Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 560 posts

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#311

Post by Tomis02 »

southphillyman wrote: post #308

Never understood why companies will refuse to give valuable employees reasonable raises but when turn around and pay an unproven new hire even more money to replace them. So you refuse to give me a 10% increase because "never negotiate with terrorists" but will gladly pay the 20% increase that I'm getting at my new job to my replacement (because that's the market). Just seems so short sighted.

Because it's easy to say "the employee is just doing the job they're paid to do, why give them a raise?". Also, "we need to give an extra 20% to convince this person to come aboard, whereas we already own these employees".

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#312

Post by nilkn »

willvarfar wrote: post #100
nilkn wrote: post #80

I think it's important to understand that there's a significant amount of selection bias possible here. In general, folks who switch jobs every two years are the folks who are not getting offered big raises by their current companies. The ones who are getting offered big raises may still choose to leave due to other reasons, but they often will choose to stay instead. And they won't be making a big fuss about it onli…

> selection bias possible here. In general, folks who switch jobs every two years are the folks who are not getting offered big raises by their current companies. The article is saying that those who stay don't get offered big raises. The article says that if you stay you get 3% or less. There's even a pretty chart to make this point. Employees aren't paid what they are worth, they are paid as little as the company c…

I hoped it was clear I was discussing this topic beyond what the article says. After all, that is what comment sections are for.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#313

Post by softawre »

djslakor wrote: post #236
scaryclam wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine this is good advice in some places, but as a line manager, if you pull this on me I'm more than likely to shake your hand and wish you luck in your new job. In a lot of places, having a talk with your manager about your salary before going off and actively looking for other offers is going to go down a lot better. Most line managers worth working for, value their teams and will fight for them if they are un…

> but as a line manager, if you pull this on me I'm more than likely to shake your hand and wish you luck in your new job. "Pull this on you"? You sound like a real joy to work for. This is expressly why I choose gigs where I'm working directly for an owner if at all possible. If you've created value, owners know how important you are and will take your request seriously as long as it's reasonable. In my career, I ha…

He is just saying ask for a raise before you go solicit offers from other companies.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#314

Post by tormeh »

rdlecler1 wrote: post #286
djslakor wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but as a line manager, if you pull this on me I'm more than likely to shake your hand and wish you luck in your new job. "Pull this on you"? You sound like a real joy to work for. This is expressly why I choose gigs where I'm working directly for an owner if at all possible. If you've created value, owners know how important you are and will take your request seriously as long as it's reasonable. In my career, I ha…

People don't like to feel like they're being exhorted. This has a high likelihood of backfiring. If you want a raise talk to your manager first. Don't come with threats to leave.

The "threat", because it's just a bidding round for your time, really, has to be real. If it's real and your employer declines to participate, that just means the other company won and you now have a new employer. There shouldn't be any hard feelings unless you have a personal relationship with your boss.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#315

Post by marvelous »

ohyes wrote: post #290
JCharante wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it doesn't add anything of value to the thread, but that's a really good analogy.

It's a terrible analogy. A better analogy is you're a prostitute and you tell your client that you looked around and the going rate for this type of work is more than he's been paying you, so you're gonna go fuck other guys for money. You don't fire your girlfriend in tough times, but your boss will fire you if he had to. It's a stricylty pay to play relationship.

We use the prostitute analogy a lot with my techie friends. Just don't tell my parents that I write software. I pretend to work at Starbucks.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#316

Post by mcguire »

scaryclam wrote: post #112
elnygren wrote: post #107

Best way to increase salary at current workplace? Get offers from other companies & ask for a meeting with your boss (or whoever decides your pay, so HR etc.). Bring up the offers, discuss what you'd get from there and also go through the potential career you could build at those companies. For example: Consultancy X would pay me $k/mo and every 6months it will go up the ladder if I perform well. With this kind of di…

I imagine this is good advice in some places, but as a line manager, if you pull this on me I'm more than likely to shake your hand and wish you luck in your new job. In a lot of places, having a talk with your manager about your salary before going off and actively looking for other offers is going to go down a lot better. Most line managers worth working for, value their teams and will fight for them if they are un…

I'm not sure about most places since I've been a contract employee for most of my career, but at my last employer, a large government contractor, extortion of this sort was literally the only way to get more than the nominal raise.

