81–90 of 196 posts
Well if the average tenure of a software developer at a company is like 2-3 years, you will lose by asking for a raise and should just quit to go somewhere else!
Saw this set of polls from @zedshaw on twitter and had JUST read this article. Seems relevant. https://twitter.com/zedshaw/status/795687259861172224
Wow. That poll seems to indicate the only way most folks get a raise is by quitting their job and getting a different one. :(
For example, we brought on a front end developer who was about 1 year out of college and hadn't done much. After 3 years, he had devoured basically everything on the front end, but he hadn't gotten much of a raise, but was leading a team in addition to his own work. An internal position opened up that would have been a promotion for him, and when I talked to the person hiring, I got a response of "What are you talking about? He's fresh out of college". Few in the company could see past their mental model of him even though he'd grown past it by far.
He wasn't able to break away from those pre-conceived, and built up opinions. However, he left, got a new position for a quite a bit of a raise, and he's no longer known as 'that college kid'.
In that way, it's like family dynamics. Being a 'kid sister' even though everyone is in their 40s, has 2 or more kids of their own, and the age gap is only 2 years. Replace your own unbreakable family dynamics here.
Like in a lot of things: Context matters. I can look at SV salaries and only shake my head. Random 'jump between jobs every 6 month if needed to improve your net worth' advice from single mid-twenties (not talking about the author, no clue about his background. But it feels that this is the general attitude around salary improvement here) is not globally applicable. And the author basically says 'invest in the compan…
IMO. It's actually bad advice. It's wrong to think of salary as something synced to productivity/value.
Working more guarantees pretty much nothing about future money. Only that you're underpaid, and you've made yourself even more underpaid because you put more hours.
"Get offers and negotiate as hard as necessary. Then work whatever you may or wish." That's a way better strategy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quite a while. There were no negative consequences.
Wow, I can't imagine a place where playing the "I got an offer somewhere else" card wouldn't start a countdown clock on your career there.
You should always approach the negotiations with an upper hand - an offer from somewhere else. If it doesn't go well, just move.
This can be an effective tactic (meaning it could get you a raise), but it's not my preferred method. I prefer to focus on the situation itself without bringing in that sort of leverage because of the impact it can have on the way you're perceived at your company, by your manager, by your teammates, etc. This strategy can work, but it's a little riskier than focusing on the value and working with your manager to alig…
Managers and HR don't give a damn about that. They do it all the time, all day along. They are professional negotiators, that's their jobs.
Your line of thinking can only manage to undermine yourself. Get it out of your head.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since Oct 2012, I've gone from $32k, to $44k, to $75k, to $85k (and killer benefits) now. None of these were in SF, NYC, LA, Boston or Austin. All from switching jobs.
One thing not mentioned a lot in this discussion is that those triple- and double-digit increases tend to only happen early in one's career. Later in your career, it gets very difficult to find a different company that is willing to pay you even 10% more than you're making. You definitely will hit a ceiling at some point. My last job hop probably did not result in more than a 1% bump or so. So, Junior Engineer going…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
at my company the answer would be "good, hire the replacement for 25% less than current so I can tell the vp we're saving money"
What happens if he replies that "We've been recruiting for 6 months for this position and we couldn't find anyone decent enough even at his current salary"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
at my company the answer would be "good, hire the replacement for 25% less than current so I can tell the vp we're saving money"
What happens if he replies that "We've been recruiting for 6 months for this position and we couldn't find anyone decent enough even at his current salary"?
If management truly wanted to "negotiate" then they would begin putting conditions on a raise or something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. That poll seems to indicate the only way most folks get a raise is by quitting their job and getting a different one. :(
There are also social dynamics and logical fallacies at play. For example, we brought on a front end developer who was about 1 year out of college and hadn't done much. After 3 years, he had devoured basically everything on the front end, but he hadn't gotten much of a raise, but was leading a team in addition to his own work. An internal position opened up that would have been a promotion for him, and when I talked…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This can be an effective tactic (meaning it could get you a raise), but it's not my preferred method. I prefer to focus on the situation itself without bringing in that sort of leverage because of the impact it can have on the way you're perceived at your company, by your manager, by your teammates, etc. This strategy can work, but it's a little riskier than focusing on the value and working with your manager to alig…
I wonder, do the managers see it that way? Engineers are doing their job and often buy into the worth of the company, the importance of their work etc. And even if they don't they think most of their peers do. So when an engineer plays this card he tends to assume others will see it as ruthless. But do management really think this? Do they really drink the kool aide and think less of you? Or do they just see this as…
By the time you go out and get another bona-fide offer that you're considering taking, I and our company have already lost the game if that's the first I hear about it. I'd much rather hear about it before you've invested that amount of time and energy into it and don't hold it against you regardless of the outcome. If we're talking about it every 3 weeks, it's a problem, of course.
I've also encouraged some very good employees to go interview and see what's out there. This is typically when a potential new role is fundamentally different from what I can offer. (Higher role at a smaller company perhaps, or a job in their home town, or a brand new startup with some past coworkers.) I've had all four outcomes (employee stays-no change, employee gets offer-we counter-they stay, employee gets offer-we counter-they leave, employee gets offer-we don't counter-they leave).
I also don't buy into the "never accept a counter-offer; they'll just be sharpening the knife to fire you later" line of thinking. If I didn't want you here, I wouldn't counter.
If you think of this whole process as a ruthless move in a game, I think you're thinking about wrong. You bring value to the table; the company brings value to the table; we freely exchange that value, making both of us better off.