DH salary. AIBU?

[Suctionplease]

So I think I probably am being unreasonable but I also feel like I have a valid point which DH seems not really to take on board. I'll preface this with DH and I both work FT although he earns a lot more than me. All money is family money.

DH has been involved in a start up business with 4 others for the last six years. Until last year he was self-employed working on other contracts alongside the start up. It got to a point where the new business needed him FT and they started paying him a salary in line with the same rate as he was already on. Ultimately, this has made no material difference to us and he therefore hasn't had a pay rise in around 10 years.

The other directors in the business did not get the same salary as DH but the goal was to get to a place where the business could afford to pay them all the same rate. This means that DH will not get a pay rise until after this point. DH thinks this is only fair.

I don't think this is fair. DH has a very specialised skill, and if he were to move jobs he would get a higher rate than he's on now. They would find it very hard to replace him. Other than the CEO, the others in the business do not have specialized roles. Their salary increase puts them way above market rates for what they do. To me it would be much fairer to pay what their equivalent jobs are worth in that sector and then split profits in the form of dividends. I think I'm particularly resentful as one of the others contributes very little to the business. If he left, nothing would happen and they could probably replace him with someone better for a lot less money.

Whilst I do understand where DH is coming from it's frustrating that he can't understand why I'm frustrated. With the COL increases and our kids getting older, we have less money. My salary has increased but with that has come an increase in responsibility and demands on my time and I am really struggling.

The business has done really well this year and it won't be long until they're all on the same salary which hopefully means that in 12 months time there may (or may not) be a pay rise (I have very low expectations now).

Can you understand why I would feel frustrated by this situation:

Yes - YANBU
No - YABU

If you have sufficient money for bills. I would ask if he's happy working where he is. Surely happiness is more beneficial than getting a higher wage. You say he already earns a lot more than you so perhaps you need to get a new job and earn more

After re reading your op, he's been involved for 6 years, working also on his own until last year. But hasn't had a rise for 10 years? Can he actually increase the amount he charges if he went back to being on his own?

In regards to the guy who, in your opinion, doesn't deserve the wages. He still has stuck his cash, time and effort into the business.

Yoko Ringo might be a crap drummer, but he was the crap drummer in the Beatles

I am with the husband here, but I get how frustrating the money side of things are.

My DH also works in the public sector like you and had a pay CUT about 10 years ago when two organisations merged. So with minimal increases in the meantime, it's taken until now for him to bringing home more than he was 10 years ago. However, for him - and us as a unit - it's the other benefits/perks of his job that are worth staying for.

So if your DH is earning a good salary anyway, and is enjoying his job, then don't stress about the "what might have beens" because had he stayed self employed, with the COL at the moment, his income might have dropped.

Maybe you could earn more if you moved out of the public sector, but you have your pension to consider as well.

Coming from from Elvis that is damming praise indeed.

The issue here is the op is struggling to understand he is not an employee as such, he is not self employed as such, he’s a director of the business. A business they are all trying to make profitable, all the other directors have put money in, but taken a step back on salary to allow it to build, allowing her husband to be paid fairly for what he does given the context and previous earnings.

demanding he wants more, and they take less, for longer is beyond ludicrous. The fact she doesn’t understand how it works is no excuse.

Get another job, if you’re worried about money.

I'm not sure the key purpose of a start up is to be fair (especially to be fair in the eyes of the spouses of people who started it).

It is to get the business up and running succesfully and then sell it to make a mint. They do well not to get distracted with anything other than that target.

The orhef 4 when they come up sll take equal salaries will probably ensure "lazy arse" earns his share. They may well be the. Networking guy who had all the contacts to win the business which the others do have (or just no gift of the gab)

If other chap just does nothing, any investor wanting to buy in and doing die diligence will raise it anyway.

It sounds like the best approach would be to stop focusing on your DH and make a plan to enable you to earn a higher salary to reduce the gap between the two of you.

Frasers I think you must have read a different OP to mine. I'm not sure where at any point I have "demanded" he wants more and they take less? I'm also not sure where you get the impression that the other directors have put more money in so the DH can get paid fairly for what he does. You have made so many incorrect assumptions it's quite funny.

FWIW, I have doubled my salary in the last six years. It is very difficult to find jobs that pay well where we live. Though so getting the next step up is proving tricky.

As stated originally, I understand that I am being unreasonable in lots of ways but it is still frustrating. Thanks to those who have offered useful perspective. I really hope this pays off. I do understand that we're playing the long game but I just wish things would seem a bit easier as it just seems to get harder, and money is something that would ease that.

Well I’m confused. Because for me this is where you said it.

The other directors in the business did not get the same salary as DH but the goal was to get to a place where the business could afford to pay them all the same rate. This means that DH will not get a pay rise until after this point. DH thinks this is only fair. I don't think this is fair. DH has a very specialised skill, and if he were to move jobs he would get a higher rate than he's on now. They would find it very hard to replace him. Other than the CEO, the others in the business do not have specialized roles. Their salary increase puts them way above market rates for what they do. To me it would be much fairer to pay what their equivalent jobs are worth in that sector and then split profits in the form of dividends

You misunderstand the way a startup works and the psychological contract that goes along with it. You don't join a startup to get paid in line with market and with regular increases. You join it to be underpaid but take an equity stake, so that when the VC ship comes in you cash out beaucoup.

You have no idea what the allegedly lazy arse actually does for the business. Evidently the other founders think he does something, or they wouldn't have gone into business with him; this kind of thing has no room for deadweight. Maybe he is the schmoozer, the salesman, the relationships guy; that's actually a hugely valuable role, even if he doesn't spend enough time behind a computer for your tastes. It's the schmoozer who brings in the VC ship.

