Accounting For The Cost Of Going To Work

Time spent in peak hour traffic, unreliable (and crowded) public transport, the cost of petrol and the ever-elusive quest for a parking spot — the daily commute has long been synonymous with inconvenience and expense.

But as companies urge their employees to reclaim their desks, a fresh wave of calculations has entered the scene and many are now meticulously tallying up the cost of heading into the office compared with working from home.

“Getting back into the office can be great for productivity but it comes at a cost to workers,” says Angus Kidman, money expert at comparison website Finder.

“Whether it’s paying for parking or fares to catch public transport, commuting into the office can be a hefty cost for consumers travelling into the office every day.

“But while remote work eliminates the need for commuting and transport costs, there are still plenty of other costs to be considered working from home.”

It’s no secret that patterns of work have changed drastically since the early days of 2020.

Where once we were content with the daily trip into the office — complete with full corporate wardrobe, coffees, lunch and drinks after work — the pandemic highlighted the ease with which many of us were able to work from home. Fast forward a few years and hybrid work arrangements are now more commonplace. However, in recent months we’ve seen many larger companies beginning to put their foot down on flexible working arrangements.

The truth is that thanks to the rising cost of living and those unrelenting interest rates many Australians are now paying more regardless of where they choose to work. But it seems a conservative estimate of around $10,000 per year to go to the office is the norm when you consider travel, food and your work wardrobe.

Research from Finder reveals consumers spend $122 per week on the commute which amounts to $5,856 over a 48-week work year.

Once we’re at work the spending doesn’t stop, with data indicating Australian workers spend around $1548 a year in their lunch hour — and that doesn’t include your morning coffee.

Commutes and coffees aside, the other big expense with working from the office is undoubtedly the corporate wardrobe although, according to experts, these days it’s more acceptable to be a little less corporate than we may have been used to pre-pandemic.

“Even prior to COVID we were witnessing a more relaxed workplace dress code and now that people have had a taste of dressing more casually, we won’t be in a rush to get back to the corporate that we used to know,” says stylist and corporate image consultant Caitlin Stewart.

“Designers have amended their offerings to reflect greater comfort and versatility in their garments so when curated carefully additional comfort elements can be implemented and still look professional.”

Stewart says a corporate wardrobe update can cost anywhere between $3000-$5000.

She also says while most men are still opting for suits in a corporate environment, the days of office heels and a full face of makeup for women are definitely over.

“A woman can look exceptionally polished in professional, flat loafers and a light face of makeup or just a clean and fresh face.”

Naturally, the actual costs people incur in the office or at home will depend on their specific circumstance but for Simon Kuestenmacher, co-founder of The Demographics Group, the bottom line is clear.

“There’s no question working from home is a cheaper option for many employees — especially in the capital cities,” he says.

Corporate image consultant Caitlin Stewart says comfort dressing can still be professional for women as well as men.

“There’s no tolls, no public transport fees, cheaper lunch, and you can get away with a smaller work wardrobe. Of course, working from home can incur extra costs but these are minimal compared with what it costs to actually physically go into the office each day.”

Undoubtedly, the biggest out- of-pocket expense in the current economic climate when working from home is increased electricity usage and associated bills.

Data from Finder estimates the extra electricity used when working from home will add between $324 in summer and $340 in winter to the average quarterly electricity bill — or an average of around $110 per month.

“You can claim a portion of those costs through tax, but the rules around that are being tightened this year,” warns Kidman.

According to figures from the ATO, almost nine million Australians claim about $22 billion worth of work-related expenses, many relating to working from home.

Other costs to consider in an home office include furniture, equipment, and software. However, according to Kuestenmacher, companies will often foot part of that bill for employees.

Further, experts say the savings associated with working from home are not just financial.

“One of the drivers for people to continue working from home is the cost of lost time that many people experience because of long commutes,” says Dr Penelope Williams from QUT’s Business School and the Centre for Decent Work and Industry.

“For many, the extra time they get back by not travelling to and from another workplace, not only helps them achieve better work-life balance, but also increases their productivity.

“It’s important to consider the financial aspect just as much as the impact of social connections, career advancement, networking and development opportunities.”

That being said, Williams points out that there are physical and mental benefits and challenges for both office and WFH environments.

“It’s really dependent on the needs of the individual and the requirements of the workplace.”

LONDON— Anglo American on Friday rejected a $39 billion takeover proposal from rival BHP, saying the bid “significantly undervalues” the company and setting the stage for a potential bidding war.

London-listed Anglo American said the unsolicited proposal, which was made earlier this month and which became public this week, features an unattractive structure that is too uncertain and complex .

Anglo American Chairman Stuart Chambers said the company stands to benefit from its portfolio of assets, including copper, that are likely to experience growth from trends around the energy transition. BHP’s bid, Chambers said, is opportunistic and dilutive for shareholders.

BHP’s all-share offer valued Anglo American at about $38.8 billion, and would have been contingent upon Anglo American spinning off shareholdings in two South African-listed units. The proposal represented a premium of about 31%, not including the South African-listed units, based on Tuesday’s closing prices.

Some analysts had predicted Anglo would find the bid too low and are expecting BHP to return with another. BHP has until May 22 to make a firm offer, though the deadline can be extended. Industry participants expect other large miners to also take a run at Anglo, whose share price has dropped since 2022 as lower commodity prices have ripped through the industry.

A tie-up between BHP and Anglo American, which would be the largest mining deal on record, would illustrate the growing importance of copper, a metal essential to clean-energy products , to a sector that has long relied on Chinese industrialisation to boost profits.

Copper represents some 30% of Anglo American’s output, while BHP counts a majority stake in Chile’s Escondida, the world’s biggest copper mine, among its assets. BHP bought Australian copper-and-gold miner Oz Minerals for $6.34 billion in May last year, representing its biggest acquisition since 2011.

Copper prices are up some 15% so far this year, reflecting expectations that demand for the metal will rise as the world decarbonises and supply will be constrained. Electric vehicles and wind farms use copper in much greater quantities than gasoline-powered cars and coal-fired power stations.

Anglo American has been reviewing its assets in recent months, and has held early conversations with potential buyers for its storied De Beers diamond unit, which it values at more than $7 billion, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

Activist firm Elliott Investment Management holds a stake in Anglo American worth roughly $1 billion, accumulated over several months and before BHP’s move on the miner, according to a person familiar with the matter. The firm is widely known for its campaigns to push companies for change to boost their stock prices. Its view of the Anglo American holding couldn’t be learned.

That said, a jump in Anglo American’s share price following BHP’s takeover offer indicates Elliott has already profited from its holding, potentially reducing any incentive for it to take any action until the outcome of BHP’s bid becomes clearer.

Anglo’s stock on Friday traded above the implied value of BHP’s offer, indicating the market expects a higher bid to emerge.

Accounting For The Cost Of Going To Work

It’s the last piece in the puzzle as employers entice fiscally conscious staff to return to the office

U.K.-listed mining giant’s chairman says the proposal undervalues the company