0

One of the employers in my knowledge who was listed twice in a row in Top 50 Great Places to work in India had delayed salary hike for entire batch of fresh recruits after their completion 1 year of successful service.

Well, the employer confirmed all candidates in that batch as permanent but kept delaying on promise of salary hike immediately after completion of 12 months of probation period. It was delayed for 4 months.

For every month delayed, when asked; they advised to wait till end of month and said it was due to system issues. Was it the software system or the management system they were talking about!, no idea. But definitely it wasn't software system as there were lot of new joiners had joined within 4 months and their salaries were processed without any issues.

After long wait of 4 months, they finally rolled-out hike letter which was effective right from next day of completion of 12 months. But for candidates who resigned after confirmation but before others got hike, those were not given any hike.

This is the worst politics, most unethical and unprofessional employer in my case study.

From their past history of regular annual salary increments, it seems they follow same strategy by delaying everyone's salary at least by two months.

How should we deal with such employer?

closed as off-topic by Philip Kendall, Masked Man, keshlam, Xavier J, gnat Jan 14 '17 at 21:03

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • You may also want to unlink your employer from your Stack Exchange profile if you're going to post things like this, or you'll very soon find they're your former employer. – Philip Kendall Jan 14 '17 at 21:16
  • 1
    and they did backdate the raise which indicates its a mistake and not anything shady – Neuromancer Jan 14 '17 at 22:25
  • Don't "remove" your question by blanking it, follow the proper process. You cannot remove a question that has upvoted answers. If you want to dissociate your profile from the question, use the "Contact Us" form and ask SE employees to do it. – Masked Man Jan 15 '17 at 8:34
  • 1
    While four months is a bit long, it's not unusual that raises are delayed, and if the raise is backdated, everything is fine. And it's not unusual if people who have left the company before the raise don't get it. – gnasher729 Jan 15 '17 at 18:44
  • 1
    I would note that the people who resigned after being made permanent but before the salary increase was formally announced probably are entitled to their backdated salary for the period between being made permanent and their having left. But that's a whole other issue. – Jonathon Cowley-Thom Jan 18 '17 at 10:04
1

How should we deal with such employer?

If it bothers you that much, find another employer. Otherwise just live with it.

Trying to work out the pay rise of each individual employee isn't trivial. The company will need to work out how much they can afford in total for pay rises. Then evaluate each employee's performance against their targets. Then normalise the result, so that employees across departments are treated equally (you don't want one manager declaring that all their employees are above average). Then work out the magic formula to work out each employee's rise. Then do all the paperwork and payroll administration.

If there's any other re-organisation going on at the same time, then that's bound to delay things.

I've had my pay rises delayed before. In the grand scheme of things, it really didn't matter. I still got paid on time, and my pay rise was backdated.

  • Thanks everyone for your detailed explanation about this. – anon Jan 15 '17 at 6:51
3

How should we deal with such employer?

In a world of dreams, the employer would give you the salary hikes on time, provide candid feedback on your performance, look after your career growth, and keep all the promises that they made when they hired you. We do not live in a world of dreams, we live in the painful real world, where it is all about business, and promises are of secondary (or no) importance.

The employer is not under any obligation to increase your salary after 12 months. It all depends on the business results when they can give you a salary hike (if at all), and how much. If you are unhappy with your salary, find another employer who would make you happy and leave.

This system of voting with your feet works fairly well in practice, and I don't see much of a serious problem that needs to be addressed here. If enough employees leave due to the lackadaisical attitude of the employer, their business would be affected, and they would be forced to take salary hikes more seriously, because:

  • Hiring is expensive. Beyond a certain threshold, they would find it cheaper to give better salaries on time to current employees than hiring new people to replace the people leaving.
  • Reputation is priceless for business. Word does spread around, and as more and more people start running away, it builds a bad reputation, making it even more difficult to hire new people.

    Think about all the companies whose share values tanked overnight when their executive was alleged to have been involved in some scam. The only thing that matters to a company more than their business is their reputation.

  • What is wrong with expecting what you are promised? If the employer thinks that this person's performance wasn't good enough to justify a raise, then he should give a clear feedback and explain this instead of having them wait for another month with unreliable reasons.So that the person can focus on his job with knowing what to do to get a raise instead of wondering in the dark. Your answers is really destructive sir. – melis Jan 14 '17 at 21:20
  • "What is wrong with expecting what you are promised?" There is nothing wrong about it. Employer "should" do this and do that, but what will you do if they don't? Keep fighting against them month after month? Complain about it on the internet to random strangers? None of that is going to help. I am just bringing the OP back into the real world from his world of dreams, nothing destructive about it. – Masked Man Jan 15 '17 at 1:57
  • Masked man speaks about bitter truth and I'm agree with him. Although I also agree with Melis, that they should have given clear feedback. This case happened with my friends and his entire batch even after 90% of them received annual rating as "Exceeds" right on same day of completion of 12 months. @Masked:Along with focus on career, I think making note of workplace politics and professionalism will help me decide how to deal with these situations, in fact I'd see what's coming ahead and plan accordingly. But its also true not to care about it too much and focus on career. Thanks! – anon Jan 15 '17 at 6:48
  • @AniruddhaKalburgi Yes, you should always keep your senses open to what is happening around you in the workplace. Anyway, my point here is that first you understand the existing system and why it works the way it works, before you can comment on whether it is good or bad. Sorry to be blunt (and I don't mean this in a derogatory way), but your question clearly shows that you are still "raw" in the industry. It is too early for you to comment on office politics and such, you should rather focus more on setting a solid foundation for your career. – Masked Man Jan 15 '17 at 8:10
  • We don't actually know that the employer in this case isn't obliged to increase their salary after completion of the first 12 months. It may be in their contract. The OP doesn't say, but his tone implies that it is. However, they did backdate it and so have therefore met that obligation if one exists. – Jonathon Cowley-Thom Jan 18 '17 at 10:07