Should I request a lower raise?











up vote
6
down vote

favorite












At my company, per-year health-insurance premiums increase by $1044 once a salary is greater than or equal to A. A does not seem to change with time, and it is the highest value where a premium increase occurs. The premiums are piece-wise constant with respect to salary.



I currently make B, such that, if I received a 2.28% raise, I would make A. I expect my new salary to be between A and (A+$1300), with the latter being a 3.3% increase.



The only other factors that come to mind that would be affected by salary are 1) 10% company match for 401(k), and 2) raises are expressed in terms of percentages of existing salary; these percentages are functions of performance category and ratio of current salary to midpoint. Therefore, there is compounding, but the percentage can be reduced if the current salary is higher.



Based on some crude calculations that consider the premium increase and the 401(k) matching, it seems it would be better to make (A-$0.01) than it would be to make between A and (A+$950).



Therefore, if my new salary is between A and (A+$950), should I request (A-$0.01)? Are there other factors I should consider?










share|improve this question









New contributor




BaronFiner is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1




    @dfundako It might be the case that at a certain salary level a more expansive health plan becomes available/becomes the only option. For the OP, the cliff is a problem, but wouldn't that also be temporary? That is, in the first year of your new salary of (A + $950) you'd be worse off, but a subsequent raise could put you ahead and then allow for further salary growth. Keeping your salary at (A - $0.01) for the rest of your career doesn't sound like the best move
    – Upper_Case
    6 hours ago










  • @Upper_Case I intend to exceed A. I just want to exceed it by enough that, when I do, my effective pay will be at least A. If I get increased to (A-$0.01) this year, I'll almost certainly get increased to (A+$2600) the following year.
    – BaronFiner
    5 hours ago










  • Is this your only health insurance option? Does your coverage also increase proportionally with the increase in cost?
    – sf02
    5 hours ago










  • I'm finding your wording really confusing, so I just want to clarify - because of this tiered insurance plan, there is a certain range of incomes where a higher salary results in a lower net income? And your raise would put you in that bracket? How much extra salary would it take to get you above that range?
    – David K
    5 hours ago












  • @DavidK Yes. Yes. Between A and (A+$950) would result in less than (A-$0.01). So I would need about $950 more than A to effectively make at least A.
    – BaronFiner
    5 hours ago















up vote
6
down vote

favorite












At my company, per-year health-insurance premiums increase by $1044 once a salary is greater than or equal to A. A does not seem to change with time, and it is the highest value where a premium increase occurs. The premiums are piece-wise constant with respect to salary.



I currently make B, such that, if I received a 2.28% raise, I would make A. I expect my new salary to be between A and (A+$1300), with the latter being a 3.3% increase.



The only other factors that come to mind that would be affected by salary are 1) 10% company match for 401(k), and 2) raises are expressed in terms of percentages of existing salary; these percentages are functions of performance category and ratio of current salary to midpoint. Therefore, there is compounding, but the percentage can be reduced if the current salary is higher.



Based on some crude calculations that consider the premium increase and the 401(k) matching, it seems it would be better to make (A-$0.01) than it would be to make between A and (A+$950).



Therefore, if my new salary is between A and (A+$950), should I request (A-$0.01)? Are there other factors I should consider?










share|improve this question









New contributor




BaronFiner is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1




    @dfundako It might be the case that at a certain salary level a more expansive health plan becomes available/becomes the only option. For the OP, the cliff is a problem, but wouldn't that also be temporary? That is, in the first year of your new salary of (A + $950) you'd be worse off, but a subsequent raise could put you ahead and then allow for further salary growth. Keeping your salary at (A - $0.01) for the rest of your career doesn't sound like the best move
    – Upper_Case
    6 hours ago










  • @Upper_Case I intend to exceed A. I just want to exceed it by enough that, when I do, my effective pay will be at least A. If I get increased to (A-$0.01) this year, I'll almost certainly get increased to (A+$2600) the following year.
    – BaronFiner
    5 hours ago










  • Is this your only health insurance option? Does your coverage also increase proportionally with the increase in cost?
    – sf02
    5 hours ago










