Discussing your salary with co-workers

Discussing your salary with co-workers

Author
Discussion

DrummerBen

Original Poster:

72 posts

155 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
Is this ever a good idea? It’s not something I do because talking about money can be a bit classless plus I try and keep my cards close to my chest.

However I only work in a small office and some people do talk and compare theirs, this resulted in one person resigning due to having more experience and time served at the company yet being paid less than others (only £800 a year less but apparently there was no money left in the budget to pay him fairly).

This has spiralled a bit further recently when someone left a list of salaries in a place where they shouldn't have and now it’s spread like a rash.

What I find totally baffling is how a group of people who all do the same job can all be paid vastly different figures. The salary ranges from £20k to £50k for exactly the same job, it’s irrational.

I’m in the middle of those figures although I’d still consider this below average for the position. I’ve accused management of adopting age related pay bands, yes age related not experienced.

I know everyone likes to think highly of themselves but when pushed management have told me “you can’t pay someone in their twenties 50 grand, that’s just wrong, that’s a family man’s salary”.

What extra experience do they have that warrants that sort of difference? What do they bring to the table that nobody else can? Why are they unable to complete their work without me helping them?

"look when you get older you earn more money whether you are good at your job or not", came the answer in a patronising tone.

davepoth

29,395 posts

198 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
It's much more common in other countries. And I think it really does help; at least it certainly focuses the mind of management on appearing to be fair.

p1stonhead

25,489 posts

166 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
Age doesn't come into it OP they are fobbing you off - My friend works in finance and earns five times that at 25

If you can do the job as well as someone else, you can expect to be able to achieve the same money.

Being able to, and actually getting, are very different in reality.

If you don't push as hard at interview stage you won't get as much. Not disclosing salaries is a practice which benefits the company the most as people therefore won't come looking for more.

Life is unfair. Salaries are unfair.
Negotiate harder.

Edited by p1stonhead on Wednesday 25th March 19:45

DrummerBen

Original Poster:

72 posts

155 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
You don’t get paid what you are worth you get paid what you negotiate, this I know.

My thread was more of a rant, but I’d be interested in other people’s opinions.



mike9009

6,917 posts

242 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
This is a tricky one.

Firstly, who on earth left the salaries of staff in a public place? Who spread it round? Were other personal details 'published'?

There definitely sounds like a case for age discrimination - although it can be difficult to prove. The market should decide the salaries - a bit like energy supply - if enough customers/ employees switch then the energy supplier/ management of the business have to change their pricing structure/ wages. Without this (people voting with their feet), there won't be a catalyst to change.

I ran a small engineering team, which equally had a disparity of pay. Through development reviews, target setting and managing expectations I was able to slowly reduce the disparity (it did feel grossly unfair when I started). It is always difficult for a business, especially those that are paying below the 'going rate'. We found it difficult to attract new talent so needed to pay appropriately - but this left a chasm between existing experienced staff and those new starters. It was tough convincing higher management about the pay increments, but quantifiable data about the worth of individuals (new business generated/ savings offered) can be a powerful tool - along with the inability to recruit the required skills.

Therefore you need to have a sensible discussion about this. It is tricky now that everyone knows each other salaries. Money is not a good motivator but can be a de-motivator. Is your direct manager approachable about this? Are you given PDRs, feedback, targets, additional training?

It has always been an issue in the companies I have worked at, as pay grades/ scales are so wide, experience/ age/ training/ qualifications are interchangeable and pay is seemingly governed by negotiation skills rather than talent.

Just my general ramblings - but an open discussion is required.


Mike


L555BAT

1,427 posts

209 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
I think discussing it with anyone, colleagues or not, will result in unhappiness.

The unfairness reasons behind it are always there, so brining them into the open is going to cause tears.

Where I work, discussing salary is gross misconduct. Never heard anyone doing it and I doubt it would get you fired (unless they were already looking for a reason), but if caught I'd expect it to be one of those things that cause a zero bonus that year with no explanation.

