-office work helps them feel more connected to co-workers, and 30% think in-person work helps with mentoring opportunities, according to Pew Research Center.

Working from home has also waned from its pandemic-era peak.

Big companies like Amazon, AT&T, Boeing, Dell Technologies, JPMorgan Chase, UPS and The Washington Post have initiated return-to-office mandates for at least some employees.

President Donald Trump also issued an order Jan. 20 to terminate remote work for federal employees and require full-time in-office attendance, with some exceptions.

That said, on a national scale, employers don’t seem to be retrenching en masse, according to labor economists.

The number of paid days worked from home during the workweek has held steady for the past two years, at between 25% and 30% — more than triple the pre-Covid rate, according to WFH Research.

Employees aren’t the only ones who get a benefit: Remote work is also a profitable arrangement for businesses, according to labor economists.

For example, employers may save money on real estate by downsizing office space. They may also hire job candidates from across the country, potentially at a lower relative salary, depending on geography.

Workers with the ability to work from home also tend to quit less frequently, thereby reducing company spending on expensive functions like hiring, recruitment and training, Bloom said.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Finance

The Fed is stuck in neutral as it watches how Trump’s policies play out

Published

on

U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell testifies before a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing on “The Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to the Congress,” at Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., Feb. 11, 2025. 

Craig Hudson | Reuters

The popular narrative among Federal Reserve policymakers these days is that policy is “well-positioned” to adjust to any upside or downside risks ahead. However, it might be more accurate to say that policy is stuck in position.

With an abundance of unknowns swirling through the economy and the halls of Washington, the only gear the central bank really can be in these days is neutral as it begins what could be a long wait for certainty on what’s actually ahead.

“In recent weeks, we’ve heard not only enthusiasm — particularly from banks, about possible shifts in tax and regulatory policies — but also widespread apprehension about future trade and immigration policy,” Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic said in a blog post. “These crosscurrents inject still more complexity into policymaking.”

Bostic’s comments came during an active week for what is known on Wall Street as “Fedspeak,” or the chatter that happens between policy meetings from Chair Jerome Powell, central bank governors and regional presidents.

Officials who have spoken frequently described policy as “well-positioned” — the language is now a staple of post-meeting statements. But increasingly, they are expressing caution about the volatility coming from President Donald Trump’s aggressive trade and economic agenda, as well as other factors that could influence policy.

The impact tariffs could have on growth is being underpriced, says PGIM’s Tom Porcelli

“Uncertainty” is an increasingly common theme. In fact, Bostic titled his Thursday blog post “Uncertainty Calls for Caution, Humility in Policymaking.” A day earlier, the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee released minutes from the Jan. 28-29 meeting, with a dozen references to the uncertain climate in the document.

The minutes specifically cited “elevated uncertainty regarding the scope, timing, and potential economic effects of possible changes to trade, immigration, fiscal, and regulatory policies.”

Uncertainty factors into the Fed’s decision making in two ways: the impact that it has on the employment picture, which has been relatively stable, and inflation, which has been easing but could rise again as consumers and business leaders get spooked about the impact tariffs could have on prices.

Missing the target

The Fed targets inflation at 2%, a goal that has remained elusive for going on four years.

“Right now, I see the risks of inflation staying above target as skewed to the upside,” St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem told reporters Thursday. “My baseline scenario is one where inflation continues to converge towards 2%, providing monetary policy remains modestly restrictive, and that will take time. I think there is a potential for inflation to remain high and activity to slow. … That’s an alternative scenario, not a baseline scenario, but I’m attentive to it.”

The operative in Musalem’s comment is that policy holds at “modestly restrictive,” which is where he considers the current level of the fed funds rate between 4.25%-4.5%. Bostic was a little less explicit on feeling the need to keep rates on hold, but emphasized that “this is no time for complacency” and noted that “additional threats to price stability may emerge.”

Chicago Federal Reserve President Austan Goolsbee, thought to be among the least hawkish FOMC members when it comes to inflation, was more measured in his assessment of tariffs and did not offer commentary in separate appearances, including one on CNBC, on where he thinks rates should go.

“If you’re just thinking about tariffs, it depends how many countries are they going to apply to, and how big are they going to be, and the more it looks like a Covid-sized shock, the more nervous you should be,” Goolsbee said.