  • I'm finding your wording really confusing, so I just want to clarify - because of this tiered insurance plan, there is a certain range of incomes where a higher salary results in a lower net income? And your raise would put you in that bracket? How much extra salary would it take to get you above that range?
    – David K
    5 hours ago












  • @DavidK Yes. Yes. Between A and (A+$950) would result in less than (A-$0.01). So I would need about $950 more than A to effectively make at least A.
    – BaronFiner
    5 hours ago













up vote
6
down vote

favorite









up vote
6
down vote

favorite











At my company, per-year health-insurance premiums increase by $1044 once a salary is greater than or equal to A. A does not seem to change with time, and it is the highest value where a premium increase occurs. The premiums are piece-wise constant with respect to salary.



I currently make B, such that, if I received a 2.28% raise, I would make A. I expect my new salary to be between A and (A+$1300), with the latter being a 3.3% increase.



The only other factors that come to mind that would be affected by salary are 1) 10% company match for 401(k), and 2) raises are expressed in terms of percentages of existing salary; these percentages are functions of performance category and ratio of current salary to midpoint. Therefore, there is compounding, but the percentage can be reduced if the current salary is higher.



Based on some crude calculations that consider the premium increase and the 401(k) matching, it seems it would be better to make (A-$0.01) than it would be to make between A and (A+$950).



Therefore, if my new salary is between A and (A+$950), should I request (A-$0.01)? Are there other factors I should consider?










share|improve this question









New contributor




BaronFiner is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











At my company, per-year health-insurance premiums increase by $1044 once a salary is greater than or equal to A. A does not seem to change with time, and it is the highest value where a premium increase occurs. The premiums are piece-wise constant with respect to salary.



I currently make B, such that, if I received a 2.28% raise, I would make A. I expect my new salary to be between A and (A+$1300), with the latter being a 3.3% increase.



The only other factors that come to mind that would be affected by salary are 1) 10% company match for 401(k), and 2) raises are expressed in terms of percentages of existing salary; these percentages are functions of performance category and ratio of current salary to midpoint. Therefore, there is compounding, but the percentage can be reduced if the current salary is higher.



Based on some crude calculations that consider the premium increase and the 401(k) matching, it seems it would be better to make (A-$0.01) than it would be to make between A and (A+$950).



Therefore, if my new salary is between A and (A+$950), should I request (A-$0.01)? Are there other factors I should consider?







salary united-states performance-reviews raise






share|improve this question









New contributor




BaronFiner is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




BaronFiner is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 hours ago





















New contributor




BaronFiner is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 6 hours ago









BaronFiner

1312




1312




New contributor




BaronFiner is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





BaronFiner is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






BaronFiner is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1




    @dfundako It might be the case that at a certain salary level a more expansive health plan becomes available/becomes the only option. For the OP, the cliff is a problem, but wouldn't that also be temporary? That is, in the first year of your new salary of (A + $950) you'd be worse off, but a subsequent raise could put you ahead and then allow for further salary growth. Keeping your salary at (A - $0.01) for the rest of your career doesn't sound like the best move
    – Upper_Case
    6 hours ago










  • @Upper_Case I intend to exceed A. I just want to exceed it by enough that, when I do, my effective pay will be at least A. If I get increased to (A-$0.01) this year, I'll almost certainly get increased to (A+$2600) the following year.
    – BaronFiner
    5 hours ago










  • Is this your only health insurance option? Does your coverage also increase proportionally with the increase in cost?
    – sf02
    5 hours ago










  • I'm finding your wording really confusing, so I just want to clarify - because of this tiered insurance plan, there is a certain range of incomes where a higher salary results in a lower net income? And your raise would put you in that bracket? How much extra salary would it take to get you above that range?
    – David K
    5 hours ago












  • @DavidK Yes. Yes. Between A and (A+$950) would result in less than (A-$0.01). So I would need about $950 more than A to effectively make at least A.
    – BaronFiner
    5 hours ago














  • 1




    @dfundako It might be the case that at a certain salary level a more expansive health plan becomes available/becomes the only option. For the OP, the cliff is a problem, but wouldn't that also be temporary? That is, in the first year of your new salary of (A + $950) you'd be worse off, but a subsequent raise could put you ahead and then allow for further salary growth. Keeping your salary at (A - $0.01) for the rest of your career doesn't sound like the best move
    – Upper_Case
    6 hours ago










