Direct report makes more than me

[houwseevryweekend]

Me and my direct report both started in at the same time for the company - we were doing the same role, both the same grade, same skills, same job, same department.

Company then made our role redundant and split the job grade into 2 different roles - with one role managing the other. We both had to interview for the role we wanted, both went for the line manager role - I got it, he didn't so I became his manager.

We've now had our salary review and because I'm his boss, noticed that not only did he get a higher % salary increase than me, his total salary is 4k higher than mine! I've spoken to my boss who hadn't realised (we're a big team) but tried to explain it saying that because he started on a higher salary than me, and they gave him a higher pay rise (to make up not getting the promotion...) - his base is now more than mine. She was non committal about resolving it. Just said to leave it with her.

What's worse is I'm also responsible for hiring more people at my grade and because they're external, they're all at a higher pay. Which pisses me off too but I understand externals get more.

However, AIBU to expect to be paid more than the person I'm managing if we both interviewed for the role and I have more budget and responsibilities and a much bigger team?

Just wondering what my options are: can HR do something like this? Feels like a pretty big issue but I don't know enough whether it's also a legal issue?

@houwseevryweekend so there were no salary changes as part of the restructure but he was compensated via salary for being unsuccessful in his interview for the job you both went for? Yet you didn’t get an increase in salary for being successful? Did I interpret that correctly?! If so I’d love to know their reason for breaking their no salary change policy if it’s not gender based.

This! How are people not getting this? It's 2024, not 1974. This nonsense doesn't fly anymore! Well it does, but only because we women allow it and some, who brown nose to men, even justify it.

As you already said his pay was higher than yours anyway before the role split and change in grades. Giving someone a higher pay bump % to prevent them leaving due to hard projects / promotion disappointment / threatening to leave is common practice in the private sector. The company can pay as it sees fit as long the extra money or lesser money isn’t directly related to gender (eg must pay him more because a man with family). New starters getting more money because market rates have shifted since previous staff joined and then pay bumps keeping them above long term peers is not unusual, that’s why it’s pays to keep an eye on the market and move around.

YABU to automatically expect more money than the internal people you manage.

Raising it with HR (and threats with unions / Acas) will just annoy management, even if they give you more money eventually, you will labelled be the “trouble maker” that caused a lot of extra work and broke the budget.

If you feel like you are under paid a much better approach in my opinion is to find a new job with more money and see if they counteroffer to keep you.

Absolutely raise an equal pay dispute. I did this around 5 years ago and go a 19% increase in pay.

I sent an email to my line manager, HR and cc’d in my union rep, and asked them to review my salary as a female, vs the males I had worked with who had done the exact same role as me - worth adding I’d ended every year with an exceeding expectations review. I said I wanted them to review it informally at that stage, basically giving them the option to resolve it voluntarily before it became a legal issue. Sorted in no time.

Worth raising with union if you have one? Or speak to ACAS if not.

Hi,

I work in HR and, before you go in guns blazing at your HR, please understand that HR don't decide what someone's salary is - it's the budget-holder/Director/Manager.

Personally I'd push back at your manager on this, the reasons he gave are shit.

Raising it with HR (and threats with unions / Acas) will just annoy management, even if they give you more money eventually, you will labelled be the “trouble maker” that caused a lot of extra work and broke the budget

But it worked for the male colleague. He asked for more money on joining the company and was apparently given even more for not getting a promotion, which is bizarre. Or is it just women that are expected to put up and shut up?

I had a similar situation once. Spoke to management and they tried to lie about the amount x was being paid. So I went and got another job offer with a massive increase in salary, my workplace immediately matched that offer. Long game because I was willing to leave the job if needs be, but my preference was to stay. I was pretty certain they’d match the offer as I was really good at my job, and they did. Good option, but you’d have to be willing to move if they don’t counteroffer!

Yes, this is correct. Everyone got a standard inflationary increase, but he got extra on top of that conciliatory (they were worried he'd quit because he didn't get the promotion...). That extra pushed his pay over mine by quite a bit but even without the extra he would have been on more than me (that was negligible enough I wouldn't have been as upset).

I feel they've mucked this up because:
(i) They promoted me but forgot to move me to a new pay band (or decided they wouldn't bother and I'd never find out).
(ii) When they did the peer review and decided to give him extra, no one bothered checking how it ranked against mine - which is daft because our policy means I have to communicate his pay rise to him! That's how they got caught out.
(iii) I've never previously thought I was being discriminated against given I got the job over him - but knowing they felt so apologetic giving me the role that he's gotten a bigger pay rise, feels he is valued more than me. I do all the work and he gets the money! Doesn't help that I am an Asian woman, he is white and all the leadership are white - I hate thinking like this but have never been in this situation before in 19 years.

I took advice here and wrote to my boss just summarising the situation and asking what the rationale was. Like a pp suggested - let them come back with an explanation to me. Then I know what to do.

Thank you for clarifying this. I thought it might be the case and my boss is hiding behind HR.

This gives me so much rage. It happened to me as well and my manager did fuck all about it and made out that I was being unreasonable to complain. In my case it was actually someone who started a year after me, who I was managing.

