[yellow_lead]

I've been told to wait for a pay increase/promotion twice. And I got it both times (luckily). The time periods were only a few months or a year each time.

I think it's a judgement call but making such a long-out promise like 3 years in the tech industry is a huge red flag. Even at one year you should be skeptical and asking how/why as the author suggests.

[hnlmorg]

Being told you have to wait until the next pay review cycle, is normal. It’s how a business with healthy and defined processes should operate.

But you should only be waiting at most a year. If you get told “wait 2+ years” then that’s usually a sign that they’ve already decided you’re not eligible (for whatever reasons they decide) but don’t want to be candid with you.

If you get told to wait for any duration beyond the next pay review cycle, then take that as a sign that you’re not going to progress under the current regime.

[PlatoIsADisease]

Can I get an exception of it was a terrible fiscal year?

Take the startup situation:

We were unprofitable year 1, we were break even year 2. Year 3 we look to repay investors and begin fun times. Year 4, fun times.

I suppose I can think of enough exceptions that I reject the theory the original OP posted.

[rrr_oh_man]

> It’s how a business with healthy and defined processes should operate.

That sounds like bullshit. Why?

[jimbokun]

Yeah 3 years is beyond the event horizon for almost every corporation. Just a polite way of telling you to go away.