  • @Upper_Case I intend to exceed A. I just want to exceed it by enough that, when I do, my effective pay will be at least A. If I get increased to (A-$0.01) this year, I'll almost certainly get increased to (A+$2600) the following year.
    – BaronFiner
    5 hours ago










  • Is this your only health insurance option? Does your coverage also increase proportionally with the increase in cost?
    – sf02
    5 hours ago










  • I'm finding your wording really confusing, so I just want to clarify - because of this tiered insurance plan, there is a certain range of incomes where a higher salary results in a lower net income? And your raise would put you in that bracket? How much extra salary would it take to get you above that range?
    – David K
    5 hours ago












  • @DavidK Yes. Yes. Between A and (A+$950) would result in less than (A-$0.01). So I would need about $950 more than A to effectively make at least A.
    – BaronFiner
    5 hours ago








1




1




@dfundako It might be the case that at a certain salary level a more expansive health plan becomes available/becomes the only option. For the OP, the cliff is a problem, but wouldn't that also be temporary? That is, in the first year of your new salary of (A + $950) you'd be worse off, but a subsequent raise could put you ahead and then allow for further salary growth. Keeping your salary at (A - $0.01) for the rest of your career doesn't sound like the best move
– Upper_Case
6 hours ago




@dfundako It might be the case that at a certain salary level a more expansive health plan becomes available/becomes the only option. For the OP, the cliff is a problem, but wouldn't that also be temporary? That is, in the first year of your new salary of (A + $950) you'd be worse off, but a subsequent raise could put you ahead and then allow for further salary growth. Keeping your salary at (A - $0.01) for the rest of your career doesn't sound like the best move
– Upper_Case
6 hours ago












@Upper_Case I intend to exceed A. I just want to exceed it by enough that, when I do, my effective pay will be at least A. If I get increased to (A-$0.01) this year, I'll almost certainly get increased to (A+$2600) the following year.
– BaronFiner
5 hours ago




@Upper_Case I intend to exceed A. I just want to exceed it by enough that, when I do, my effective pay will be at least A. If I get increased to (A-$0.01) this year, I'll almost certainly get increased to (A+$2600) the following year.
– BaronFiner
5 hours ago












Is this your only health insurance option? Does your coverage also increase proportionally with the increase in cost?
– sf02
5 hours ago




Is this your only health insurance option? Does your coverage also increase proportionally with the increase in cost?
– sf02
5 hours ago












I'm finding your wording really confusing, so I just want to clarify - because of this tiered insurance plan, there is a certain range of incomes where a higher salary results in a lower net income? And your raise would put you in that bracket? How much extra salary would it take to get you above that range?
– David K
5 hours ago






I'm finding your wording really confusing, so I just want to clarify - because of this tiered insurance plan, there is a certain range of incomes where a higher salary results in a lower net income? And your raise would put you in that bracket? How much extra salary would it take to get you above that range?
– David K
5 hours ago














@DavidK Yes. Yes. Between A and (A+$950) would result in less than (A-$0.01). So I would need about $950 more than A to effectively make at least A.
– BaronFiner
5 hours ago




@DavidK Yes. Yes. Between A and (A+$950) would result in less than (A-$0.01). So I would need about $950 more than A to effectively make at least A.
– BaronFiner
5 hours ago










5 Answers
5






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
11
down vote














Therefore, if my new salary is between A and (A+$950), should I
request (A-$0.01)?




Assuming you are able to request raises, it would seem to make a lot more sense to request (A+$1300).



