Some employers have received that message loud and clear by offering remote or hybrid work options for new employees. But in many instances, there’s a catch: flexible work but at lower pay. 

Today, nearly half of managers anticipate challenges in meeting candidates’ compensation expectations. And when the gap between salary expectation and an offer is too great, many employers are negotiating remote and hybrid work to get candidates to sign on the dotted line, according to Robert Half’s recently published 2025 U.S. Hiring Outlook.

Some candidates accept 5% to 15% less pay in exchange for getting to work from home, Theresa L. Fesinstine, founder of human resources advisory peoplepower.ai, told Fortune. 

“There’s this unspoken exchange rate between flexibility and comp, and for some candidates, it’s worth a significant tradeoff,” said Fesinstine, who has more than two decades of leadership experience in HR. This is especially true “for those who value work-life balance or are saving on commute costs.”

The downside to paying remote workers less

There are inherent risks in offering job candidates lower salaries, even if it means getting the chance to work from home. Amy Spurling, founder and CEO of employee benefits reimbursement platform Compt, told Fortune she expects to see a second Great Resignation this year after hiring freezes, benefits cuts, and forced RTO policies in 2023 and 2024.

“If you’re trying to lowball remote workers, you’re about to face a harsh reality,” Spurling said. “2025 is going to be a ‘find out’ year for companies that thought they could use remote work or other ‘perks’ to replace competitive compensation and genuine employee support.” 

To wit, a 2024 report by PwC forecasts another resignation period with a 28% increase in the number of people who plan to change jobs, compared to 19% during the Great Resignation of 2022.

Plus, many workers see this as yet another pay gap issue. Sara Kobilka, a communications and education consultant, said paying remote workers less is a “dangerous trend.” Yet she took on a lower-paying job to escape a toxic work environment. 

“Yes, people have the freedom to apply for jobs that pay less than their current one because they value the freedom and flexibility of remote work,” Kobilka wrote in a LinkedIn post. “But that should not translate into unilaterally paying remote employees less.”

What’s more, Fesinstine argues, remote work “isn’t a perk anymore, but rather a standard operating model.” So attempting to describe remote work as a benefit doesn’t sit well with job candidates. 

“The shift to remote and hybrid work has rewritten the playbook for how companies negotiate pay, and frankly, many teams are struggling to adapt,” Fesinstine said. “It’s a balancing act—offering just enough flexibility to entice candidates without completely blowing up internal pay equity.”

Employers who aren’t providing remote work accommodations may need to incentivize in-office work in other ways, Michael Steinitz, senior executive director of professional talent solutions at Robert Half, told Fortune. This could include negotiating additional paid time off as part of their compensation package, he said. 

On the flip side, 76% of job candidates are willing to work fully in-office in exchange for a higher salary, Steinitz said, noting that finding from Robert Half’s research. Among those employees, the average raise they would request is about 23%, he said.

“Even in a softening market, candidates are maintaining high expectations around salary and flexibility,” Steinitz said. “Employers need to act quickly with competitive, well-rounded offers, and be prepared to negotiate—especially when seeking top-tier talent with specialized skills.”