And TBH, if the company is making cutbacks, all of the competent people will be scurrying away first; you might as well be one of them.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#317

Post by fullstackhuman »

scaryclam wrote: post #112
elnygren wrote: post #107

Best way to increase salary at current workplace? Get offers from other companies & ask for a meeting with your boss (or whoever decides your pay, so HR etc.). Bring up the offers, discuss what you'd get from there and also go through the potential career you could build at those companies. For example: Consultancy X would pay me $k/mo and every 6months it will go up the ladder if I perform well. With this kind of di…

I imagine this is good advice in some places, but as a line manager, if you pull this on me I'm more than likely to shake your hand and wish you luck in your new job. In a lot of places, having a talk with your manager about your salary before going off and actively looking for other offers is going to go down a lot better. Most line managers worth working for, value their teams and will fight for them if they are un…

> Most line managers worth working for, value their teams and will fight for them if they are unhappy, without the threats.

Most good line managers will recognise their employees contributions to the company and suggest a raise/additional compensation without needing to be prompted.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#318

Post by restalis »

kogepathic wrote: post #170
johnnyfaehell wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is considered bad advice. Nearly every HR article about this subject states that doing this will on average results in being let go after a year.

> I think this is considered bad advice. I agree, but for a different reason. Not only would this behaviour annoy your employer, but it shows that your employer doesn't care to pay you market rates or what you're worth. So why do you keep working for people who don't pay you what you're worth? Accept the outside offer and move on.

"So why do you keep working for people who don't pay you what you're worth?"

Worthiness may be a mater of debate and thus the related pay - a subject for negotiation. If the employers recognize your worth (or just yield under your worth self assertion) and are willing to pay you accordingly, then you may discount malice from their part. If that happens, then there's nothing wrong with continuing working together. Count that former under-appreciation as a little misunderstanding that was addressed in a timely manner. You may choose to stay with them simply because it may be better to work with people that you already have a track record of good report than taking your chance with new/unknown business party. Other than that, elnygren offered a solution where you get both the benefit comparable with job switching without the bad consequence of appearing disloyal.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#319

Post by kazagistar »

mamon wrote: post #246
pc86 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if you're paying half a dozen people below market, that's sort of to be expected, isn't it? Management knows the market rate for a given role. Let's say a good-not-great senior developer (as in give them a code base and a quiet room and you've got substantive code on day 1 or 2) commands $100k cash comp to make the math easy. You take the job for 10% below market for whatever those reasons happen to be. Maybe yo…

Who said anything about paying below market? Illusory superiority[1] is a real issue - about 70% of people think they are above average, so they keep demanding above-market salaries. Plus, as I mentioned in my previous post, other employers have harder time evaluating person's skills through interviews than a company that currently employs them. So they offer above-average salary to your average employees and by the…

So what you are saying is that they can get and retain a higher salary elsewhere, but that isn't what they are worth? Sounds like the market is disagreeing with your price evaluation, and the market is more right then you are.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#320

Post by kogepathic »

BurningFrog wrote: post #278
kogepathic wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this is considered bad advice. I agree, but for a different reason. Not only would this behaviour annoy your employer, but it shows that your employer doesn't care to pay you market rates or what you're worth. So why do you keep working for people who don't pay you what you're worth? Accept the outside offer and move on.

> it shows that your employer doesn't care to pay you market rates or what you're worth. As an employer, it's hard to know how someone's market value fluctuates. The only way to really know is for the employee to do a job search.

> As an employer, it's hard to know how someone's market value fluctuates. The only way to really know is for the employee to do a job search.

There are several ways to figure out the market rate for a position:

1. Post an opening and see what the salary expectations are of applicants

2. Talk to recruiters and see what similar positions are paying

3. Use your network of people at other companies to find out what similar positions pay

4. Look at salary data for your industry and region

I agree you probably won't get a precise answer from any of the above, but it should at least give you an idea which end of the spectrum you fall.

You can also talk to the employee and try to get an idea whether they're happy with the position and compensation. My personal preference is for this to happen multiple times per year, instead of just at an annual review.

Post reply on HN