You can use your argument about the net loss due to higher insurance costs to bolster your request.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1




    This is the best answer. In addition to satisfying the conditions listed in the question (and avoiding the heavy lift of changing the policies the company has explicitly chosen), it also addresses the underlying situation. If the idea is to lower premiums for workers under a certain salary, then the cliff between raise and breakeven means that the OP carries that burden personally for the company's choice. The company should pay for this odd arrangement, not the OP.
    – Upper_Case
    4 hours ago










  • @Joe Strazzere Unfortunately, there is a fair amount of rigidity in place such that 1) raises are only awarded once per year, based on a matrix that accounts for performance and current compensation ratio, and 2) they aren't negotiated; at best, I'm assuming I could get it lowered.
    – BaronFiner
    3 hours ago






  • 1




    @BaronFiner - I guess you do whatever you feel you must do. It makes no sense to me. In a different context, I was able to negotiate a more equitable benefit, when we were acquired and assimilated into the acquiring company's benefits plan. In my case it was vacation time rather than salary. But the plea for fairness worked. Good luck.
    – Joe Strazzere
    1 hour ago


















up vote
3
down vote













Your company has a perverse incentive in place, and it would be a more constructive response to lobby for it be changed than to engage in shenanigans that simply perpetuate it rather than addressing it. You're proposing responding to one form of dysfunction with more dysfunction, which is bad for the company and likely for you. If you really can't get the policy changed, you'll have to decide whether $1000 is sufficient compensation for contributing to the dysfunction of the corporate world (and the risk of looking like an employee trying to game the system).






share|improve this answer




























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    I don't think you should request a lower raise.



    Although the situation of having to pay more for the same health coverage isn't pleasant, requesting a lower raise would set a bad precedent for yourself. Even though it is for financial reasons, it sends the message that you don't need/want more money. The next time you are considered for a raise, they may continue with the lower raise since you previously rejected a higher one.



    Also, requesting A-$.01 means that it will take longer for you to get to A+$950. There is no guarantee that your next raise, if you accept A-$.01, will get you to A+$950 ( What will you do then? Reject a raise completely? ). You could end up losing more money than the extra cost of insurance for a shorter period.






    share|improve this answer






























      up vote
      1
      down vote













      Last time that happened at my company, we have negotiated to officially raise the salary to A - 0.01, but keep track of the intended salary C (being A < C < A + 950), so next raise would be based on C instead of A - 0.01.



      That way, the affected employee kept the best salary they could, as the company couldn't pay A + 950 or higher, but the employee didn't miss the C - (A - 0.01) raise permanently - they only refused it while it wasn't a benefit for them.



      This only works if there's trust between both parties - I don't think there's a legally binding instrument to agree on this.






      share|improve this answer




























        up vote
        0
        down vote













        Consider that the raise is forever. If you get 1% less salary this year (and are happy about it), you will also get 1% less salary next year, and the year after, and the year after that. You gain a bit this year, but you will lose out all the following years.



        Take the raise that you can get.






        share|improve this answer





















        • If the raise was forever, surely that would be an argument for asking for the lower raise, if the higher raise would leave the OP worse off? Or are you considering that the medical cost threshold might be increased in subsequent years?
          – Time4Tea
          2 hours ago











        Your Answer








        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "423"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: false,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });






        BaronFiner is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f124502%2fshould-i-request-a-lower-raise%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown




















        StackExchange.ready(function () {
        $("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function () {
        var showEditor = function() {
        $("#show-editor-button").hide();
        $("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
        StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
        };

        var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
        if(useFancy == 'True') {
        var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
        var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
        var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');

        $(this).loadPopup({
        url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
        loaded: function(popup) {
        var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
        var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
        var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');

        pTitle.text(popupTitle);
        pBody.html(popupBody);
        pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);
        }
        })
        } else{
        var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
        if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true) {
        showEditor();
        }
        }
        });
        });






        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes








        5 Answers
        5






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        11
        down vote














        Therefore, if my new salary is between A and (A+$950), should I
        request (A-$0.01)?




        Assuming you are able to request raises, it would seem to make a lot more sense to request (A+$1300).



        You can use your argument about the net loss due to higher insurance costs to bolster your request.






        share|improve this answer



















        • 1




          This is the best answer. In addition to satisfying the conditions listed in the question (and avoiding the heavy lift of changing the policies the company has explicitly chosen), it also addresses the underlying situation. If the idea is to lower premiums for workers under a certain salary, then the cliff between raise and breakeven means that the OP carries that burden personally for the company's choice. The company should pay for this odd arrangement, not the OP.
          – Upper_Case
          4 hours ago










        • @Joe Strazzere Unfortunately, there is a fair amount of rigidity in place such that 1) raises are only awarded once per year, based on a matrix that accounts for performance and current compensation ratio, and 2) they aren't negotiated; at best, I'm assuming I could get it lowered.
          – BaronFiner
          3 hours ago






        • 1




          @BaronFiner - I guess you do whatever you feel you must do. It makes no sense to me. In a different context, I was able to negotiate a more equitable benefit, when we were acquired and assimilated into the acquiring company's benefits plan. In my case it was vacation time rather than salary. But the plea for fairness worked. Good luck.
          – Joe Strazzere
          1 hour ago















        up vote
        11
        down vote














        Therefore, if my new salary is between A and (A+$950), should I
        request (A-$0.01)?




