Payday?

Elmo

So when do you get paid.

I always hated getting paid monthly (espically when I was getting minimum wage).

I think their should be laws to prevent anyone under 30,000 pa getting paid monthly.

I heard of someone working a back month i.e. the started mid-month but would only get their pay for those two weeks six weeks later !!!!

Anyway are there people being paid under 30,000 getting paid monthly?

Also are you happy with your payday i.e. are you happy getting paid by the month?

Eoin

Elmo wrote:

I heard of someone working a back month i.e. the started mid-month but would only get their pay for those two weeks six weeks later !!!!

That happened to me as a temp in a bank years ago. I started one week into the pay cycle, so wasn't eligble to get paid till the end of the next month - so I was 7 weeks without pay. By which time I had already left.

Elmo

That happened to me as a temp in a bank years ago. I started one week into the pay cycle, so wasn't eligble to get paid till the end of the next month - so I was 7 weeks without pay. By which time I had already left.

What made them think that you would continue to work for them while you waited 7 weeks to be paid for your first three??? The person I know left the job before the got paid as well.

Eoin

Elmo wrote:

What made them think that you would continue to work for them while you waited 7 weeks to be paid for your first three??? The same happened the person I know.

It was just a temp job, and good money for a student. It can be hard enough getting a summer job there anyway.

Elmo

It was just a temp job, and good money for a student. It can be hard enough getting a summer job there anyway.

Even still if your a student and it just a temp job it's like that you won't be paid until you get back to college, if its the last seven weeks of the summer holidays. Good when it comes in as your back in college but bad as you have no money during the summer and you are working, not the greatest for motivation.

Kimbot

When I started working years ago I was on 7500 punts a year getting paid monthly, I started the 7th of the month and payday was 21st of every month (i.e. on the 21st of april you got paid for 1-30 April) it was horrible!!

Elmo

When I started working years ago I was on 7500 punts a year getting paid monthly, I started the 7th of the month and payday was 21st of every month (i.e. on the 21st of april you got paid for 1-30 April) it was horrible!!

Well it means that your paid in advanced, from the 21st - 30/31/28/29

But getting paid monthly on low wages isn't fair, IMO, espically a back month.

Vokes

Elmo wrote:

I think their should be laws to prevent anyone under 30,000 pa getting paid monthly.

And what about those people earning below 30K who would rather be paid monthly ?

Eoin

Elmo wrote:

Even still if your a student and it just a temp job it's like that you won't be paid until you get back to college, if its the last seven weeks of the summer holidays. Good when it comes in as your back in college but bad as you have no money during the summer and you are working, not the greatest for motivation.

I see the point, but I was lucky to get a summer job there in the first place; they certainly didn't have to go trawling for applicants. If you asked nicely, they could organise an advance if you needed it. When you have that many employees to look after, you have to stick to pretty rigid procedures - you can't have different pay cycles.

What was worse for me when I got a longer job there was the 5 week months - that was really hard to budget for. I've been getting paid fornightly for the last 8 or 9 years now, and would find it very hard to go back to monthly.

Sony

I completely agree there should be some sort of law regarding this(never will be Im sure).

I worked 6 weeks before I got paid also and then I was emergency taxed even though I had handed the relevant forms in to HR. It seems that this has also happened to EVERYONE that has started in my company (a very well known one for that matter)

As you say if I was on 40k a montth fair enough but anyone thats on under 30k pa usually finds themselves scraping pennies together at the end of each month even though they have worked 3/4 weeks for which theyre owed money for.

This is what bugs me, working the back weeks effectively means that you are constantly owed at least 3 weeks wages by your job which you'll never catch up with unless you leave.

example: This month I have worked 3 weeks, I get paid next week for 4. Im currently broke and cant afford to do anything because the job wont pay me for the 3 weeks I have slogged my guts out working for already this month!

I know I agreed to this when I signed my contract but its a cheap way of companies cutting costs at their employees expense:rolleyes:

Elmo

And what about those people earning below 30K who would rather be paid monthly ?

Then you and you alone can ask your company for a monthly pay check but it should be transparent that you asked to get a monthly pay packet.

When you have that many employees to look after, you have to stick to pretty rigid procedures - you can't have different pay cycles.

