Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less • Hacker News Board

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

#461

Post by foo101 » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:24 PM UTC

magnetic wrote: post #365

coldtea wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. If the employee is only motivated by money, he will be gone rather sooner than later as there is always a higher offer around. What else would they be motivated by? It's not their hobby. This doesn't mean they are also not into programming and coding challenges -- but those are constants that they can find in another employer too. if they like the programming, it's not that they can't find a programming job else…

> What else would they be motivated by? The actual work (what is being done), the mission of the company (are you helping kids send pictures that disappear after 10 seconds or are you working on finding a cure to hearing loss?), the team, the location (do I have to spend 2h commuting?), the opportunities to learn, the opportunities to grow, etc. We each value different things, but if money is your only consideration,…

Mission? Loyalty? Company values? Which would do you live in? You are speaking as if the companies are doing a favor to the employees by giving them a job and the employees are at the mercy of these companies.

Being employed with a company is a business transaction, where one party sells their time and skills in exchange for money.

Aren't employees disposable anyway? When the company runs low on cash, they are not going to hesitate to fire you to restore the financial health of itself.

Companies are motivated by money. It is in my interest to be motivated by money too. Companies are not loyal to employees. It is foolish to expect employees to be loyal to companies.

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

#462

Post by jldugger » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:25 PM UTC

sidlls wrote: post #451

jldugger wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why changing jobs is the only way to get paid what you're worth: management has neither the backbone nor the incentive to price things properly. So instead we perform the cognitive hack of two underpaid employees trading jobs, because as you said, "The easiest time to give an employee a raise is during hiring." I figure the only way to really fix this 'the only way to get a raise is to leave for a year' meth…

Putting retention in the manager's evaluation without also supporting his efforts (e.g. with an appropriate budget) isn't fair to the manager.

Oh, well then I guess we'll have to continue underpaying employees.

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

#463

Post by justrobert » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:25 PM UTC

slantyyz wrote: post #398

lordCarbonFiber wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me if I can get a better offer (ie over 10% salary increase) that's just a signal that the current employer is trying to take advantage of me. I'm with you in that I'd never go back and negotiate, I'd just leave. Especially early in your career, there is 0 reason to stick around with someone that won't pay you what you're worth. Underpaying is going to directly correlate with retention problems, and limited career…

>> To me if I can get a better offer (ie over 10% salary increase) that's just a signal that the current employer is trying to take advantage of me. It's more likely ignorance of your specific market price than malice. First, the employer isn't even going to know your outside market price if you don't get an offer in the first place. For you to prove that you're worth the 10% salary increase, you would have to be vet…

The point is, when someone has offers from other companies for 10% increase (which imo is pretty low usually it is 20% or more), the employee finally realizes their value.

In these situations often the employee is getting raises that do not even cover inflation. So the employee now sees their market value and would like to continue working for the company, but they have realized they could take on risk for a 20-50% raise instead.

I mean the risk equation is simple, with such a raise you can save enough cash to justify the risk even if it doesn't work out.

I always ended up taking the offer from the more generous company, and they tended to increase my pay to offset more than inflation and then a bonus to justify staying.

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

#464

Post by iLemming » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:30 PM UTC

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…

Every single time I tried that I end up leaving. Once I got offered a bump but it felt too little, too late.

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

#465

Post by foo101 » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:30 PM UTC

mseebach wrote: post #397

joshklein wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's important to take both of the posts above this one seriously and not dismiss them as "not in my experience." If you want leverage in any negotiating situation, you need to be able to walk away from the negotiation if the final terms are undesirable. The party with the best "next-best option" is usually the one most willing to stand their ground on terms, or walk. That means you need to be prepared to los…

There's something to be said for communication style. You can do essentially what top-GP suggests, but without the high-conflict ultimatum -- basically, communicate your worry about your salary in a series of low-drama conversations, in which you can calmly suggest that your research implies that you'd be able to make $X in a similar job elsewhere, but really enjoy your current job, etc. The key, of course, is always…

Have you tried what you are suggesting in practice?

