I have very mixed feelings on this subject. I know a few friends now who have opted to take a promotion without a pay rise or were promoted with no salary increase.
In many ways, it does seem like a sensible thing to promote someone to then ask that employee to prove themselves in the role then you can speak about money. Personally I am all for the idea of giving people a test run first, they might not even like the role they are promoted to. Why risk losing good staff if the role doesn't work out for them.
But of course there is a flip side to this. Employees in many cases might feel that they have worked hard and earned the promotion with a nice salary increase and may be feel offended being given a promotion to then be told they would have to wait for a pay rise and ultimately could cause them to leave anyway.
Would I want to be promoted and not have an increase in salary? I really don't know.
What do you think?
New research from leading recruitment specialists Robert Half UK reveals securing promotion is no guarantee of a pay rise, as 94% of finance professionals would elevate an employee into a new role without offering any additional remuneration. The primary motivation (42%) for Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) and Finance Directors (FDs) promoting employees without offering a pay rise is because they believe employee performance in the new role needs to be assessed first.