Your DH has committed to this plan and this business; if you want more money, time to earn it yourself.

Frasers and where exactly am I demanding? I pointed out that I didn't think it was fair and offered my perspective on fairness. I haven't demanded anything.

You might not have explicitly 'demanded' change but you feel strongly enough about the situation ('frustrated', 'resentful') that you felt the need to have articulated your thoughts to your DH. It might not be a demand but I assume he is now very aware that you are unhappy and with the inference that you would prefer it if he instigated a change to the current business arrangement (and all the potential fallout that could generate).

Ok maybe demanded is the wrong word, but you’re playing semantics, your strength of feeling is very clear, and I would be very surprised if your husband wasn’t aware and feeling unfair pressure from you, about something you neither understand or is your decision.

Would you consider it similarly fair that - having paid your DH more than everybody else up to that point - the others get millions on executing the exit strategy and never have to work again, and your DH gets an order of magnitude or two less and can just about pay off the house?

Because...that's how startups work at director level. High salary or equity but not both, and nothing to do with fair market wages.

We need more info, have the others put in more money? More time? More risk? Did they found it and then bring him in? Did they have the idea? They might not be specialists in your eyes, but I have found that businesses are often not run well by specialists, you want someone broad to really take a start-up forward. For example, I've seen accountants and lawyers try and Start businesses and do dismally (sorry to pick on those, that is just what I've seen anecdotally!). Their strength is in detail, and being meticulous, not what you often need in most start-ups where forward progression is crucial in the early stages.

They may be worth a lot more than you think, essentially.

I think you're absolutely being unreasonable. You aren't part of the company yet you've somehow decided that your DH is the only value driver because you think he's more skilled. I'm guessing your DH couldn't run the company single handedly which is why he is in partnership with other people who have different skill sets. The fact that he has a more specific skill set is in any event already reflected in the fact he earns more than the rest of his partners. You want your DH to earn more before his partners even reach parity with him.

This is how new businesses work. You take a risk on the business being a success knowing that it will take time and effort and likely a lot of years of relatively low pay for the significant upside available if the business is a success.

This is why start-ups often fail. One partner looks at another and thinks they aren't pulling their weight or I have more talent. Its much more likely to work if they stay harmonious with each other.

I had similar with my partner, however he was an employee at the start up (one of only 2 by the end, the rest of the small team were ‘directors’ with shares and getting paid pittance. He took a pay cut to join them for the pay off of escaping corporate life and working with people he knew and got on with.

didnt get a pay rise in 4 years despite CoL and inflation when already below market rate. Talks of pay rises and getting everyone on the same wage were showing no sign of materialising soon. There’d also been 2 occasions of wages coming in late because the company didn’t have the money in the bank. In the end he went back to corporate for stability and doubled his salary. Was all done with the best intentions but at the end of the day intentions and vague promises don’t pay todays bills.

slightly different situation to yours as my partner was a regular employee with no shares or say in the company. But I get how the lack of stability and reduced income with no clear end can get stressful. I suppose it depends how much confidence he has that the investment will pay off?

He didn’t take a pay cut though, and he is a director, it’s partly his company.

shes also not said how much seed money they all put in to start it.

but being a director is very different to being an employee. Very different indeed.

the fact the husband is now at it full time is very positive. They must be getting there, but it will take a lot of time. It always does.

Otterock Thank you for this. You kind of sum up how it feels although I do know that as a director and shareholder DH is in a different situation.

We have been here before and none of those startups have paid off. However, none of these also came with the level of potential, risk and commitment of this one. In the last six years, there have been ebbs and flows in cashflow - we've had to put money in to cover the bills although we have got most of that back which is positive. The fact that the business is in a position to pay all the directors the same salary along with 20 employees and has been growing is also a good sign. But there is no certainty, and for us personally nothing has changed, so it's hard and I have no idea if it will ever be different. I find this difficult to deal with despite knowing that this is how startups work etc etc.

That all depends if OP is doing all the heavy lifting in the home doesn't it.

Her Public sector job may be allowing her to give her husband the time to carry the startup.

Because thats what he's doing he's carrying them all, to the detriment of his own earning potential, especially the lazy f....er who will gain exponentially when the startup is sold.

Shares should be proportionate to the effort/time/money invested in the startup.

So it’s a start up with 5 directors and 20 employees, and you already have some interest from VCs? That’s a bit different from the initial impression that it was just the 5 directors working on it.

You’ve said that your DH is getting paid at the same rate as when contracting a year ago - but you say that he hasn’t had a pay rise in 10 years? So his rate now is the same as it was for the previous 9 years contracting? That rate didn’t increase over those 9 years? But you think he’d now be getting significantly more if he went back to contracting? Not sure I follow the logic of that unless demand for his skill set has surged only in the last 12 months?

I think you’re also underestimating the roles and skills of the other directors - who themselves are taking a lower salary than your DH. You said that the “lazy arse” would double his salary when they get to the point where they are all paid the same - so is he on half on what your DH is taking in salary? Are all the directors working full time in the business?

TBH, it sounds like your DH is in a good place - with salary and equity and the chance of a good payout if/when the company sells. Plus the knowledge that he will ultimately benefit from building up the company and the satisfaction of working for himself.

Wow that’s a drip feed. No way your husband is running this single handedly or the key person. No way at all. A business with 20 employees takes a lot of work behind the scenes, a lot.