DrummerBen

Original Poster:

72 posts

155 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
mike9009 said:
This is a tricky one.

Firstly, who on earth left the salaries of staff in a public place? Who spread it round? Were other personal details 'published'?

There definitely sounds like a case for age discrimination - although it can be difficult to prove. The market should decide the salaries - a bit like energy supply - if enough customers/ employees switch then the energy supplier/ management of the business have to change their pricing structure/ wages. Without this (people voting with their feet), there won't be a catalyst to change.

I ran a small engineering team, which equally had a disparity of pay. Through development reviews, target setting and managing expectations I was able to slowly reduce the disparity (it did feel grossly unfair when I started). It is always difficult for a business, especially those that are paying below the 'going rate'. We found it difficult to attract new talent so needed to pay appropriately - but this left a chasm between existing experienced staff and those new starters. It was tough convincing higher management about the pay increments, but quantifiable data about the worth of individuals (new business generated/ savings offered) can be a powerful tool - along with the inability to recruit the required skills.

Therefore you need to have a sensible discussion about this. It is tricky now that everyone knows each other salaries. Money is not a good motivator but can be a de-motivator. Is your direct manager approachable about this? Are you given PDRs, feedback, targets, additional training?

It has always been an issue in the companies I have worked at, as pay grades/ scales are so wide, experience/ age/ training/ qualifications are interchangeable and pay is seemingly governed by negotiation skills rather than talent.

Just my general ramblings - but an open discussion is required.


Mike
Very good post so thank you for that.

The document in question contained salaries, the salary rise budget for departments, employee talent scores and the calculation for working out pay rises.

We've been recruiting new people recently and the job adverts pay more than what the majority of us are on, yet still low for the market and as such we've not really had many applicants!

I think one of the problems we have is the pay review scheme implemented by the shareholder doesn't allow for big rises to get people where they should be - this is especially apparent when people get promoted and the system won't allow for an increase in remuneration.

For example say the manager of 5 employees is given £5000 to increase remuneration to their subordinates as they see fit. They could give raise 1 persons salary justifiable by £5000 but then this would leave absolutely nothing for the others.

So either you all get buttons or none at all...

mike9009

6,917 posts

242 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
DrummerBen said:
mike9009 said:
This is a tricky one.

Firstly, who on earth left the salaries of staff in a public place? Who spread it round? Were other personal details 'published'?

There definitely sounds like a case for age discrimination - although it can be difficult to prove. The market should decide the salaries - a bit like energy supply - if enough customers/ employees switch then the energy supplier/ management of the business have to change their pricing structure/ wages. Without this (people voting with their feet), there won't be a catalyst to change.

I ran a small engineering team, which equally had a disparity of pay. Through development reviews, target setting and managing expectations I was able to slowly reduce the disparity (it did feel grossly unfair when I started). It is always difficult for a business, especially those that are paying below the 'going rate'. We found it difficult to attract new talent so needed to pay appropriately - but this left a chasm between existing experienced staff and those new starters. It was tough convincing higher management about the pay increments, but quantifiable data about the worth of individuals (new business generated/ savings offered) can be a powerful tool - along with the inability to recruit the required skills.

Therefore you need to have a sensible discussion about this. It is tricky now that everyone knows each other salaries. Money is not a good motivator but can be a de-motivator. Is your direct manager approachable about this? Are you given PDRs, feedback, targets, additional training?

It has always been an issue in the companies I have worked at, as pay grades/ scales are so wide, experience/ age/ training/ qualifications are interchangeable and pay is seemingly governed by negotiation skills rather than talent.

Just my general ramblings - but an open discussion is required.


Mike
Very good post so thank you for that.

The document in question contained salaries, the salary rise budget for departments, employee talent scores and the calculation for working out pay rises.

