Indian Man Says Getting Salary 24 Times a Year Is Better Than Monthly Pay — Here’s Why
An Indian man living in Australia has sparked a fresh discussion about something millions of salaried employees deal with every month: how often should workers get paid?
Sarthak Dhingra, an Indian content creator based in Australia, shared his experience with a more frequent salary cycle and explained why he now prefers it over receiving one salary payment every month.
According to Dhingra, having money credited more frequently makes it easier for him to divide his income between daily expenses, savings and investments.
His comments have attracted attention online, with people debating whether getting smaller but more frequent paychecks actually improves personal financial management—or simply changes when the same amount of money reaches a worker’s bank account.
Why He Prefers More Frequent Salary Payments
Dhingra explained in his social media video that after experiencing Australia’s more frequent salary cycle, he finds it difficult to imagine returning to a system where he has to wait an entire month for the next paycheck.
One concern surrounding frequent salary payments is that workers might be tempted to spend money more often.
Dhingra said his experience has been different.
Instead of increasing his spending, he believes the shorter gap between payments helps him manage his finances more efficiently.
He said he is able to allocate money toward expenses while also keeping track of savings and investments.
For someone accustomed to receiving one large salary payment at the beginning or end of every month, dividing income into smaller and more frequent installments can significantly change the rhythm of household budgeting.
“24 Salary Payments” Claim Gets Attention
One of the points that attracted the most attention was Dhingra’s comparison between receiving a salary 12 times and 24 times during a year.
Under a traditional monthly salary system, employees generally receive 12 payments annually.
Receiving a paycheck twice each month would instead result in 24 salary credits during the year.
However, there is an important distinction between twice-monthly and fortnightly pay.
A true fortnightly salary is paid every two weeks, or every 14 days. Since a year contains 52 weeks, that generally results in 26 pay periods per year, rather than 24.
A twice-monthly or semi-monthly schedule, meanwhile, produces 24 payments annually.
The distinction does not change the central point behind the viral discussion: Dhingra prefers receiving his annual income in smaller, more frequent installments rather than waiting for one monthly paycheck.
Does Getting Paid More Often Mean Earning More?
No.
Getting paid more frequently does not automatically increase an employee’s annual salary.
Consider an employee earning a fixed annual salary. Whether that amount is divided into 12 monthly payments, 24 semi-monthly payments or 26 fortnightly payments, the underlying annual compensation can remain exactly the same.
What changes is cash-flow timing.
That difference can nevertheless matter for personal budgeting.
More frequent payments may reduce the amount of time an employee has to wait between paydays, potentially making it easier to align income with recurring expenses.
On the other hand, employees who already follow disciplined monthly budgets may see little financial advantage.
Why the Idea Resonates With Salaried Workers
The debate highlights a common financial challenge faced by salaried employees.
With monthly pay, workers often receive one relatively large amount and must make it last until the next salary date.
Rent or housing payments, utility bills, loan repayments, credit-card bills, investments, groceries and everyday spending can all compete for that single pool of money.
The first few days after payday can therefore look very different from the final week before the next paycheck.
A shorter pay cycle potentially reduces that gap.
Rather than budgeting for approximately four weeks at once, employees receiving more frequent payments can organize some expenses around shorter periods.
Psychologically, that may also make cash flow feel more predictable for some workers.
Social Media Users Debate the Idea
Dhingra’s argument received mixed reactions online.
Some users agreed that receiving salary more frequently could make managing everyday expenses easier.
Others pointed out that the total amount earned remains unchanged regardless of how many times it is credited.
That counterargument is important.
Payment frequency alone cannot replace good financial planning. Someone who overspends after every payday could potentially face the same problem whether they receive money once or twice a month.
In other words, the effectiveness of either system ultimately depends partly on individual spending habits and budgeting discipline.
Fortnightly Pay Is Common in Australia
Dhingra’s experience also highlights differences in payroll practices between countries.
Monthly salary payments are familiar to many Indian salaried professionals, while Australian workplaces can use weekly, fortnightly or monthly payment arrangements depending on the applicable employment rules and agreements.
Australian Bureau of Statistics data cited in reports on the discussion showed that fortnightly payment was the most common frequency among employees in its March 2023 data.
That makes the system experienced by Dhingra less unusual in Australia than it might initially appear to workers accustomed to monthly payrolls.
Monthly vs More Frequent Pay: Which Is Actually Better?
There is no universal winner.
More frequent salary payments can offer several practical advantages. Employees have shorter gaps between paydays, expenses can potentially be divided into smaller periods, and some people may find cash-flow management easier.
But there are disadvantages too.
More paydays can create more opportunities for impulsive spending. Employees may also mistakenly interpret frequent account credits as having more disposable income even though their total salary has not increased.
Monthly salaries, meanwhile, can encourage workers to plan expenses over a longer period and may make it easier to automate major monthly investments and bills.
The better system therefore depends heavily on how an individual manages money.
Why This Viral Salary Debate Matters
At first glance, the discussion may appear to be simply about whether a salary should arrive once or twice a month.
But it raises a broader question about cash flow and financial behaviour.
For employees, the timing of income can influence how money is mentally allocated and spent. For employers, payroll frequency can affect administrative processes and employee expectations.
As digital banking, automated investments and financial-management apps become more common, workers are also becoming increasingly conscious of not just how much they earn, but when and how their income reaches them.
Dhingra’s viral observation ultimately highlights a simple financial reality: receiving money more frequently does not necessarily make someone richer, but for some workers, it may make managing the same income feel considerably easier.
This article is based on reporting published by Hindustan Times.
