[MrRoboto]

Originally Posted by aozer

i dont get why it would be so hard to budget getting paid once a month. most bills are once a month. pay all your bills at the start of the pay period, set aside however much you are plan to put into savings, set aside your monthly spending money. it isnt rocket science. if you cant budget your spending for each month you probably arent living within your means anyways.

It's got nothing to do with your monthly expenses. The company is putting it's AR risk on the employees which is wrong and evidence of poorly managed company and/or one that has cashflow issues.

[Ickdeep]

When I wife first started teaching, she got the same pay schedule. Once a month towards the end of the month. The first month was a little hard but it worked it self after a few months (used credit cards but paid them off afterwards).

My recommendation is budget budget budget. Pay all the house bills as soon as you get paid so that you know your "living money". From that take out gas, food, etc.. And don't forget to budget for savings. We use an excel spreadsheet to track all of the bills.

[Alfisti]

Yeah it's not about the monthly payment it's the additional time in arrears that gets me. it's madness.

Read the OP again.

[Maestro]

Ops, the company you work for is having a cash flow issue, they are billing your hours to third party and they have 30 days to pay their bill and your company is not paying you until they get paid.

My wife works in the HR recruiting and contracting space most good company pay the contactor every two week and usually the first pay is delayed by one pay period. When a company who provides contracted service they usually negotiate with their clients to pay immediate upon a contractor summitting their hours, even if the companies pays 30 days later which some do, the Contracting company floats the cost of pay for a period of time.

[MJBO]

I’ve had several full time jobs that were paid monthly, and now that I’m running my own business my payments are all over the place.

Many are end of month plus 30 days, one is 60 days from invoice!

Being on end of month plus 30 while being an employee seems weird though.

[aozer]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

It's got nothing to do with your monthly expenses. The company is putting it's AR risk on the employees which is wrong and evidence of poorly managed company and/or one that has cashflow issues.

obviously. im referring to posts like this:

Originally Posted by F30lolz

Did you know of this before you accepted the position? The University of Miami pays its employees once a month, though not sure if it’s the exact same structure as your current employer. My aunt only lasted a year working for them as she had a hard time budgeting.

[Angry Ketchup]

OP, I guess it's pretty simple:

1) Demand/negotiate fortnightly pay with your new employer.

2) Work somewhere else where the conditions of employment better meet your expectations/lifestyle.



Unless you're somehow indentured to serve that employer, go out and find what makes you happy. That's how I'd look at it. ymmv

[DETRoadster]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

It's got nothing to do with your monthly expenses. The company is putting it's AR risk on the employees which is wrong and evidence of poorly managed company and/or one that has cashflow issues.

Not always. The company I work for is small (75 people) and we have 1 person to do Hr/payroll/benefits. She's swamped. Doing payroll Is such a timesuck we do monthly instead of bi weekly.

[Alfisti]

Half of you are not reading the OP. It's not 30 days, it's damn near 60.

[eluded]

What state is this legal in ?

[gatorfast]

Need to know if you are a w-2 employee or contract work. If the former then net 30 is not common and perhaps not legal. If you are a consultant then net 30 is extremely common and terms can and should always be negotiated between you and your client.

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by eluded

What state is this legal in ?

Close to half of them:

https://www.dol.gov/whd/state/payday.htm

There are a few states that don’t appear in that list.

[Violator]

My wife and I have been paid once a month/end of month since 2005. It’s very easy to live with, 12 paychecks a year.

Just budget well and live within your means.

[The Libertine]

So, if you get paid based on prior month’s work (revenue), a concern of mine would be if the prior month was a slow one. What if Company goals were not met? Or if there is a downtown in the economy, how would that impact revenue stream? Is the Company properly funded to ensure employees salaries are paid?

[MrRoboto]

Originally Posted by DETRoadster

Not always. The company I work for is small (75 people) and we have 1 person to do Hr/payroll/benefits. She's swamped. Doing payroll Is such a timesuck we do monthly instead of bi weekly.

That's a great example. Rather then your company hiring someone to help with the payroll or contracting an outside payroll company has made the job easier for payroll at the expense of employees.

Your company is taking a huge risk by having one person to do payrol. If she quits or gets sick you guys are in the shit. Outsourcing payroll/benefits is quite inexpensive. 75 people is a decent size 'small' business.

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

That's a great example. Rather then your company hiring someone to help with the payroll or contracting an outside payroll company has made the job easier for payroll at the expense of employees.

Your company is taking a huge risk by having one person to do payrol. If she quits or gets sick you guys are in the shit. Outsourcing payroll/benefits is quite inexpensive. 75 people is a decent size 'small' business.

Years ago, I was controller and then CFO for a company that did something similar to DETRoadster's company. (In our case we went from weekly payroll to 2x / month for non-commission payroll.) We also had one person who spent a full day collecting and prepping payroll for the outsourced provider and then reviewing what we got back before the cash was transmitted each payroll period. That doesn't mean she was the only person who could do it. There were several other people cross-trained and able to step in if she was sick, on vacation or if she left the company. However, having her spend 24 days / year on it rather than 52 means we picked up 28 work days a year for her to do other productive things, in her case related to employee benefits. 5-6 weeks of man-hours was not insignificant to us and everyone eventually adapted after initially complaining loudly. I also reduced the frequency of vendor payments and stretched terms, to which they also adapted, with similar efficiency gains. Efficiency is important to controlling costs and I do not agree that it makes sense to just keep hiring people to do administrative tasks that can be done more efficiently. In our case, it had nothing to do with cash flow and everything to do with efficiency. Presumably outsourced providers have more efficient solutions today than they did back then so the efficiency savings would not be as great. But nevertheless, it is in everyone's interest to keep administrative expense growth in check.

[DETRoadster]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

That's a great example. Rather then your company hiring someone to help with the payroll or contracting an outside payroll company has made the job easier for payroll at the expense of employees.

Your company is taking a huge risk by having one person to do payrol. If she quits or gets sick you guys are in the shit. Outsourcing payroll/benefits is quite inexpensive. 75 people is a decent size 'small' business.

As RickFLM4 said about his experience, my company also has multiple people cross-trained to do payroll.

My understanding is the root of our problem is our ERP system does not play with ADP. So it all has to be manually done.