New direct report earning higher salary

[InAWorkPickle]

Currently navigating some changes at work following a recent restructuring. I’ve taken on additional responsibilities and as well as that, now oversee a department of two people.

However, one of the team members is currently earning significantly more than I am, despite having fewer responsibilities and tbh skills. There are definite issues with productivity etc from the department, which is why I think I’ve been put in there.

Have been told that remuneration will be discussed in a couple of weeks time and I came here because I want to be sure… the salary situation is not right? I can’t be expected to manage someone with less responsibilities and a greater salary?

To me, this seems obvious, but anxiety and imposter syndrome are issues with me and I’d like to get some feedback and discuss here before having the conversations at work.

I haven’t read the whole thread but even in teaching it is possible for someone to be a manager and earn less than a direct report by the way additional pay for specific responsibilities is bolted on to the core teaching salary.

So, for example, someone who has reached the top of the teachers’ pay scale is on circa £52k for full time teaching due to significant experience. But, if you hadn’t been teaching long, you might be lower down in the teacher pay scale, say £36k, but also get a further £6k for being a head of a medium sized department. So, £42k with a direct report on £52k.

Ok so the impostor syndrome comes through loud and clear. Either you deserve or you don’t. You believe you do so negotiate for the difference plus 5% at least so you’re not back here in 6 months in the same situation.

I looked up all the tactics and facts I could find for negotiating this. Did it just before the person was going away so they wanted this done and dusted before they went.

I got what I wanted.

Fewer skills and responsibilities- no.

Managing people on a higher salary than you in general - yes. If their job is more in demand, and requiring a harder to find skillset, then that can be normal. Example: in some technical roles individual contributors can be on much higher salaries than their managers depending on their seniority and skill levels.

From what you’ve said though it doesn’t sound like this is the situation, it sounds like it’s time for you to negotiate.

Negotiations have yet to begin, so I can’t have engaged with any negotiation as of yet. And I don’t expect to ‘just be handed a pay rise’. I am rightly due a salary review as a result of this new role and increased responsibility. Where that salary review lands is what I am trying to prepare for.

Put it back to them to justify paying you less for more responsibility and doing a better job.

If they don't respond, look for another job.

I’ve never said I want my colleagues pay reduced. What I have pointed out is that they are massively overpaid. Their role is not scarce, or niche, or paid this much in the vast majority of companies. It doesn’t require formal qualifications and this persons work has been a known issue for a long time.

I’ve seen cases where people moved from high paying companies and so the next company couldn’t really get them without matching/ paying close/ over. That or yes they might be great at negotiating. Personally I think renegotiate but also sorry but don’t automatically assume they’ll match/ go over, you accepted what they offered you and were fine with it until you saw what someone else was earning

I’m irked at the fact that I have been brought in and given more responsibility because this persons work is not up to scratch. I will now be responsible for the productivity of this department and it doesn’t seem fair that I am essentially being asked to fix/manage this persons work, when they earn significantly more than I do.

Speaking to a HH is a good idea. What kind of company do you work in? Do you know people in similar roles within your company or in similar companies?

I earn more than my boss by £7k (he told me) and out earn at least one of the team members by about £20k, as he told me his salary, fishing to see if I would tell him mine (no way matey!!).

I’ve been there 15 years and negotiated a well above market rate salary when I started.

It is what it is, if my boss doesn’t like it, he needs to do something about it.

It's ridiculous to say what other people earn is irrelevant. How on earth would you ever know how much a role is worth without at least some points of comparison. It's well documented that pay secrecy reinforces the gender pay gap.

I also loathe the fact that in the private sector especially, pay comes down to negotiation skills rather than job performance. Fair enough if your job involves a lot of negotiation but in my experience there's very little overlap in the venn diagram of 'people good at negotiating' and 'people excellent at their job'

@InAWorkPickle I’ve had this three times. The first time, I was given an automatic raise when someone joined doing same role who’d negotiated harder. The next time, the new person just blurted out their rate. They had negotiated a better rate. I pointed it out, was given the same. The latest time, I was asked to take on more responsibilities and I basically went in and explained (in a nice way) why I should be paid more - and I suggested a rate I’d be happy with. I now wish I’d asked for more, as it was approved with no argument whatsoever! Just make a case for yourself as you did in your original post and ask for what you think you are worth. Do not sell yourself short!

Well exactly, and if I’m going to be benchmarking myself against people externally in similar roles, why would I also not benchmark myself against people in internal roles? If my company are willing to pay £X to this person for an unskilled role and very little productivity, return or responsibility, then surely I should be paid more for a lot of responsibility, proven performance and return as well as actually managing their work as there is proven performance issues?

