Only one that didn't get a raise after being on equal pay

DanRM

Hi, I'm looking for a bit of advice regarding a pay rise within my department. So I have worked at my company for 3 years, my first year I accepted the job on a lower salary than the other 3 people in my department under the same job role, this was agreed that at 6 months I will have a pay rise and then at 12 months I will be on equal pay to my colleagues.

At 12 months my old manager and team leader both agreed that it was time to bring me up to full pay, with my old manager retiring at the time and said he would like to see me at that level before he leaves, pushing for any training I had not taken to be completed before he left, which I did.

For the last 2 years I have been on equal pay to the other 3 people in my department, all of which do very similar if not the same jobs. (We will swap and change depending on who is nearing the end of their current job, or split higher quantity jobs between us).

A colleague has been pushing for a department wide raise for the last couple of months, saying that he will resign if we dont. The day after his first meeting about it I was called into the office where I was warned about how much time I spent talking to my colleague the day before he asked for a raise, (we were working on machines next to each other) this led me to believe that they think I'm pushing my colleague to act out.

I have since found out that my new manager has introduced a pay progression scheme last month, so that anyone who has worked there for 5 years or more has received a 10% pay rise last month.

The issue I have is that after being on equal pay for 2 years, this decision has singled me out being the only person having worked there for less than 5 years. I have asked if there was a reason behind this such as performance issues, they said it was to reward time served. I argued that I do equal work to the others and their response was that my team leader (the same one who agreed the original 12 month pay rise) said that my experience is not at the same level, even though he will give me the same skill level jobs as the others, and that I also have taken on extra responsibilities as they haven't replaced a team member that retired in the summer.

Am I right to feel singled out? And that this is a personal issue management has against me?

I have since been offered another job as although I enjoy the work that I do, I have felt the need to resign over the fact that I no longer feel that I'm being treated fairly within my team. I informed them of this job offer in a hope that they would come to some sort of agreement, but their response was simply "do what you got to do"

Apintplease

I really do think you are over thinking this

The company or department have decided to reward long service, you havent reached that point yet, its that simple

I worked for the NHS and long service - after five years - was rewarded by extra holiday days. So obviously when I started , although on the same pay as my colleagues I was a day or 3 short on the holidays. Time I left, I had so much holiday and stat days, if I planned it right I only worked half a year

Ive worked in other places where long service is rewarded by shares, discounts etc. Where I work right now, because of recruitment issues, we all got a very good pay rise - as an incentive not to go looking elsewhere, and its worked

in none of the places Ive worked has anyone had to negotiate their pay, there has always been a pay scale and its taken promotion work up it. Your place of work seems to have a flexible pay scale, up to each employee to negotiate . The long service pay award is a bonus

Jillanddy

Sorry - I agree with the previous poster. Whilst long service awards can and often are discriminatory in law, there is a specific exception to that, and that exception is set at five years. So basically, an employer can reward "long service" by giving an improved term at that point. I work in the public sector and our employers give 5 extra days leave a year to anyone who has done five or more years. 

I think the main learning points here are that you should never take on extra work without clarifying whether that gets adequately compensated; and that you should be prepared to have your bluff called. You wanted to to "increase your value" to the employer by threatening to leave, and they've told you that's fine and you should go. You now have backed yourself into a corner. You would have been treated the same as your colleagues - when you got to five years service. Now you have a new job, hopefully the pay that you wanted, but you have traded the job you liked and your two years continuous service for employment protection rights. 

TELLIT01

As others are saying, the OP hasn't been 'singled out' for different treatment.  The company is using a widely accepted, and legal, benchmark for recognising service.  Unfortunately for the OP they haven't reached it yet.  The OP can either accept the reality of that and wait another 2 years for the uplift, or accept the other job.

Going to an employer and basically saying "Give me more money or I'll leave" is rarely a successful bargaining tool.

TBagpuss

OP, it's not unfair, there are benefits to the company in having staff remain and it's legitimate to reward that.

Equally, while you may be doing similar tasks, it may well be that your lower level experience does impact on your work,  - being given tasks at a similar level  doesn't automatically mean that they are being performed t the same level - it's possible that your more experienced coworkers complete the takes more quickly, need less support or make fewer mistakes (they may not, but being given the same tasks, or having the same job title, id not the only indictor that you are performing at the same level)
It sound as though you have threatened to leave over this and they have called your bluff, and made clear that the policy is not going to change for you, so the ball is in your court, you either lave and the take the new job or you stay and accept that you don't yet qualify for the higher pay 

NCC1701-A

Quite common in NHS, 2 people doing exactly the same job, one with more years service gets extra leave and over 20% more pay.  E.g. Band 6 starting salary = £31,365, Band 6 after 8 years = £37,890.  Responsibilties and duties would be the same.

Sandtree

In several companies I've worked, people below a certain grade get extra days holiday after X years service up to a maximum (normally 30 days + BHs) - those above the grade tend to have the max from the outset so dont benefit.

Companies want a modest level of staff turnover and so long service rewards are a common way to try and reduce attrition 

Undervalued

TELLIT01 said:

As others are saying, the OP hasn't been 'singled out' for different treatment.  The company is using a widely accepted, and legal, benchmark for recognising service.  Unfortunately for the OP they haven't reached it yet.  The OP can either accept the reality of that and wait another 2 years for the uplift, or accept the other job.

Going to an employer and basically saying "Give me more money or I'll leave" is rarely a successful bargaining tool.

Plus, even if he had been "singled out", that would still be perfectly lawful unless he could show if was for one of the handful of legally protected reasons (e.g race, gender, trad union membership etc).

There is no legal right, ever, to a pay rise unless your pay falls below the national minimum wage. Otherwise it is a matter for negotiation.

Tigsteroonie

I also work in a government body with some employees having been here for thirty years (in its various guises). Longevity is rewarded, both through the accumulation of annual rises and extra days of holiday. If you compare two people in the same team doing the same role, there can be £10k and 2 days A/L between them just as a result of how long they have been working in the organisation.

Ten years ago as a newbie I thought it was unfair as we were doing the same job, now I'm at the other end of that scenario I think it's perfectly acceptable