I don't see why not, I know Civil Servants are paid weekly, fortnightly and monthly depending on their grade.

rain on

I've been paid weekly in every job I've worked apart from one, which was monthly and also backdated by a month. So I was going two months without pay which was a massive pain in the arse starting but was quite handy leaving. Also I was right at the bottom of the ladder in that place (the interview basically consisted of 'Have you been to college? and 'Can you spell your own name?'), only worked there for about four months total spread over a period of eight months, basically as temp and as casual as you can get, but they still gave me three paid weeks off at Christmas which was awesome. So things balanced out in the end.

Elmo

monthly and also backdated by a month

This has to be wrong! Even when I worked monthly I was paid for the month I worked not a back month. Surely that's one of the pluses get paid every month that you are paid up to date.

Eoin

Sony wrote:

I completely agree there should be some sort of law regarding this(never will be Im sure).

I worked 6 weeks before I got paid also and then I was emergency taxed even though I had handed the relevant forms in to HR. It seems that this has also happened to EVERYONE that has started in my company (a very well known one for that matter)

As you say if I was on 40k a montth fair enough but anyone thats on under 30k pa usually finds themselves scraping pennies together at the end of each month even though they have worked 3/4 weeks for which theyre owed money for.

This is what bugs me, working the back weeks effectively means that you are constantly owed at least 3 weeks wages by your job which you'll never catch up with unless you leave.

example: This month I have worked 3 weeks, I get paid next week for 4. Im currently broke and cant afford to do anything because the job wont pay me for the 3 weeks I have slogged my guts out working for already this month!

I know I agreed to this when I signed my contract but its a cheap way of companies cutting costs at their employees expense:rolleyes:

Maybe organising a fornightly pay run is a much bigger (actual) expense to the company, then the notional expense to the employee of having to budget. Not that I could ever do it, but if you budget properly, you won't be scraping your pennies together - you're still getting paid the same amount.

Of course you'll always be behind - you don't get paid for the work you may be doing in the future, you get paid for the work you've already done.

seamus

Sony wrote:

As you say if I was on 40k a montth fair enough but anyone thats on under 30k pa usually finds themselves scraping pennies together at the end of each month even though they have worked 3/4 weeks for which theyre owed money for.

Em...if you can't budget and control your spending, that's not the company's problem.

What's the difference between getting €300 at the end of each week, or getting €1200 at the end of the month?

I've been getting paid monthly since back when I was on a paltry €17.5k p/a and I love it. I schedule all my direct debits and bills to be taken out of my account at the start of the month, and then whatever's left is mine to spend. You work it out in your head - I have X amount of money, 4 weeks to get through and 4 weekends of drinking to do. Therefore, I must have at least Y amount left by Z date.

Eoin

Elmo wrote:

I don't see why not, I know Civil Servants are paid weekly, fortnightly and monthly depending on their grade.

I'm talking about organisations who may want to have some modicum of efficiency, and aren't bent over the barrel by unions.

Elmo

It is prob one of the easiest ways to motivate people is by paying them weekly.

I've been getting paid monthly since back when I was on a paltry €17.5k p/a and I love it. I schedule all my direct debits and bills to be taken out of my account at the start of the month, and then whatever's left is mine to spend. You work it out in your head - I have X amount of money, 4 weeks to get through and 4 weekends of drinking to do. Therefore, I must have at least Y amount left by Z date.

So on top of work you spend time counting your pennies.

I always thought I could do it, pay the rent and all the bills but they always came out on the same date as did my pay check hence I always was left with nothing no matter how hard a budgeted, at least getting paid by the week I know whats coming in and that I have some money coming in at the end of the week. It's great to know you have money going into your bank account without having to worry about bills etc all that much. You pay your bills the next week you have money in your account regardless.

It's all good if you want to be paid by the month but not so good if you don't.

I'm talking about organisations who may want to have some modicum of efficiency, and aren't bent over the barrel by unions.

Who pay bad wages and pay them by the month, and then spend a fortune bring in a consultant to motivate their staff.

WindSock

How do you work out your celery from your hourly rate?

leeroybrown

I get paid monthly and have absolutely no problem with it. I don't think there should be any laws to prevent any salaried employees from being payed monthly. Waged employees with specific hourly rates and variable working hours should be offered some extra protection though.

It shouldn't be the duty of the employer to aid the employees financial planning or educate them how to budget.

seamus

Elmo wrote:

It is prob one of the easiest ways to motivate people is by paying them weekly.

How so? Because they're seeing money flowing in regularly? Without any specific increase in the amount they're receiving, I fail to see how paying them the same money at shorter intervals makes them happier. Unless they're students.

