At my organisation, we’re paid fortnightly. A couple of years ago management floated the idea of moving to monthly payment and there was almost a riot among the staff. The “it will be more difficult to budget” argument got a lot of play. I doubted that at the time. I tend to agree with other posters that people with good budgeting skills will be able to handle any frequency of payment. Likewise those who lack the skills will always struggle, regardless of how frequently they’re paid.
Anyway, we’re still on a fortnightly payment cycle and I don’t think it’s likely to change. I’ve never experienced any other frequency of payment.
I think I am going to put out a memo at work tomorrow: “Henceforth, those under the servitude of this grand establishment shall be paid fortnightly. Any concerns should be immediately be directed to HR.”
We already get paid biweekly (which is actually a technical misuse of language that means every 14 days but can imply twice a week). I just like the term fortnightly much better and we don’t use it enough in the U.S.
Overtime pay was a bummer when I got paid on the 15th and 30th.
If that split week was OT, you had to wait a bit extra to get it.
But employers always have gimicks. I worked in one hotel, I did payroll and the WORK WEEK (schedules) was Sun - Sat, but the pay week was Mon - Sun, and this would cause no problems as in the end it balances, but you could get weird things like 88 hours straight pay, which confused people as they thought the extra 8 hours should be OT.
But it wasn’t because of they work week and pay week were not synched up
You have to be involved with the payroll process for a minimum of 50 employees for a few months, to grasp the severe ineptness of too many people in handling money in a reasonable or responsible manner.
Monthly payroll has substantial cost saving advantages for both parties, payer and payee, but it goes against two major established norms: the first is the high level of incompetence many people have to handle any piece of information that has a number on it, and the second is that monthly payroll will decrease the immediate gratification spending that’s a huge part of the consumerist economy that is prevalent in the last 150 years.
In short: consumption units can’t count, they can’t postpone their gratification and they are dependent on the illusion that they’re paid more often than once a month.
I have been paid weekly. Same amout of pay each week unless over time, the easiest way to budget. Walk around money easy to handle and budget for.
I am now being paid every other week. some dificulities. Same amout of pay each week unless over time. Walk around money easy to handle and budget for. Payday always on the same day of the week but the date of paydays changes through out the year. Each year 10 months will have two paydays and 2 months will have 3 paydays.
I have been paid twice a month. More dificulties. Differnment amount pf pay each payday, from as little as 7 days pay, or as many 13 days. Payday always on the same two dates. Walk around money harder to budget. Bills are normaly sent near the same date so easier to budget.
I have also been paid monthly. NOt bad. Same amount of pay each payday. Walk around money can be harder to budget, easier to run out of spend money before end of month. Most bills are monthly. Problem is bills that come in on the 3 or 4th of the month that are not constant. I had a gas bill that I would get on the 4th I never knew how much to set aside. Worked with the gas company and changed billing date to the 20th.
My standing is
Best weekly
Next Monthly
then every other week
Last 1st and 15th
Monthly paychecks are pretty standard in the UK, certainly in your typical office job. Is this mainly a case of ‘what you’re used to’? People here budget well, or don’t in just the same way as I’m sure happens in the US for those of you who get paid twice a month.
I have some bills that are weekly (groceries) and others which are monthly - mortgage, utilities, insurance etc. I do try to have the monthly ones come out just after payday, but it’s not like I am then home free, I still need to budget so as to be able to do a weekly groceries shop for the family, balancing in that some months have an extra week where I still have to buy food.
Similarly, 1/365th of your annual rent/mortgage should be deducted every day since you already lived there that day. Your gas and electric meters should be tied straight to your bank so that you can see the pennies slip away when you turn up the thermostat. Why should you be allowed to earn interest on money you rightfully owe to others?
We could always change back to paying salaries and collecting rents on quarter days (although we would need to decide whater we would be using the English, old Scottish, or new Scottish days).
OP, when I saw the thread title I thought, “Yeah! Getting paid every week would be so much better!” Then I read the OP. I don’t think you need a trip to the funny farm; I think you’re thinking out loud. And I think you have a bad idea. (I think I do too much thinking.)
What most, but not all, people are overlooking is that some people are not bad budgeters, just dirt poor. When the paycheck comes in (every other Friday in our case), we pay rent and bills first, and eat what’s left. Sometimes that means I have to feed a family of five for two weeks on $100. And take money for gas out of that, and money for field trips, and car repairs. The next check can never come soon enough.
If we had to wait three weeks or so for more money, we’d be in a constant state of panic, and hunger. I think one thing everyone can agree on (everyone on the Dope agree on something? Yes, we can!) is when your children are hungry now, you do whatever you can to feed them now. I’ve had to return gifts from the in-laws to Marshall’s and buy food there with store credit. Have you seen the weird foodstuffs there? I’ve also used KMart gift cards for food (canned baked beans and canned peaches was not our favorite dinner). Or walking five miles to the nearest Noco because I had a gift card but no bus fare. Sprite and Combos, yay. But you do what you have to do to feed the kids. At least it’s only for a few days or a week, and all the bills are paid. If we only had income once a month, we’d run out quickly, good budgeting or no, because the baby is screaming for milk now, we’re out of gas now, and I have no more creative financing up my sleeve. But the bills are paid.