        Assuming you are able to request raises, it would seem to make a lot more sense to request (A+$1300).



        You can use your argument about the net loss due to higher insurance costs to bolster your request.






        share|improve this answer



















        • 1




          This is the best answer. In addition to satisfying the conditions listed in the question (and avoiding the heavy lift of changing the policies the company has explicitly chosen), it also addresses the underlying situation. If the idea is to lower premiums for workers under a certain salary, then the cliff between raise and breakeven means that the OP carries that burden personally for the company's choice. The company should pay for this odd arrangement, not the OP.
          – Upper_Case
          4 hours ago










        • @Joe Strazzere Unfortunately, there is a fair amount of rigidity in place such that 1) raises are only awarded once per year, based on a matrix that accounts for performance and current compensation ratio, and 2) they aren't negotiated; at best, I'm assuming I could get it lowered.
          – BaronFiner
          3 hours ago






        • 1




          @BaronFiner - I guess you do whatever you feel you must do. It makes no sense to me. In a different context, I was able to negotiate a more equitable benefit, when we were acquired and assimilated into the acquiring company's benefits plan. In my case it was vacation time rather than salary. But the plea for fairness worked. Good luck.
          – Joe Strazzere
          1 hour ago













        up vote
        11
        down vote










        up vote
        11
        down vote










        Therefore, if my new salary is between A and (A+$950), should I
        request (A-$0.01)?




        Assuming you are able to request raises, it would seem to make a lot more sense to request (A+$1300).



        You can use your argument about the net loss due to higher insurance costs to bolster your request.






        share|improve this answer















        Therefore, if my new salary is between A and (A+$950), should I
        request (A-$0.01)?




        Assuming you are able to request raises, it would seem to make a lot more sense to request (A+$1300).



        You can use your argument about the net loss due to higher insurance costs to bolster your request.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 4 hours ago

























        answered 5 hours ago









        Joe Strazzere

        239k116697995




        239k116697995








        • 1




          This is the best answer. In addition to satisfying the conditions listed in the question (and avoiding the heavy lift of changing the policies the company has explicitly chosen), it also addresses the underlying situation. If the idea is to lower premiums for workers under a certain salary, then the cliff between raise and breakeven means that the OP carries that burden personally for the company's choice. The company should pay for this odd arrangement, not the OP.
          – Upper_Case
          4 hours ago










        • @Joe Strazzere Unfortunately, there is a fair amount of rigidity in place such that 1) raises are only awarded once per year, based on a matrix that accounts for performance and current compensation ratio, and 2) they aren't negotiated; at best, I'm assuming I could get it lowered.
          – BaronFiner
          3 hours ago






        • 1




          @BaronFiner - I guess you do whatever you feel you must do. It makes no sense to me. In a different context, I was able to negotiate a more equitable benefit, when we were acquired and assimilated into the acquiring company's benefits plan. In my case it was vacation time rather than salary. But the plea for fairness worked. Good luck.
          – Joe Strazzere
          1 hour ago














        • 1




          This is the best answer. In addition to satisfying the conditions listed in the question (and avoiding the heavy lift of changing the policies the company has explicitly chosen), it also addresses the underlying situation. If the idea is to lower premiums for workers under a certain salary, then the cliff between raise and breakeven means that the OP carries that burden personally for the company's choice. The company should pay for this odd arrangement, not the OP.
          – Upper_Case
          4 hours ago










        • @Joe Strazzere Unfortunately, there is a fair amount of rigidity in place such that 1) raises are only awarded once per year, based on a matrix that accounts for performance and current compensation ratio, and 2) they aren't negotiated; at best, I'm assuming I could get it lowered.
          – BaronFiner
          3 hours ago