Many risks ahead

More broadly, though, the January minutes indicated a Fed highly attuned to potential shocks and not interested in testing the waters with any further interest rate moves. The meeting summary pointedly noted that committee members want “further progress on inflation before making additional adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate.”

There’s also more than just tariffs and inflation to worry about.

The minutes characterized the risks to financial stability as “notable,” specifically in the area of leverage and the level of long-duration debt that banks are holding.

Prominent economist Mark Zandi — not normally an alarmist — said in a panel discussion presented by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation that he worries about dangers to the $46.2 trillion U.S. bond market.

“In my view, the biggest risk is that we see a major sell off in the bond market,” said Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “The bond market feels incredibly fragile to me. The plumbing is broken. The primary dealers aren’t keeping up with the amount of debt outstanding.”

“There’s just so many things coming together that I think there’s a very significant threat that at some point over the next 12 months, we see a major sell-off in the bond market,” he added.

In this climate, he said, there’s scant chance for the Fed to cut rates — though markets are pricing in the potential for a half percentage point in reductions by the end of the year.

That’s wishful thinking considering tariffs and other intangibles hanging over the Fed’s head, Zandi said.

“I just don’t see the Fed cutting interest rates here until you get a better feel about inflation coming back to target,” he said. “The economy came into 2025 in a pretty good spot. Feels like it’s performing well. Should be able to weather a lot of storms. But it feels like there’s a lot of storms coming.”

There's no compelling reason to cut rates, says Fmr. Cleveland Fed President Loretta Mester

Continue Reading

Finance

Alibaba rose on China AI hopes. Where analysts see the stock heading

Published

on

Continue Reading

Finance

Walmart sell-off bizarre, buy stock despite tariff risks: Bill Simon

Published

on

Walmart's stock drop after earnings is bizarre, says former CEO Bill Simon

Walmart stock may be a steal.

Former Walmart U.S. CEO Bill Simon contends the retailer’s stock sell-off tied to a slowing profit growth forecast and tariff fears is creating a major opportunity for investors.

“I absolutely thought their guidance was pretty strong given the fact that… nobody knows what’s going to happen with tariffs,” he told CNBC’s “Fast Money” on Thursday, the day Walmart reported fiscal fourth-quarter results.

But even if U.S. tariffs against Canada and Mexico move forward, Simon predicts “nothing” should happen to Walmart.

“Ultimately, the consumer decides whether there’s a tariff or not,” said Simon. “There’s a tariff on avocados from Mexico. Do you have guacamole with your chips or do you have salsa and queso where there is no tariff?”

Plus, Simon, who’s now on the Darden Restaurants board and is the chairman at Hanesbrands, sees Walmart as a nimble retailer.

“The big guys, Walmart, Costco, Target, Amazon… have the supply and the sourcing capability to mitigate tariffs by redirecting the product – bringing it in from different places [and] developing their own private labels,” said Simon. “Those guys will figure out tariffs.”

Walmart shares just saw their worst weekly performance since May 2022 — tumbling almost 9%. The stock price fell more than 6% on its earnings day alone. It was the stock’s worst daily performance since November 2023.

Simon thinks the sell-off is bizarre.

“I thought if you hit your numbers and did well and beat your earnings, things would usually go well for you in the market. But little do we know. You got to have some magic dust,” he said. “I don’t know how you could have done much better for the quarter.”

It’s a departure from his stance last May on “Fast Money” when he warned affluent consumers were creating a “bubble” at Walmart. It came with Walmart shares hitting record highs. He noted historical trends pointed to an eventual shift back to service from convenience and price.

But now Simon thinks the economic and geopolitical backdrop is so unprecedented, higher-income consumers may shop at Walmart permanently.

“If you liked that story yesterday before the earnings release, you should love it today because it’s… cheaper,” said Simon.

Walmart stock is now down 10% from its all-time high hit on Feb. 14. However, it’s still up about 64% over the past 52 weeks.

Sign up for the Spotlight newsletter, a hand curated collection of video clips selected by CNBC’s top editors and producers. Your daily recap of top business highlights and leading stories.

Disclaimer

Continue Reading

Trending