I work for a non-profit. I am going to change names of the person and the amount of the pay value slightly.
This being said, we don't have annual increases and you kind of have to fight for one. My mission since I started (I've worked here for 6 months now). has been for annual increase instead of large increases every 5 years. I feel it helps with retention and appreciation. No one stays 5 years at a place anymore and we can keep people longer if we show constant value (that's my mindset).
I got hired on as an executive of Payroll/HR. I run into constant issues where I have to look at the company's needs (obviously). but I fight the good fight for the people who deserve it and I am extremely vocal about we should find a balance that benefits both the team and the company for mutual success.
So I have someone let's call him Chris. Chris had started a little before me and he works in the Warehouse below our office as a Warehouse worker. I noticed when we first started that we didn't really have a supervisor in the Warehouse during the day time. (The Warehouse Manager was on nights). I come from an Operations background and I am used to working on structure of the company.
So we started hiring for a Team Lead in which I said “Why don't we look internal first”. And Chris was someone who stood out as someone with a great attitude and great work ethic. Nice guy, professional and knows what he's talking about.
Chris currently makes $22/hr. I was hiring a Team Lead for $24/hr. Chris' current role is something that really doesn't require 40 hours a week. Even Chris had told me confidentially (Which the company doesn't need to know and only I really knew). that he only needed 2 hours a day to complete his daily duties.
I had pitched the idea that we could possible change Chris to a Team Lead and Chris (he had offered it himself). would still be able to do his duties without being strained or stressed and could basically replace both roles and combine them into one and save the company money.
My logic is that we combine the 22/hr and 24/hr and meet somewhere in the middle like let's call it $35/hr That way it's a win-win, a big increase for Chris and less expenditure for the company. Unfortunately, when I went to the Operations Manager and CFO. They said that it's too large of an increase. I then said okay but if we don't move him somewhere there then I have to hire another 24/hr and then we are at a total of $46/hr with 2 separate people instead of $35/hr. (I would give Chris the 46 if I could but I know it WOULD NOT fly).
They said they are willing to do $26/hr or NO dice. I explained in great detail how that is a slap in the face and at a certain point we are just penny pinching. He's worth it and we should invest in good people.
So the final offer they allowed me to give is $28/hr but AFTER a 3 month probationary period with no retroactive pay. Like wtf are we doing. I should just go to Chris and give him the middle finger instead.
Chris had a lot of push back (as he should). and unfortunately I am going to keep Chris where he is (no one needs to know how fast he can do his workload). and I now have to hire a Team Lead for $24/hr.
Why the hell are people like this? It could have been a win-win situation. I am having a meeting with the Operations Manager boss today to help me push for Chris. Ultimately it will be the CFO's call.