Should Extra Duties Equal More Pay?

The level of the additional tasks matters

If you are being asked to take on additional tasks that are at the same level as your current tasks, then welcome to the workload we're all shouldering today. However, if the new tasks require a significantly higher level of judgment and experience to able to perform them, then indeed it would be appropriate to get more money. Also, Dustin's comments about the frequency of the additional work are very pertinent.

Darcy of CO @ May 12, 2009 12:32:39 PM

Negotiating

For some reason, the first thing that came to my mind is whether people's advice depends at ALL on the reader's gender (or assumed gender based on occupation of secretary). There are some interesting studies about women who do/n't negotiate and how that influences pay gaps and perceived differences in pay. Perhaps that's a side conversation that isn't relevant, but I'm still curious whether we would give the same advice to someone in a slightly different support role who was being asked to do something outside of their job description.

I *do* think that this could be a GREAT opening for the reader to show their worth to the company and perhaps move into another position - they're showing that they're a team player and that their value to the company isn't just a job title. How marvelous it would be if companies could move away from the pigeonholing of people into specific roles or titles and into capitalizing on the various talents of their workforce - but it's generally not efficient.

Overall, I think we need more information here to make an educated decision and I'll be watching this carefully as I think that the discussion about where lines are drawn is an important one, especially in this economy. How do you, as an employee, ensure that you're being properly compensated while still being a team player? I'm sure that it's come up in other contexts with employers unwilling to pay new people and asking FAR more of current employees knowing that current employees are "over a barrel" so to speak because they don't want to lose their job for any reason in this economy.

Katy of GA @ May 12, 2009 11:03:26 AM

If it were 1994...

If it were 1994, I'd say -- put your foot down and don't budge.

But it's 2009, and there are 50 people outside the gate who'd cut throats to get your job, and your employer knows it.

So I think Alison's advice is good -- do the IT stuff, do it well, and make damn sure it's acknowledged in the next performance review. Also keep an eye out for any IT openings.

Rebecca of PA @ May 12, 2009 09:04:18 AM

Re: I don't completely agree

Perdita, I think we're saying (close to) the same thing. Absolutely she should ask for more money down the road, using this as part of the picture of her overall value to the company. But I don't think asking for it immediately, as a condition of taking this on, is the way to go. Down the road, yes.

I also should add that I think this depends to some extent on the type of company you're working for. If you're working for a 20-person employer, this type of thing is typical. If you're in a 2,000 person company, it's a different story.

Alison Green of DC @ May 12, 2009 08:59:11 AM

I don't completely agree

They aren't being asked to take on extra duties expected of their position, they're being asked to do an additional role and they should ask to be recognised for that, otherwise the employer is just going to walk all over them.

I was in exactly the same position. Hired as an Admin and because of my IT background ended up becoming User Support for the office and covering for the IT Manager when he was away.

I didn't ask for money straight away, I did the job and when it came to my annual review I was armed with the added value I brought to the company and asked for a raise to reflect that. I got it.

Why on earth would someone hired to do secretarial / clerical work be expected to take on another role and not expect to be compensated for all their hard work. There was no way I was going to accept still being paid the same as the other Admin when I was doing way more work than them. I was saving the company an extra salary by adding that role on to mine.

The other thing is to make sure you stand up for yourself when the inevitable complaints happen that you haven't done X while you're covering for the IT person. I used to get asked why I hadn't cleared all my files when I'd had to spend most of the day recovering the database because some genius had downloaded a virus that wiped it out!

Perdita @ May 12, 2009 04:07:06 AM

Golden Opportunity

If you're a secretary with a degree in computer engineering, I'm kind of surprised that you're not excited about having the opportunity to do a little more of the sort of thing you went to college for.

I used to be a secretary. I volunteered to be the backup HR person when the regular HR person was unavailable. I didn't get more money, but I did get experience that led to a long, successful career in HR. I considered the extra work an investment, and it paid off very, very well. It also made my days a lot more interesting...because being a secretary was boring.

Incidentally, the other secretaries thought I was nuts for not demanding more money. Guess what? They're still secretaries.

Kerry of WI @ May 11, 2009 21:38:53 PM

More details!

I can see the point of both the author and the comments. Unfortunately, we don't have enough details. Does "back up IT" person mean that the reader only infrequently has to do some random IT thing if the regular IT people are all sick, on vacation, etc.? Or does it mean that once a week, the reader's doing the regular IT guys job? The former, and I side with Allison; the latter and I side with the first comment. It's a fine line, and the decision needs to be made by the reader.

Also, if you don't feel like you're being adequately compensated, you're not going to be happy, so you need to figure out if this is acceptable. If it's not, by all means, ask for more money. The one thing I would point out here is to wait until you've performed the duties (and done them well), and time it so it doesn't look like you're blackmailing them (i.e. don't wait until you've been assigned an "IT" task and then say, I want to get paid more). Talk about it after you've performed the duties, since that way you could approach it as a conversation about the depth of your new responsibilities, how often they will occur, etc.

Good luck!

Dustin of MD @ May 11, 2009 18:41:17 PM

Alison Green is completely off-base here.

I have to completely disagree.

People get hired to do a specific job. This person was hired to do secretarial work. Her pay is based on her role as secretary, regardless of the type of degree she possesses.

Sure, it is expected that she may be asked to occasionally perform tasks somewhat outside the role of secretary. However, those should be infrequent. And, they should not be too far from the skillset required for a secretary.

To hire her for secretarial work and then ask her to perform IT duties without the corresponding IT pay is unfairly taking advantage of her skills and her situation. Heck, if they're going to do that, what's to stop them from replacing all their IT workers with "secretaries"? Absolutely nothing. Just because we are in a recession, that does not give companies the right to mistreat employees.

If her company wants her to perform the duties of backup IT person, then they need to acknowledge that by officially changing her duties, her title, and her pay.

Chris V of WA @ May 11, 2009 18:14:25 PM