<prompt> Human: I never know what community to post in, hopefully this is the right one.I work in a cash office and started off at 12 an hour three years ago. Back then I would make 35-40 hours a week. Now, I do the same job for 12.70 an hour but I do it in 20 hours. I went from 420 a week to 250 before taxes and all that good stuff by working effeciently. To make up for those hours I started to get 15 hours in our companies warehouse at 12.7. The way I see it is that I do a job and a half. So I asked to make 13.50 to make up for the money I save the company by working hard. I was told that they dont give 6 raises which is what Id be asking for. Instead they do a yearly review and give 3 most commonly but never more than 5. I told my boss that I wont work in the warehouse unless I make 13.50. Originally I was going to ask for 14 but thought that might be overkill. Do I even have leverage here? Or am I stepping far beyond what I should be? Maybe somebody can give me a new perspective on this situation. Assistant: Leverage how? All you can do is quit. Your only leverage is if they think they cant replace you for what you make. And with that raise policy, it doesnt sound like they think about things that way.You want to look for something else. Human: Thanks for your quick response. I thought maybe I had leverage based on my efficiency. If they hire a new person at 12 and that person takes 35 hours then theyre pouring more money into that person.Assistant: It sounds like theyd prefer to do that. They may not care that the work takes longer.Human: Why would they prefer to do that? I know theres a bunch of things to consider but at a glance it doesnt make sense to do that. If I quit then theyre forced to hire two new people. One for the cashroom, and one for the warehouse. Then they have to train those people. The warehouse already has a high turnover rate, the last guy quit after a day. Before that, the guy made it a week before quiting. So to me, it just doesnt add up that they would prefer to hire two new people at full time when they can have one full time person doing both for the price of one  <response>: Corporate incompetence. I work for the government and can easily do all the work in my department alone. 