is my employer being unreasonable?

BillJones

tir21 wrote: »

Its not first dibs if im in the group that qualifies for a pay rise. There is no reason for it to be "insider information". What is wrong with someone knowing that when the company is in a position to offer pay rises then they will be in the group yhat qualifies

Even if this really is the planned scheme, they are unlikely to knnow in advance exactly how far up the pay scale the rises will go. It will depend on how they share it, and how much there is. This meanns that you are basically bugging them for information that probably does not exist yet, and it's completely unreasonable of you to expect them to spend time and effort working out hypothetical numbers to keep you happy.

BillJones

mustang121 wrote: »

Quick question. If people don't get a pay rise to at least match inflation is that effectively a pay cut?

In real terms, yes, but as above, why is that seen as wrong? Sometimes people get rises above inflation, sometimes they get rises of below, and sometimes they get a cut in nominal terms.

There can be perfectly legitimate and fair reasons for this, for example if a management was particularly generous, and gave all of the company's profits back as salary. In this case, which iis the best ever scenario for workers, they'd see pay rise and fall as company fortunes waxed and waned.

mustang121

BillJones wrote: »

In real terms, yes, but as above, why is that seen as wrong? Sometimes people get rises above inflation, sometimes they get rises of below, and sometimes they get a cut in nominal terms.

There can be perfectly legitimate and fair reasons for this, for example if a management was particularly generous, and gave all of the company's profits back as salary. In this case, which iis the best ever scenario for workers, they'd see pay rise and fall as company fortunes waxed and waned.

Employers cants have it both ways. They should at least keep the salary to the same level of inflation. Pretty much Making it the same conditions as the initial contract. Unless they can justify that an employee doesn't deserve it or the company is in trouble

Any one, in any industry, no matter their seniority should automatically get a pay rise. *cough mps and bankers cough* pay rises should be subject to additional job responsibility, merit and education.

BillJones

mustang121 wrote: »

Employers cants have it both ways. They should at least keep the salary to the same level of inflation. Pretty much Making it the same conditions as the initial contract. Unless they can justify that an employee doesn't deserve it or the company is in trouble

Any one, in any industry, no matter their seniority should automatically get a pay rise. *cough mps and bankers cough* pay rises should be subject to additional job responsibility, merit and education.

Ok, two points here. The first is that bankers have seen pay absolutely slashed in recent years. I know traders who are 80% down on what they were once getting, so to imply otherwise is strange. Why do you believe that they are unaffected?

Secondly, why should employers give inflation matching pay rises? You've completely ignored, or failed to understand the point to which you responded; if a company distributes the entire bottom line as pay (which is incredibly generous), then where does the extra come from if revenue is down the following year?

Company revenue is not generally linked to inflation, so why should pay be?

Bantex_2

mustang121 wrote: »

Employers cants have it both ways. They should at least keep the salary to the same level of inflation. Pretty much Making it the same conditions as the initial contract. Unless they can justify that an employee doesn't deserve it or the company is in trouble

Any one, in any industry, no matter their seniority should automatically get a pay rise. *cough mps and bankers cough* pay rises should be subject to additional job responsibility, merit and education.

That is a matter of what contract has been agreed,

Southend1

BillJones wrote: »

Company revenue is not generally linked to inflation, so why should pay be?

Inflation is the increase in the prices of goods and services so I would absolutely dispute that company revenue is not linked to inflation.

Bantex_2

Southend1 wrote: »

Inflation is the increase in the prices of goods and services so I would absolutely dispute that company revenue is not linked to inflation.

That is complete rubbish and I suspect you already know it.

makeyourdaddyproud

Southend1 wrote: »

Inflation is the increase in the prices of goods and services so I would absolutely dispute that company revenue is not linked to inflation.

How on earth did you deduce that?

Southend1

makeyourdaddyproud wrote: »

How on earth did you deduce that?

Basic economic theory. Inflation is a persistent increase in the general price level of goods and services in an economy over a period of time.

Southend1

Bantex wrote: »

That is complete rubbish and I suspect you already know it.

I wonder what your understanding of inflation is?