The main issue with everybody getting paid once a month on the first has to do with the bills you then have to pay. As it is now, every company works hard to spread its billing out evenly so you don’t have every. single. customer. getting their monthly bills generated on the same day. Because that fucks with your billing system computers something fierce. The company I work for now has 5 million customers. That means on any given day, assuming 30 day months, we’re issuing about 167,000 statements. This is doable and doesn’t unduly impact the computer systems. Now figure we have to do them ALL on one day, in order for the due date to fall on the same day. How much do you want to be the person who has to call customer service to get some issue resolved on that day? You ready to be on the phone for an hour waiting for the billing system to respond as enormous percentages of its capacity are tied up with generating statements? After that, how would you like to be waiting for hours on the phone so’s not to miss your due date, trying to get a discrepancy fixed? Along with the other 4,999,999 customer who ALSO need to get THEIR issues resolved? There’s a reason why bill cycles are spread out over the month, it’s to let the companies function correctly and with the maximum efficiency and minimum impact to the customer experience.
How about shopping? You wanna go shopping when that check gets in–and so does everybody else. Welcome to the fabulous world of having all your frozen goods melt completely while you’re standing in line to make your purchases. Gas stations, movie theaters, trying to get something mailed on THE DAY, you’d think you were queueing up in Soviet Russia trying to score that last roll of bum wad. The other three weeks the entire economy will be effectively dead–so we’ll make all the service workers do overtime like hell for the first week and a half of the month, then furlough them for the rest of the month so they aren’t standing around with their thumbs up their butts, not working because nobody’s shopping because it’s two weeks after Payday and two weeks before Next Payday.
Yeah, great idea, I’m sure it will catch on. :rolleyes:
I’m leftist, and I oppose this proposal, so please don’t lump me in with the OP.
I’d go just the opposite route, actually. I’d mandate that paychecks be weekly, and that direct deposit always be an option (for a poor person who doesn’t have a car, it can be a major hardship to get a ride over to the bank).
Does anyone here ever remember their first job, or has gotten a job after a long stretch of unemployment? It completely blows having to wait two weeks for that paycheck, let alone a month!
Your reality is interfering with everyone’s chance to feel smug and superior.
People- even poor people- generally act rationally according to incentives. If they are blowing all their money, it’s probably because they have some reason to think that is a good idea. That could be that they just don’t have enough money to plan ahead, the lives of those around them have convinced them that delayed gratification is not likely to yield rewards, they are unaware of the financial resources available to them, etc. If you want to change the behavior (for whatever reason…) you need to change the incentives.
As someone who processes payroll for two different businesses I can’t see any benefit for an employee to be paid monthly. The business would benefit by being able to get some interest by hanging onto the money and paying fewer payroll processing fees, but that’s about it.
I have been paid bi-weekly and am currently paid weekly. There is really no difference for me in being paid either way. If you do a poor job handling money then you will do a poor job handling your money no matter when you get it.
Long ago when I was a restaurant server I was basically paid daily (since I walked with cash everyday). What I got as an hourly wage went to taxes, FICA, etc. so my paychecks were always zero after the deductions. There were some of us who put cash in the bank daily and did ok and others who acted like the cash was burning a hole in their pocket and spent it as fast and recklessly as possible. I think it had more to do with maturity and a willingness to plan for the future than how frequently we were paid.
For those who now get paid bi-weekly and prefered it back when you got paid once a month: Why not just sit on that first paycheck for a couple weeks and then do your bills? Or just go to your employer and say “Hold onto this paycheck for a couple weeks; I don’t want to pay bills yet.”?
I have been paid bi-weekly, weekly, and currently am paid semi-monthly and daily (delivering pizzas). The best (financially) was when I was working 2 jobs: one paid weekly and the other was delivering pizzas getting cash every time I worked for spending money and then getting a check every 7th and 22nd of the month. I got paid 6 - 7 times a month, not counting my spending cash. (They weren’t big checks, but enough to pay whatever bills were due at that time.) You see, my bills all come at different days of the month. I have a spreadsheet to remind me what and when needs to be paid. Mortgage on the 1st. Water on the 7th. Internet on the 8th. Credit cards on the 14th. Cell phone on the 18th. Gas on the 21. Car on the 25th. Electricity on the 28th.
Because of the time value of money, the more frequently you get paid, the better (for the employee. The employer would love to collect the interest on your paycheck for as long as possible.)
As everyone else has said, this plan is terrible and would only help businesses (who would earn interest on the paychecks that they are essentially holding) and the employees who are beyond help.
Another vote for it’s not the frequency of the paychecks, but the money sense of the paycheck holder that determines who will stay on budget. At my university faculty is paid monthly. Staff is paid bi-monthly. Casual observation (overhearing people talk about their finances) has confirmed many times if someone can’t budget they will find themselves in financial trouble.
I was paid monthly at a previous job and it sucked so hard I’m surprised the universe didn’t collapse in on itself. No matter how carefully and scrupulously I budgeted, something always seemed to come up in the last week of the pay cycle (ie the week before I’d get paid) that meant I often still ended up with no money for a week.
Getting paid fortnightly isn’t my preferred frequency either, although I can manage if that’s how it is; but I find getting paid weekly works best for me and I can’t possibly imagine why anyone would think legislating so that people got paid less frequently would be a good idea, to be honest.
Well, you know how all of your bills are due on the first of each month? Including a month’s worth of groceries, dining, clothes, etc?
And you know how, if you have cash at the same time that your bills are due, you will pay your bills?
And you know how, if you have cash a few days before the bills are due you will just spend that money on hookers and blow?
Not really, no. My bills come in monthly (one of them quarterly), but not on the first. They’re scattered all over the calendar. For your scheme to have value, the employer would have to inquire what the employee’s expenses and billing cycles were, and I don’t see a whole lot of employees coughing up said info, nor that all employees would have similar (or similar enough) finances to make it worthwhile.