Re: Pay Rise
If your contract says that you will get an unconditional payrise in July of each year, then that's really all there is to it. Does it specify the actual %age raise? If it's in line with inflation though, that could mean the change in inflation between when you started and July, not necessarily the annual inflation rate (unless it details that specifically in the contract). That would mean a very small increase. Although if they gave the other person a full annual %age increase if they started in March, as opposed to April, then that shows that they don't pro-rate the increases depending on when an employee started (provided it was before April)
You don't need to have an official probation period but you can be let go for any reason (bar anti-discrimination) within the first 12-months of employment.
I agree that it's not on for your employer to say in the contract that you will get a pay rise in July and then after you've joined tell you that this wasn't applicable if you started in April. However, if it is their policy that one has to start in March to be eligible for the payrise in July (which I don't think in and of itself is unreasonable), then the employee that started before you does fall in that category and so, if they had told you about the March cut-off date initially, there would be no problem. If the policy had been notified to you in advance, then everyone would have been treated fairly under that policy and, as such, I think a comparison to this other employee who started in March is a bit of a red herring. The problem, as I see it, is that they didn't tell you of this cut-off point before you joined.
If you believe that they are manufacturing this cut-off point purely not to give you the pay rise, then I'd agree that you need to seriously think about whether you want to work for these people. However, if you believe that they just inadvertently forgot to notify you that the cut-off date for payrises was for employees starting prior to April, then you have to decide whether you want to make a big deal about it now, have them make an exception to their global policy on this subject, and deal with the risks of that. It's not necessarily fair, but squeaky wheel employees are viewed with some trepidation by employers and your employer could decide that you are not worth the effort. Then you could be left with a moral victory on this pay rise point, but no job afterwards.
Perhaps you could ask them now to give you a larger pay rise next July - e.g. a 1.3X inflation to take into account the additional months worked this year for which you aren't getting the inflation-related rise. That would show willing on your part to compromise on this issue and would also give your employer a sense of comfort because if you are still there next July, it means that the employment relationship is working out and the employer wants to keep you and you want to stay there. Or, if you have a bonus scheme that pays out e.g. at the end of the year, perhaps ask for a commensurate increase in your bonus for this year.
You need to decide how far you are willing to go with this. If you absolutely wouldn't have joined if you weren't guaranteed the pay rise in July, then you have to be prepared to walk away if you don't get it. If you decide that you can suck it up (or reach a compromise), then you need to be absolutely sure that you can accept that with good grace and get on with the job at hand. The worst possible situation would be for you to not get your pay rise and then be disgruntled for the foreseeable future but still remain in employment. A festering resentment will not help anyone, least of all you.
Good luck with it. For what it's worth, I doubt that your employer is doing this deliberately to target you and merely made a mistake. It's a very good policy from an employee's point of view and very few companies guarantee pay rises at all, even if you have to wait 15 months to get the initial one. If you like the actual job, that's reason enough for you to stay and leave this matter behind you.
Good luck
Sprite