Needless to say, I left, and I recommend you do the same.

I will be interested to hear their rationale for paying a white man more than an asian woman who is his manager.

I'd definitely let them squirm for a bit with that one if I were you.

Launch a grievance if your company refuses to give you a pay rise? Nope.

I am sympathetic because you shouldn’t be earning less than your direct reports, because what’s the benefit of being the manager when you probably have more work/responsibilities? Your options are the following:

1. Revisit the conversation with your manager and tell them you’re deeply concerned your direct reports make more than you do.
2. Stay and suck it up or
3. Look for a new role internally / externally (pref externally)

It doesn’t make sense but sadly this isn’t illegal and ultimately companies can do what they like in terms of remuneration, it just so happens most employees don’t find out what one another earns.

Surely this?

We do the exact same job and skill set. Its not one of those where one is technical and the other just line management: It's more senior because I am more experienced in what he does so need to QA his work, deal with escalations, along with other responsibilities and line management. That's why I got the job and he didn't

As you've described this @houwseevryweekend your situation really looks like sex discrimination and you need to challenge this. It's illegal and it's wrong.

As I said before raise first with HR. If unsuccessful then a grievance would be next. However at that point (or before) would be contacting ACAS, trade Union or solicitor for advice and support.

Start putting every thing in writing and make file notes after any conversation on this matter.

This is incorrect and why equal pay laws exist. It’s not just about being unhappy with what you’re paid. Please look into some equal pay tribunals, I mentioned one up the thread, and the judgements there. Companies cannot “do what they like” in terms of remuneration unless it is properly justified - this is only going to become more necessary as more people become aware of their rights.

I'm currently in a very similar position.

New role been created in my team on same level as me but with less responsibility and £5k more than my salary.

I was not happy when I found put and have made it clear I will be leaving if this isn't rectified.

Unfortunately we have a hopeless HR department who move at a snails pace so I am still waiting for an outcome 4 weeks later.

The ridiculous thing is if I do leave they'll have to pay a higher salary anyway and they're just relying on the fact I like my job so won't actually leave!

This! I guess you are a woman? I would contact my union and get their take on it.

Yes but HR can advise the employee about the correct process to follow.

I earn more than my manager. They are my line manager but my job is skilled and attracts higher pay than the management level.
Theres no hard and fast rule, but negotiate!

Not necessarily. It sounds like a mess from the beginning and difficult to prove it is an equal pay / sex discrimination case if that’s the route OP decides to go down.

I’m not saying what has happened to OP is right, but certainly without knowing all the details it’s a difficult route to follow. If what they’ve done is justified, then OP either needs to accept it or move on. What isn’t clear is why she was made the manager and why her direct report is allegedly so valuable that they could only be retained with a pay rise. As I say, difficult to know what’s happened here without all the details.

I had something similar, Op. My line manager didn't really care until I told her that I was going to apply for one of the higher banded external jobs being advertised. I was serious too. My job was re-evaluated and I received more money.

Promoting me and then paying the guy who was unsuccessful (that I will be managing) more than me makes zero business sense. Because now they are at risk of me leaving, he will always be a more expensive resource than anyone else at his grad, and they will have to pay any replacement of mine a lot more than me, as the market rate is always much higher. Breaking budgets more than if they just didn't overpay him...AND leaving a gap if I leave where work will slip and costs rise as they'll need a contractor on day rates- it's a specialist role and not easy to fill at short notice. They took 6 months to find me!

The burden of proof does lie with OP, but she only has to demonstrate an 'inference' of discrimination from the facts.

Which is why they need to justify their decisions here. Why, when they had the same role, was it justified that he was paid x%/x amount more? And then why was he given a pay increase higher than everyone (?) else, yet was deemed not quite good enough to be worthy of promotion? And then, why was OP's pay rise fucked about with, and still she was not equally financially rewarded for being good enough to be worthy of promotion?

It's not difficult to draw 'inference' from the above facts, but whether she has a case will depend on the employer's justifications. The only wrong answer in this situation is to 'suck it up'. Ask the questions, get the responses, possibly question the validity of those responses, but only then do you consider letting it go.

It really depends on when he started getting paid more than you.
So if for example when he started he negotiated a higher salary than you (due to experience or whatever) then he started out in this job on more than you. If he was awarded the exact same percentage increases etc then he'd still be paid more than you as the promotion didn't come with a pay rise. Your boss did seem to say that he started with a higher salary?

i would be focusing on the fact they actually said they gave him a higher pay rise to compensate for the lack of promotion. That seems very odd.

In any case, no you don't need to earn more than people who report to you. And also it is often the case that external hires earn more than people who have stayed with the company longer. If you don't like it ... look elsewhere ! There are other benefits sometimes for long service for example where I work you get enhanced sick pay and more holidays.

It honestly isn’t really that difficult to prove IF the company don’t have robust justification to prove why they’ve taken decisions which should all be documented and contemporaneous. Which most companies don’t, because they have the thought process of a lot of people on this thread.