Two in five employees in the UK would take a pay cut if they were offered better benefits such as income protection, according to a survey from MetLife UK.
The benefits company found that employees are increasingly looking for supportive perks to cover employee absence, or higher pension contributions, in place of higher salaries.
It found that 42% would assess annual leave allowances when looking at a potential new job, and 34% would like to see mental health support and wellness packages.
Thirty-seven per cent said financial bonuses were important to them and 35% said they would seek generous pension contributions. A third said income protection – a policy that would ensure they received some or all of their salary if forced to take time off sick – was a priority and 26% were looking for private health and/or dental care.
Financial support
Young people turning down jobs because of upfront costs
How to address the financial wellbeing support ‘perception gap’
Continuing on the wellbeing theme, 47% said that hybrid working and flexible working was important.
A survey by the CIPD and Simplyhealth last year found that UK employees were absent for 7.8 days on average, compared to a pre-pandemic rate of 5.8 days.
Separate research has shown that people who are able to work at home record the UK’s lowest levels of sickness absence.
Adrian Matthews, head of employee benefits at MetLife UK, said: “Benefits are becoming increasingly more important to employees, and rightly so. Competitive salaries are important, but businesses need to realise that it’s not the only thing candidates think about when assessing job opportunities.
“Employers need to look beyond pay cheques and assess options for wider support and protection to attract and retain the best people.”
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
The company now offers a limited term option on group income protection in order to make this a more affordable addition to employers’ benefits packages.
“Having the choice of a shorter duration of cover can reduce costs by over 50%, protecting employees for “the now”, whilst also protecting overheads,” he added.