        • 1




          @BaronFiner - I guess you do whatever you feel you must do. It makes no sense to me. In a different context, I was able to negotiate a more equitable benefit, when we were acquired and assimilated into the acquiring company's benefits plan. In my case it was vacation time rather than salary. But the plea for fairness worked. Good luck.
          – Joe Strazzere
          1 hour ago








        1




        1




        This is the best answer. In addition to satisfying the conditions listed in the question (and avoiding the heavy lift of changing the policies the company has explicitly chosen), it also addresses the underlying situation. If the idea is to lower premiums for workers under a certain salary, then the cliff between raise and breakeven means that the OP carries that burden personally for the company's choice. The company should pay for this odd arrangement, not the OP.
        – Upper_Case
        4 hours ago




        This is the best answer. In addition to satisfying the conditions listed in the question (and avoiding the heavy lift of changing the policies the company has explicitly chosen), it also addresses the underlying situation. If the idea is to lower premiums for workers under a certain salary, then the cliff between raise and breakeven means that the OP carries that burden personally for the company's choice. The company should pay for this odd arrangement, not the OP.
        – Upper_Case
        4 hours ago












        @Joe Strazzere Unfortunately, there is a fair amount of rigidity in place such that 1) raises are only awarded once per year, based on a matrix that accounts for performance and current compensation ratio, and 2) they aren't negotiated; at best, I'm assuming I could get it lowered.
        – BaronFiner
        3 hours ago




        @Joe Strazzere Unfortunately, there is a fair amount of rigidity in place such that 1) raises are only awarded once per year, based on a matrix that accounts for performance and current compensation ratio, and 2) they aren't negotiated; at best, I'm assuming I could get it lowered.
        – BaronFiner
        3 hours ago




        1




        1




        @BaronFiner - I guess you do whatever you feel you must do. It makes no sense to me. In a different context, I was able to negotiate a more equitable benefit, when we were acquired and assimilated into the acquiring company's benefits plan. In my case it was vacation time rather than salary. But the plea for fairness worked. Good luck.
        – Joe Strazzere
        1 hour ago




        @BaronFiner - I guess you do whatever you feel you must do. It makes no sense to me. In a different context, I was able to negotiate a more equitable benefit, when we were acquired and assimilated into the acquiring company's benefits plan. In my case it was vacation time rather than salary. But the plea for fairness worked. Good luck.
        – Joe Strazzere
        1 hour ago












        up vote
        3
        down vote













        Your company has a perverse incentive in place, and it would be a more constructive response to lobby for it be changed than to engage in shenanigans that simply perpetuate it rather than addressing it. You're proposing responding to one form of dysfunction with more dysfunction, which is bad for the company and likely for you. If you really can't get the policy changed, you'll have to decide whether $1000 is sufficient compensation for contributing to the dysfunction of the corporate world (and the risk of looking like an employee trying to game the system).






        share|improve this answer

























          up vote
          3
          down vote













          Your company has a perverse incentive in place, and it would be a more constructive response to lobby for it be changed than to engage in shenanigans that simply perpetuate it rather than addressing it. You're proposing responding to one form of dysfunction with more dysfunction, which is bad for the company and likely for you. If you really can't get the policy changed, you'll have to decide whether $1000 is sufficient compensation for contributing to the dysfunction of the corporate world (and the risk of looking like an employee trying to game the system).






          share|improve this answer























            up vote
            3
            down vote










            up vote
            3
            down vote









            Your company has a perverse incentive in place, and it would be a more constructive response to lobby for it be changed than to engage in shenanigans that simply perpetuate it rather than addressing it. You're proposing responding to one form of dysfunction with more dysfunction, which is bad for the company and likely for you. If you really can't get the policy changed, you'll have to decide whether $1000 is sufficient compensation for contributing to the dysfunction of the corporate world (and the risk of looking like an employee trying to game the system).






            share|improve this answer












            Your company has a perverse incentive in place, and it would be a more constructive response to lobby for it be changed than to engage in shenanigans that simply perpetuate it rather than addressing it. You're proposing responding to one form of dysfunction with more dysfunction, which is bad for the company and likely for you. If you really can't get the policy changed, you'll have to decide whether $1000 is sufficient compensation for contributing to the dysfunction of the corporate world (and the risk of looking like an employee trying to game the system).







