Remote* work has offered many employees a great deal over the past few years. Some have been earning London-level salaries while enjoying a lower cost of living in historically non-commuter towns or working from local cafés. But there’s a shift on the horizon. Employers are starting to re-evaluate those arrangements and salary expectations may begin to reflect that.
Why is the Landscape changing?
Before the pandemic, higher salaries were often tied to location. City-based roles came with higher pay not just because of the job, but because of the costs associated with commuting, renting, and working in urban environments. But now, the lines have blurred. Some remote workers are still on £100K salaries, while their colleagues in the office on the same salaries but paying a premium for the cost of living in a city plus huge transportation expenses.
Naturally, that’s raising questions. Employers are starting to ask, “Why are we still paying a location premium when the location isn’t part of the equation anymore?” And it’s a fair question. If someone is no longer navigating city commutes or paying for city living, is it time to reassess what that role is worth?
The Shift Is Already Happening
Many employers are already making changes. They’re looking closely at location-weighted salaries and whether they still make sense in a hybrid** or remote-first world. From their perspective, pay should reflect the value of the work being done, not outdated assumptions about where that work used to happen.
Interestingly, employees themselves are signalling they understand the trade-off. A joint study by Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and the University of Illinois found that 40% of workers would take a pay cut of at least 5% to keep working remotely. Around 9% would even accept a 20% reduction. That shows just how highly some people value flexibility and balance.
This Isn’t About Punishment, It’s About Practicality
It could be easy to interpret this as a fairness issue but for many businesses, it’s about financial sustainability and consistency. Salary adjustments aren’t necessarily about reducing pay; they’re about aligning it with the current reality of the role.
There are wider implications, too. Remote workers earning top-tier salaries have had an impact on local economies contributing to rising house prices in rural areas and reshaping demand for services. Employers, meanwhile, are contending with costly empty offices and expanding payrolls. Understandably, they’re looking at the numbers and reconsidering the status quo.
Why Office Presence Still Matters
This isn’t just about cost savings. Employers continue to believe that in-person working offers something extra – whether it’s spontaneous collaboration, mentorship opportunities, or a stronger sense of team culture. From their point of view, those benefits justify a higher salary for employees who are regularly present in the workplace and seemingly contribute more to the culture and success.
2025: A Year of Realignment
This year we’re likely to see more companies resetting expectations. Not out of spite, but because the world of work has changed and pay structures are catching up. For those who value the flexibility of remote work, a slightly lower salary might be a price worth paying. And for those happy to be back in the office, there may be new opportunities and rewards.
Ultimately, it comes down to choice. Flexibility or full pay? Presence or independence? The good news is that there’s room for both so long as we’re honest about what each is worth.
All I know is, it will happen, and you will need to choose.
*remote = never needed in an office
**Hybrid = fixed number of days in the office and WFH
Flexible = set number of days in the office and WFH but not fixed
Stay informed and stay ahead – subscribe to my newsletter for the latest updates and trends shaping the industry: Recruitment Report