We've been recruiting new people recently and the job adverts pay more than what the majority of us are on, yet still low for the market and as such we've not really had many applicants!

I think one of the problems we have is the pay review scheme implemented by the shareholder doesn't allow for big rises to get people where they should be - this is especially apparent when people get promoted and the system won't allow for an increase in remuneration.

For example say the manager of 5 employees is given £5000 to increase remuneration to their subordinates as they see fit. They could give raise 1 persons salary justifiable by £5000 but then this would leave absolutely nothing for the others.

So either you all get buttons or none at all...
Unfortunately this did mean that some of the higher earners got buttons for a few years, as did some who did not perform (0% in a few cases). But it was the only way to reduce some of the disparity.... frown Hence managing expectations is also key.... It could lead to some difficult reviews, but the only real way to handle it for the longer term.....

DrummerBen

Original Poster:

72 posts

155 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
mike9009 said:
DrummerBen said:
mike9009 said:
This is a tricky one.

Firstly, who on earth left the salaries of staff in a public place? Who spread it round? Were other personal details 'published'?

There definitely sounds like a case for age discrimination - although it can be difficult to prove. The market should decide the salaries - a bit like energy supply - if enough customers/ employees switch then the energy supplier/ management of the business have to change their pricing structure/ wages. Without this (people voting with their feet), there won't be a catalyst to change.

I ran a small engineering team, which equally had a disparity of pay. Through development reviews, target setting and managing expectations I was able to slowly reduce the disparity (it did feel grossly unfair when I started). It is always difficult for a business, especially those that are paying below the 'going rate'. We found it difficult to attract new talent so needed to pay appropriately - but this left a chasm between existing experienced staff and those new starters. It was tough convincing higher management about the pay increments, but quantifiable data about the worth of individuals (new business generated/ savings offered) can be a powerful tool - along with the inability to recruit the required skills.

Therefore you need to have a sensible discussion about this. It is tricky now that everyone knows each other salaries. Money is not a good motivator but can be a de-motivator. Is your direct manager approachable about this? Are you given PDRs, feedback, targets, additional training?

It has always been an issue in the companies I have worked at, as pay grades/ scales are so wide, experience/ age/ training/ qualifications are interchangeable and pay is seemingly governed by negotiation skills rather than talent.

Just my general ramblings - but an open discussion is required.


Mike
Very good post so thank you for that.

The document in question contained salaries, the salary rise budget for departments, employee talent scores and the calculation for working out pay rises.

We've been recruiting new people recently and the job adverts pay more than what the majority of us are on, yet still low for the market and as such we've not really had many applicants!

I think one of the problems we have is the pay review scheme implemented by the shareholder doesn't allow for big rises to get people where they should be - this is especially apparent when people get promoted and the system won't allow for an increase in remuneration.

For example say the manager of 5 employees is given £5000 to increase remuneration to their subordinates as they see fit. They could give raise 1 persons salary justifiable by £5000 but then this would leave absolutely nothing for the others.

So either you all get buttons or none at all...
Unfortunately this did mean that some of the higher earners got buttons for a few years, as did some who did not perform (0% in a few cases). But it was the only way to reduce some of the disparity.... frown Hence managing expectations is also key.... It could lead to some difficult reviews, but the only real way to handle it for the longer term.....
Thanks for sharing your experiences.

Normally at a minimum everyone would get about 3% for inflation although under our previous shareholder bigger pay rises were no problem.

Our new one however has a calculation (which is extremely complex) which if applied evenly amongst departments comes out to about 2% frown

Muzzer79

9,805 posts

186 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
There's 2 other people on this planet who know my salary - my wife and my boss

No-one else's business. I negotiate what I'm worth and have no interest in what others get

mike9009

6,917 posts

242 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
DrummerBen said:
Thanks for sharing your experiences.

Normally at a minimum everyone would get about 3% for inflation although under our previous shareholder bigger pay rises were no problem.