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 4 hours ago









            Acccumulation

            2,5961410




            2,5961410






















                up vote
                1
                down vote













                I don't think you should request a lower raise.



                Although the situation of having to pay more for the same health coverage isn't pleasant, requesting a lower raise would set a bad precedent for yourself. Even though it is for financial reasons, it sends the message that you don't need/want more money. The next time you are considered for a raise, they may continue with the lower raise since you previously rejected a higher one.



                Also, requesting A-$.01 means that it will take longer for you to get to A+$950. There is no guarantee that your next raise, if you accept A-$.01, will get you to A+$950 ( What will you do then? Reject a raise completely? ). You could end up losing more money than the extra cost of insurance for a shorter period.






                share|improve this answer



























                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote













                  I don't think you should request a lower raise.



                  Although the situation of having to pay more for the same health coverage isn't pleasant, requesting a lower raise would set a bad precedent for yourself. Even though it is for financial reasons, it sends the message that you don't need/want more money. The next time you are considered for a raise, they may continue with the lower raise since you previously rejected a higher one.



                  Also, requesting A-$.01 means that it will take longer for you to get to A+$950. There is no guarantee that your next raise, if you accept A-$.01, will get you to A+$950 ( What will you do then? Reject a raise completely? ). You could end up losing more money than the extra cost of insurance for a shorter period.






                  share|improve this answer

























                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote









                    I don't think you should request a lower raise.



                    Although the situation of having to pay more for the same health coverage isn't pleasant, requesting a lower raise would set a bad precedent for yourself. Even though it is for financial reasons, it sends the message that you don't need/want more money. The next time you are considered for a raise, they may continue with the lower raise since you previously rejected a higher one.



                    Also, requesting A-$.01 means that it will take longer for you to get to A+$950. There is no guarantee that your next raise, if you accept A-$.01, will get you to A+$950 ( What will you do then? Reject a raise completely? ). You could end up losing more money than the extra cost of insurance for a shorter period.






                    share|improve this answer














                    I don't think you should request a lower raise.



                    Although the situation of having to pay more for the same health coverage isn't pleasant, requesting a lower raise would set a bad precedent for yourself. Even though it is for financial reasons, it sends the message that you don't need/want more money. The next time you are considered for a raise, they may continue with the lower raise since you previously rejected a higher one.



                    Also, requesting A-$.01 means that it will take longer for you to get to A+$950. There is no guarantee that your next raise, if you accept A-$.01, will get you to A+$950 ( What will you do then? Reject a raise completely? ). You could end up losing more money than the extra cost of insurance for a shorter period.







                    share|improve this answer














                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer








                    edited 5 hours ago

























                    answered 5 hours ago









                    sf02

                    2,3332313




                    2,3332313






















                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote













                        Last time that happened at my company, we have negotiated to officially raise the salary to A - 0.01, but keep track of the intended salary C (being A < C < A + 950), so next raise would be based on C instead of A - 0.01.



                        That way, the affected employee kept the best salary they could, as the company couldn't pay A + 950 or higher, but the employee didn't miss the C - (A - 0.01) raise permanently - they only refused it while it wasn't a benefit for them.



                        This only works if there's trust between both parties - I don't think there's a legally binding instrument to agree on this.






                        share|improve this answer

























                          up vote
                          1
                          down vote













                          Last time that happened at my company, we have negotiated to officially raise the salary to A - 0.01, but keep track of the intended salary C (being A < C < A + 950), so next raise would be based on C instead of A - 0.01.



                          That way, the affected employee kept the best salary they could, as the company couldn't pay A + 950 or higher, but the employee didn't miss the C - (A - 0.01) raise permanently - they only refused it while it wasn't a benefit for them.



                          This only works if there's trust between both parties - I don't think there's a legally binding instrument to agree on this.






                          share|improve this answer























                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            1
                            down vote









                            Last time that happened at my company, we have negotiated to officially raise the salary to A - 0.01, but keep track of the intended salary C (being A < C < A + 950), so next raise would be based on C instead of A - 0.01.