I have never succeeded in getting any raise unless I had a concrete actionable BATNA, i.e. a competing offer.

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

#466

Post by naasking » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:32 PM UTC

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.

Demonstrating that you're undervalued is not a threat, it's feedback on how the market values your employees. You give feedback on how well your employees are serving the business right? Why shouldn't it work the other way around?

Your work is not your family, this isn't personal judgment or criticism, this is just business.

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

#467

Post by foo101 » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:35 PM UTC

dsp1234 wrote: post #377

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blackmailed by what? The market? Some of those points are excuses for doing nothing. #2 especially - what, they'll find a better and better job every six months? Not likely. If somebody can show you how they'd be paid better somewhere else, deal with it. Denial gets you nowhere. #3 is exactly what the above remark addresses. If I can show my boss I'd be treated properly elsewhere, the boss sure better get on board an…

The BATNA for the employee is one of those other offers. The BATNA for the employer is training a new person who isn't going to make every 6-12 months a fight. Suggesting that it's fine for the employee to exercise their BATNA, but that it's not OK for the employer to exercise theirs seems a bit odd. what, they'll find a better and better job every six months? From the commenter above, make your employer fight for yo…

You are completely ignoring the fact that if an employee is able to come up with a significantly higher offer every 6-12 months, then the company is probably paying him way below the market rate, otherwise it won't be so easy to come up with a competing offer every 6-12 months.

So if an employee you have hired is able to get a competing offer every 6-12 months, it is worth spending time to figure why things are so screwed up in the company and resolve that.

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

#468

Post by mamon » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:36 PM UTC

matwood wrote: post #407

mamon wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The whole point of showing up with an offer is so that the market is known, and to avoid any delusions of grandeur.

I honestly don't know what's the point of mentioning an offer to your current employer. If you have a better offer - take it, don't let me hold your career back, good luck, no hard feelings on my side.

From my experience the reason why employees who have another offer even bother to mention it to their current boss, asking for counter, is because that other offer has some serious downside that prevents them from just accepting it right away.

Anyway, I can probably replace you with someone that will gladly take your current salary. And if I can't and end up paying your replacement the money you demanded (or more) at least I'll be paying that to the guy who is happy to work for me, not to someone who is already actively looking for other jobs.

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

#469

Post by 33W » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:38 PM UTC

bitexploder wrote: post #437

33W wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an interesting problem. Let's say I think I'm underpaid and speak with my manager about it. If I go in with broad market data, the argument could be made that my specific circumstances make the general market data invalid. If I go in with specific job offers, then I present myself as a risk to leaving, and the conversation may be more adversarial than I intend. So could there be a service that sits in between…

Market rate is tricky. Especially for jobs that require less common skills. Some employers, small shops mostly, actively can't or don't bother to compete with the big tech shops on salary even though they recruit from the same pool of employees. They compete on life style, company culture, and other intangibles. If this is done openly and employees know what they are getting into it is a good situation as long as tha…

Thanks for the brain dump, I'm always learning more about these types of things. Personally, I think I'm fairly paid at the moment, but this is something to consider if that changes in the future.

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

#470

Post by naasking » Mon, Jul 17, 2017, 5:41 PM UTC

thomascgalvin wrote: post #269

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…

> Most line managers worth working for, value their teams and will fight for them if they are unhappy, without the threats. Agreed. I've already gotten my team the best raise/promotion that I could. If they can find better at a different company, I wish them well. And that's not sarcastic. I genuinely wish them well. It hurts to let a good employee go, and finding/training a replacement sucks, but we're all kind of s…

> Agreed. I've already gotten my team the best raise/promotion that I could.

Then again, this employee has just presented you with evidence that maybe your compensation isn't competitive, which is something you can bring to the higher ups to increase your budget. If you're not competitive, you'll have retention problems and business will ultimately suffer.

So you got the best rate you could at the time with the information available, but competing offers could change that equation.