Our new one however has a calculation (which is extremely complex) which if applied evenly amongst departments comes out to about 2% frown
That's not unheard of, a generic 2% increase would have been put into the budget for the year. How that 2% is divided up is up to the management team. In fairness, having a mechanism (calculation) is one step ahead of many companies (IME).

As part of the management team, we used to calibrate the individual reviews by managers, as some (including me smile) would score higher than others.... (I just had a very talented team with an excellent manager!!). But it was fair.

My last company in recent times (since 2009) has not had a generic increase above inflation (although with inflation at 0% that may change....). Not many people have left, except for me smile , but I left for 'other' reasons.......

Mike

DuraAce

4,240 posts

159 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
Ours are published online, everyone can see what everyone else gets paid.

SkinnyPete

1,411 posts

148 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
DuraAce said:
Ours are published online, everyone can see what everyone else gets paid.
Do you work for the BBC? As per the recent thread on here.

DuraAce

4,240 posts

159 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
No I'm afraid not.

SteveS Cup

1,996 posts

159 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
I've currently got this issue with 2 members of staff at my place. 1 is an administrator on my team and the other is the admin guy within HR who I go to the gym with.

There's a £3000 difference in there salaries which he knows about as he wrote her salary increase letter!

It's a ridiculous situation and proves he's not right for the role but he is now interviewing elsewhere.

I do believe in having salary brackets which allow small increases for performance before promotions. The above situation should never of happened. £3000 may not seem much but it's 20% of his salary!

brickwall

5,192 posts

209 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
At my place the basic (before-bonus) salaries are the same for everyone of a given grade. Makes life much simpler.

Sheepshanks

32,519 posts

118 months

Wednesday 25th March 2015
quotequote all
DrummerBen said:
What I find totally baffling is how a group of people who all do the same job can all be paid vastly different figures. The salary ranges from £20k to £50k for exactly the same job, it’s irrational.
I've worked in places where there's been a range, but nothing like that kind of scale of difference - that seems immense.

Also if your salaries are below the industry average, how on earth do you hang on to the people on £20-30K?

DrummerBen

Original Poster:

72 posts

155 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
Sheepshanks said:
DrummerBen said:
What I find totally baffling is how a group of people who all do the same job can all be paid vastly different figures. The salary ranges from £20k to £50k for exactly the same job, it’s irrational.
I've worked in places where there's been a range, but nothing like that kind of scale of difference - that seems immense.

Also if your salaries are below the industry average, how on earth do you hang on to the people on £20-30K?
We do lose people in the lower bracket, but most hang on for a few years with the promise of a huge rise which never comes.

The experience is good though and sets people up well for an identical role at a different company.

ChasW

2,135 posts

201 months

Thursday 26th March 2015
quotequote all
OP

Such a disparity would cause a real problem for the employer if it reflected a gender or race bias, ie females with the same qualifications/experience being paid less than males or vice versa.

Having worked in a number of companies and had to manage this situation as best as I could it's virtually impossible to achieve parity unless you have zero staff turnover, all staff performing more or less equally and there is sufficient budget to correct anomalies and keep pace with external rates. I have only ever worked one company where sufficient management attention and budget were applied to ensuring that rewards were fair. It was a strenuous exercise for those involved. In my last company we partly solved the problem through a performance bonus system. We used the salary budget to ensure, as best we could, that there was parity between employees at the same level etc and then use the proceeds of company over-performance to reward those that had over-achieved that year. Consistently poor performers would end up with a zero increase and zero bonus and be performance managed out. Steady people would get a salary increase and a modest bonus. Stellar performers would get a aalary increase and big bonus and be on a path to promotion.

I can quite understand that in poorly managed companies the reality is much different.

okgo

37,846 posts

197 months

Friday 27th March 2015
quotequote all
swerni said:
Sorry but rofl
Of all the reasons to give, that is a brilliant one.