Calendar abnormality or another way to sc--w over employees? Please discuss…
51 replies (most recent on top)
@ap and there are always 10 work days tied to each paycheck. So for the past 11 years, every “annual” salary covered 260 work days (without removing holidays, pto, etc.). This year they are changing it to cover 270. Resulting in a 3.7% pay decrease. If you want to say the annual salary is the same, sure, but you have to work 10 additional days next year to earn your “annual” salary compared to any of the last 11 years.
Our salaries are split by the number of pay checks we receive in the year. Not by two week pay periods. So we will still get the same Salary in 2026 but spread over 27 checks instead of 26. The use of pay period vs paycheck is what is causing the confusion.
It’s a 3.7% pay reduction no matter how you do the math. Every 10 days you work, you will be paid 3.7% less than you have been to this point. And there is no payment on the back end to make up for it. Their logic is that we have been “overpaid” for the past 11 years and that this is the year that will be made up for.
I do recall this 11 or 12 years ago. As I did my research, every once in a while, all companies that pay on a biweekly schedule experience a payroll quirk: instead of the typical 26 pay periods in a year, there are 27. This isn’t unique to us — it happens across organizations about every 11 years because a calendar year is actually 52.1775 weeks long, not a perfect 52. Over time, that small fraction of a week accumulates, and eventually, one extra payday appears on the calendar. In the upcoming year, our payroll calendar will include 27 biweekly pay periods. To maintain consistency and keep everyone’s annual salary the same, we’ll spread regular annual pay evenly over 27 pay periods instead of 26. This means your total annual salary remains the same, but each paycheck will be slightly smaller since the same amount is divided over one additional pay period. Benefits and deductions will continue as usual. I called two friends at other companies and they heard the same from their companies. I guess this is normal.
I’ve been here over 25 years and have never seen this - they say this happens every 11 to 12 years - can they show us the communication from HR that was used at that time? I don’t recall anything being shared…….. because they never did!
@a2 I have been here over 17 years and have never heard of such either. My guess is it is another problem related to Workday and payroll processing or another way to get an expense off the books for a quarterly earnings report.
As someone coming from another Fortune 500 company this sounds very fishy. When we did have a calendar anomaly they would pay you the same and then during the catchup month there would be the extra paycheck so the three checks in the month would be smaller but by the end of the month everything would be back to normal. Because they wanted to impact employees the least . I call BS or lazy accounting.
27 two week pay periods in a 52 week year? Impossible. 27 checks. the first being 1/3/26 for pay period ending Dec 28th 2025. Surely that is a 2025 pay period and expense not 2026. Unless we are being told that our salaries are spread over the number of paychecks we receive in the year.
However, our pay slips quite clearly say pay period ending so I can't see that.
This whole organization is an embarrassing joke.
Constant micromanaging and babysitting but incompetent b00bs.
Seems fishy to me. Maybe trying to hide how bad medical premiums are going to go up in 2026.
@OP yeah that is a huge crock of sh**, the last check in 2026 is on Thursday due to the holiday, New year's day. I've been here over 12 years and never heard of a "calendar occurrence".