So on top of work you spend time counting your pennies.

Quite the opposite. I spend probably five minutes a week checking my finances. If I was paid weekly, I'd spend more time on it and be far more stressed because I would know I was under pressure to save money each week. If I'm getting paid monthly I don't have to hold back a huge chunk of my paycheck for a bill I know is coming up next week or in two weeks'. The amount of money you'd have to save each week would vary depending on what's coming up, so some weeks you may have little to spend, but others you'd have plenty. Seems very inefficient to me

mikemac

I prefer being paid monthly and it's very easy to manage.
ESB and Bord Gais is bi-monthly while most stuff like gym, savings,rent, etc is monthly. So it easier to work everything out.

Sure if you're not capable of budgeting your monthly salary, how the hell did you get a professional type job in the first place?:eek:

Only people who should get weekly wages are those in temporary jobs or maybe have piece-rate in a factory.

OP seems to be talking about professional jobs like a teacher or a banker

rain on

Elmo wrote:

This has to be wrong! Even when I worked monthly I was paid for the month I worked not a back month. Surely that's one of the pluses get paid every month that you are paid up to date.

It wasn't much fun, but there were about 8,000 staff in this particular place so I figured payroll were fairly on top of things.

Eoin

Elmo wrote:

Who pay bad wages and pay them by the month, and then spend a fortune bring in a consultant to motivate their staff.

Sorry, not sure I have this right. Are you saying that pubolic sector employees are better motivated than private sector?

deadfingers

I get paid montly but which seems rather weird is that I get paid for the last two weeks I work and two weeks in advance.

Stark

Like micmclo and seamus, I prefer getting paid monthly because it matches up nicely with the frequency of my bills. That said, I get paid for my month's work at the end of that month. If I was a month behind, I wouldn't be too happy.

I did however have the situation when starting work of not getting paid for 2 months, then getting emergency taxed. That added onto the fact that I'd just moved to Dublin, so had coughed up a month's rent and a rent deposit up front, made for a miserable 3 months. Then I switched contract, so they had to remove me and readd me to the payroll and I had to go through the whole process again, grr.

Elmo

Quite the opposite. I spend probably five minutes a week checking my finances. If I was paid weekly, I'd spend more time on it and be far more stressed because I would know I was under pressure to save money each week. If I'm getting paid monthly I don't have to hold back a huge chunk of my paycheck for a bill I know is coming up next week or in two weeks'. The amount of money you'd have to save each week would vary depending on what's coming up, so some weeks you may have little to spend, but others you'd have plenty. Seems very inefficient to me

Strangely enough that all seems to happen me when I try to budget for a monthly wage.

Ok! in fairness to when I did get paid monthly I was on a **** wages, and like other posters was paying for every thing in advanced so I was in dept each month before I got paid.

Sorry, not sure I have this right. Are you saying that pubolic sector employees are better motivated than private sector?

No I am just point out that alot of companies spend money motivating people, when if they are happy in their finances they are motivated to larger extent. (IMO)

OP seems to be talking about professional jobs like a teacher or a banker

AFAIK teachers get paid fortnightly in some schools.

Only people who should get weekly wages are those in temporary jobs or maybe have piece-rate in a factory.

Anyone under 30,000 should be on a weekly wage and TBH no person on the minimum wage should never be paid monthly (but it does happen).

seamus

Stark wrote:

If I was a month behind, I wouldn't be too happy.

Indeed, working an entire back month seems like madness. Switching from weekly pay to monthly pay is tough enough, I can't imagine having to work two whole months with only a week's wages (or even one month's salary) to get me by. My credit card would take a hammering.

Anyone under 30,000 should be on a weekly wage and TBH no person on the minimum wage should never be paid monthly

But there's still no difference. Many people on €30k a year have far more disposable income than someone on €60k a year, so there's no reason why being paid monthly instantly puts them at a disadvantage. I'm still struggling to understand how getting your money monthly is worse than getting it weekly, unless you're unable to budget.

In fairness, the basics of budgeting should be something that's taught in school. I know plenty of people who get paid on a Friday, then go out and blow their weeks' wages on beer and crap, only to scrape the rest of the week. Likewise I know salaried people who go on a shopping spree the day after payday, blow half their paycheque and spend the rest of the month moaning about how they can't afford to do anything.

