Normal to get paid based on only years worked rather than output?

Question

I'm a software developer based in the U.S. I've been with a company for a few years.

I have 8 years of work experience, but I'm doing the work that someone with 15-20 years would typically do. My management has told me this themselves. However, when the topic of promotion or raises comes up, I've been told that paying me is tricky because I don't actually have 15-20 years of experience and management can't figure out how to pay me.

I'm consistently given more work and get good reviews every year. So, I think people trust me to do the work and are happy with the results.

Is this normal? Are companies normally this strict when it comes to number of years worked and how much you can get paid based on that number? Nothing signifies that in my work contract which is why I'm asking if this is a normal practice.

Answer 1

If you want to get paid what you're worth you're probably going to have to change jobs. There's a 99% chance that management is lying when they say "they can't figure out how to do it"; with a 1% chance of general incompetence instead. Either way you're not getting it from your current employer.

Very large raises, and the equivalent to 7-12 years at once is very large, are difficult to achieve even if management is fully and enthusiastically supporting you. If they're not it's effectively impossible.

Answer 2

When it comes to wages, employees and management simply have opposing views. You as an employee view this as an individual problem, while management view wages collectively.

From their view, giving you a raise could start an avalanche where others also demand more compensation - which they obviously want to avoid.

One way to manage this is by sweet talking an employee (as they currently are doing to you), another is to hand out more fancy sounding job titles, but no extra money. Basically, management want as cheap a deal as possible and will do whatever you let them get away with.

In your case, bringing you on par with the more experienced employees will not happen. The best you can realistically hope for is probably slowly closing the gap by getting above average raises for a number of years.

Your current wages are effectively 'anchored' at this level. The only way to get a substantial raise is to find another employer willing to pay and thus resetting that anchor.

Answer 3

Is it "normal" to pay you only enough to keep you from leaving? Yup! Even though that's not your question, that's what "normal" is, in my experience, in the US.

I worked at one place, where, after a year in one department, I'd transferred to a new area. At my first review in that new area, my boss said, "this is all we're paying you? I've got to fix that!" and he did. I got a 20-30% raise out of it and was incredibly appreciative!

At my current job, I went 2 years without a raise because I'd exceeded the top of the pay range for my job title, and my boss and HR were working to find a new job title that didn't require me switching departments (all the people at the next level of the same title work in a centralized area and neither my boss nor I wanted me to move there), and a title that was similar enough to what I actually do and had enough pay range head room to make the switch worthwhile. I did get a reasonable bonus each of the review years that went by without a raise, so it eased the pain a bit, but it wasn't fun. We finally managed to find a new title for me and I got a raise at my last review. Of course, the base on which the raise was based was 2 years old, and no special accommodation was made for that, but it was better than being stuck for another year. (I also note that this is just one of the many reasons I put so little stock in job titles, but that's a totally different question...)

TL;DR: If you believe your boss is actively making a good faith effort to work with HR to find a way to give you a raise to get you to where you feel you should be and you like the job, ride it out. If you think he (HR) is just blowing smoke, freshen up the resume and get hunting.

Answer 4

In Canada, if the employer has pay grades, it is normal that salary is based on experience to a certain extent. Also, the two major employers (a hospital and the military) for which I worked had an establishment of how many people they could have in each pay grade.

Something else my two employers had in common was a salary range within each pay grade. In the military one would start at the bottom salary of that grade. I am not sure how the hospital did it. In both cases one would advance to the next salary level within the grade until the top level was reached. After that, the only raises would be associated with inflation.

Your question had the phrase, "promotion or raises". If your employer is like mine, in order to get promoted, there must be a vacancy. How those vacancies are filled depend on the employer but if you did get promoted, you should expect your duties to change. Getting a big raise without changing responsibilities would simply not happen.

The bottom line is that what you are experiencing is normal to me.

Answer 5

First off, pay is never strictly about years, primarily it’s about position with time in grade being a secondary consideration.

If this is a government and/or a union job, your manager may be correct in that there are hard experience requirements for some positions that simply can’t be overridden by competence. If it’s neither, then it’s likely that your manager could get you a promotion and with it a larger salary.

But all of that is irrelevant, what you want is a salary commensurate with your abilities and your manager has said that isn’t going to happen. Your choice is to either remain under paid or get a new job.

I would be asking myself how likely it is whether my manager can and will help me do that, but either way I would be planning on getting a new job.

Answer 6

One thing that I don't see mentioned but it is important: after a while experience does not really matter for compensation, if anything I have seem experienced people adopt dont-get-fired-minimum-work plan where they don't care about learning new stuff or keeping up with developments.

So beside the fact that your management is probably lying even if they are not lying their promotion/compensation policy is idiotic so you would be smart to leave, or use a new job offer as a negotiation tool.