It’s fine to benchmark against internals, comparable skill set, and responsibilities. It is not fine to attack the person in doing so, so saying to all intents and purposes they are shit at their job.

I earn more than my manager, he was quite shocked when he gave me my pay rise and found out, as he’s two grades higher than me, and I’m paid above my salary level and he is at the lower end of his. He has taken the discussion on salary but from what I can see, he’s never once tried to bring me down to big himself up

your comments maybe accurate on this employee, but you’re new in role, and it feels like resentment and jealousy, rather than a factual assessment of comparable responsibilities and skills

if I was your manager I’d consider if you were capable of managing if you behaved in this manner,

Very normal in my industry for direct reports to earn more than their manager. It’s due to older workers having legacy salaries, and new people hired to do the same job are on considerably less.

Exactly this!

I have not behaved in any ‘manner’. I’m having an anonymous conversation with strangers to assess how I should feel about this and approach it before I do anything.

I am specifically being brought into this role as my colleague is not performing and it’s affecting the business. I have experience in their field and have held the same role in a number of busier companies. I am not attacking this colleague, I am experienced in the ins and outs of this role and it is very clear they are underperforming and their skill set is not sufficient to carry out the role effectively.

No legacy salaries in this situation, my colleague has been with the company less time than I have.

Benchmarking involves comparing against a range.

Single point comparisons make you look naive and petty. Benchmarking makes you look professional and serious.

Keep that in mind on how you approach it.

Thank you, no intention of benchmarking purely against my colleague, just asking if it’s reasonable for me to take this into account. I will start today looking at a range of comparable roles externally as well.

i dont think the op is attacking anyone. or jealous.

i think shes rightly pointing out the unfairness of the private sector and negotiated pay in a poorly performing area which shes been brought in to address. so she knows that certain employees are shit at their jobs snd which ones ss i thibk there are only a couple in that area?

however as others have pointed out somwtimes there are reasons why direct reports get paid more than managers.

the thing i domt get is how a company can expect you to do extra work and turn a department around - without having paid you for this work or even discussed it.

i wonder if they are hoping to see how you perform in the first couple of weeks.
it all soumds a bit stingy. i wonder if they cannot increase profits if they will shut down.
not sure i like their ethics.

you will need to do your research and also come up with a plan to turn the place around.
as youll be a trainer and manager as well as whatever else you do, i’d look at comparable roles and work out a pay based on that, present my plans and ask for that salary.

what will you do if they say no though. you need to work on that. is your old role still there? might you face redundancy? can you refuse the new post when they say unfortunately there’s no money just now… I think you have to or they will get you to do a shed load of work for free. managing a poor performer is hard work. multiple chats snd meetings snd training rinse and repeat til thwy get it.
you may need to work longer hours to get it all done and should be paid overtime for this.

One key concept to get your head around is that work practises aren’t fair, and never will be.

They should be legal, and beyond that everything else is a case of what you’re going to tolerate.

Look at this situation, many people would say it’s not fair to cut someone’s pay significantly while expecting then to continue doing the same role. Many would say it isn’t fair to expect someone to manage someone who’s paid less than them. Many would say it’s not fair to have fixed pay for roles as that doesn’t reflect wider skill sets and experience that add value. And it’s not a viable business strategy to keep bumping everyone’s salary’s up.

There isn’t a solution that fulfills all those perceptions.

An individual under performing in their role is a management problem. Not a salary reference point for others. That would be heading rapidly towards embedding an error.

If you’ve been put in a role because you’re seen as having the capability to turn round an area of the business that’s under performing, then that’s the skill you’re selling. Being able to approach people management issues professionally is a skill you’re going to need them to believe you have. Being able to understand variations in remuneration packages is a skill you’re going to need them to believe you have.

Be mindful that your approach to this negotiation doesn’t undermine your reputation. Make it about his salary vs yours and you will very likely do that.

Make it about what you’ve been offered externally, what you think external recruitment for the role would be, how compares to the range of internal peers and the range in the team.

Of course it's not right OP.

I had this situation a few years ago with someone I directly line managed who had been there a year less than me and had lower qualifications and experience.

After taking it higher they refused to accept that it was an issue and just kept saying that I should not have been able to see/ find out that information.

The person in question was friends with my manager outside of work. I actually quite liked her and had nothing against her, but the situation was ridiculous that she would be paid more than me for fewer responsibilities and skills, and as my direct report.

I left that workplace shortly after.

There's no need for such a snarky response. There's nothing wrong with someone coming on here to offload and get other people's opinions on a situation like this.