Elmo

In fairness, the basics of budgeting should be something that's taught in school. I know plenty of people who get paid on a Friday, then go out and blow their weeks' wages on beer and crap, only to scrape the rest of the week. Likewise I know salaried people who go on a shopping spree the day after payday, blow half their paycheque and spend the rest of the month moaning about how they can't afford to do anything.

Well I amn't talk about those people. But even those of us who go out on payday and spend every penny on drink have the advantage of knowing that next friday they will have money in their bank account. You can survive 5 days with no money.

I'm still struggling to understand how getting your money monthly is worse than getting it weekly, unless you're unable to budget.

Someone already point out that they had difficulted budgeting for a weekly wage but found it easier with their monthly wage, surely there is no difference. :rolleyes:

But there's still no difference. Many people on €30k a year have far more disposable income than someone on €60k a year, so there's no reason why being paid monthly instantly puts them at a disadvantage.

It depends on their indivdual situation. I don't see how someone on a higher wage in the same individual situation has less disposable income. And I am talking about people under 30k not people on 30k (I know their isn't much difference betweek 30k and 29k, but I mean a good bit under 30k).

In fairness, the basics of budgeting should be something that's taught in school.

It's part of Business Studies for the Junior Cert.

Eoin

seamus wrote:

Indeed, working an entire back month seems like madness. Switching from weekly pay to monthly pay is tough enough, I can't imagine having to work two whole months with only a week's wages (or even one month's salary) to get me by. My credit card would take a hammering.

This only happens when you start a job. In this age of credit being thrown at any person with a pulse, I'm sure an overdraft could cover this once-off scenario , if the company won't give you an advance.

Elmo

This only happens when you start a job. In this age of credit being thrown at any person with a pulse, I'm sure an overdraft could cover this once-off scenario , if the company won't give you an advance.

You do get into a cycle of having to pay that overdraft off. Why should you pay a bank when your Company won't pay you?

I mean companies are saving money by paying each month, they could at least be paying you each month on the month you have work rather then putting it off.

A bit of give and take.

prendy

alot of posters are missing OP's comment about earning under 30k
iv just started in a company paying monthly and im hanging for next weeks salary and im usually fairly good with money.
if your on a ower wage its easier to budget weekly as money is alot tighter.

Eoin

Elmo wrote:

You do get into a cycle of having to pay that overdraft off. Why should you pay a bank when your Company won't pay you?

I mean companies are saving money by paying each month, they could at least be paying you each month on the month you have work rather then putting it off.

A bit of give and take.

There should be no cycle if the first month's paycheck is 7-8 weeks wages, as opposed to four. Personally I agree - I find it much easier getting paid every fortnight, but that's personal preference - and my problem if I'm not great at budgeting with a monthly pay check.

Edit: And yes, there should probably be a method where you do get paid for the partial month you've worked, but that is 1) a once-off occurrence, unless you're a serial job-hopper and 2) not related to the monthly v fortnightly pay check argument.

Elmo

1) a once-off occurrence

Sorry, I assumed that those companies pay a back month each month, therefore at the end of 6weeks you get paid for 2weeks and at the end of 10weeks you get paid for the second 4 weeks. Still this once-off occurrence doesn't need to happen, I know it has never happened to me.

Eoin

Elmo wrote:

Sorry, I assumed that those companies pay a back month each month, therefore at the end of 6weeks you get paid for 2weeks and at the end of 10weeks you get paid for the second 4 weeks. Still this once-off occurrence doesn't need to happen, I know it has never happened to me.

Well, you'll always get paid for the month you've just done, not the one you're about to start, so in that sense you're 4 weeks behind.

But in the few situations where I've had to wait till the 2nd pay cycle, I've gotten the 4 weeks standard pay, plus the weeks from the first pay cycle.

Lpfsox

jonny24ie wrote: »

When I started working years ago I was on 7500 punts a year getting paid monthly, I started the 7th of the month and payday was 21st of every month (i.e. on the 21st of april you got paid for 1-30 April) it was horrible!!

ha - my first job (early '90s) paid me £4,800 a year (or £400 per calendar month) and I think payday was the 3rd week of the month as well. Basically you bought your monthly bus ticket, paid a few bob at home and had about £50 to spend for the whole month; now THAT was horrible.

stepbar

I work in a bank and get paid monthly. To say its a pain is an understatement. I would like to get paid weekly but realistically its not possible. So I'll just have to grin and bare it