                            That way, the affected employee kept the best salary they could, as the company couldn't pay A + 950 or higher, but the employee didn't miss the C - (A - 0.01) raise permanently - they only refused it while it wasn't a benefit for them.



                            This only works if there's trust between both parties - I don't think there's a legally binding instrument to agree on this.






                            share|improve this answer












                            Last time that happened at my company, we have negotiated to officially raise the salary to A - 0.01, but keep track of the intended salary C (being A < C < A + 950), so next raise would be based on C instead of A - 0.01.



                            That way, the affected employee kept the best salary they could, as the company couldn't pay A + 950 or higher, but the employee didn't miss the C - (A - 0.01) raise permanently - they only refused it while it wasn't a benefit for them.



                            This only works if there's trust between both parties - I don't think there's a legally binding instrument to agree on this.







                            share|improve this answer












                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer










                            answered 1 hour ago









                            mgarciaisaia

                            1,053812




                            1,053812






















                                up vote
                                0
                                down vote













                                Consider that the raise is forever. If you get 1% less salary this year (and are happy about it), you will also get 1% less salary next year, and the year after, and the year after that. You gain a bit this year, but you will lose out all the following years.



                                Take the raise that you can get.






                                share|improve this answer





















                                • If the raise was forever, surely that would be an argument for asking for the lower raise, if the higher raise would leave the OP worse off? Or are you considering that the medical cost threshold might be increased in subsequent years?
                                  – Time4Tea
                                  2 hours ago















                                up vote
                                0
                                down vote













                                Consider that the raise is forever. If you get 1% less salary this year (and are happy about it), you will also get 1% less salary next year, and the year after, and the year after that. You gain a bit this year, but you will lose out all the following years.



                                Take the raise that you can get.






                                share|improve this answer





















                                • If the raise was forever, surely that would be an argument for asking for the lower raise, if the higher raise would leave the OP worse off? Or are you considering that the medical cost threshold might be increased in subsequent years?
                                  – Time4Tea
                                  2 hours ago













                                up vote
                                0
                                down vote










                                up vote
                                0
                                down vote









                                Consider that the raise is forever. If you get 1% less salary this year (and are happy about it), you will also get 1% less salary next year, and the year after, and the year after that. You gain a bit this year, but you will lose out all the following years.



                                Take the raise that you can get.






                                share|improve this answer












                                Consider that the raise is forever. If you get 1% less salary this year (and are happy about it), you will also get 1% less salary next year, and the year after, and the year after that. You gain a bit this year, but you will lose out all the following years.



                                Take the raise that you can get.







                                share|improve this answer












                                share|improve this answer



                                share|improve this answer










                                answered 3 hours ago









                                gnasher729

                                80.6k34145254




                                80.6k34145254












                                • If the raise was forever, surely that would be an argument for asking for the lower raise, if the higher raise would leave the OP worse off? Or are you considering that the medical cost threshold might be increased in subsequent years?
                                  – Time4Tea
                                  2 hours ago


















                                • If the raise was forever, surely that would be an argument for asking for the lower raise, if the higher raise would leave the OP worse off? Or are you considering that the medical cost threshold might be increased in subsequent years?
                                  – Time4Tea
                                  2 hours ago
















                                If the raise was forever, surely that would be an argument for asking for the lower raise, if the higher raise would leave the OP worse off? Or are you considering that the medical cost threshold might be increased in subsequent years?
                                – Time4Tea
                                2 hours ago




                                If the raise was forever, surely that would be an argument for asking for the lower raise, if the higher raise would leave the OP worse off? Or are you considering that the medical cost threshold might be increased in subsequent years?
                                – Time4Tea
                                2 hours ago










                                BaronFiner is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                                draft saved

                                draft discarded


















                                BaronFiner is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                                BaronFiner is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                                BaronFiner is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                                Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                                Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                                Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f124502%2fshould-i-request-a-lower-raise%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown











                                Popular posts from this blog

                                404 Error Contact Form 7 ajax form submitting

                                How to know if a Active Directory user can login interactively

                                TypeError: fit_transform() missing 1 required positional argument: 'X'