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

Salary Negotiations: What is Possible When There's no More Money

articulateventures.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 84 posts

Re: Salary Negotiations: What is Possible When There's no More Money

#51

Post by SatvikBeri »

crusso wrote: post #48
grecy wrote: post #38

Great article. It bothers me that people think like this: > I was already getting paid almost as much as people who had been on staff for many more years than me. Salary should be based on performance and expertise, not how many years you've been sitting in a seat.

Are you're saying that companies shouldn't give yearly raises except for inflationary increases? Wouldn't that be an implication of not considering time with the company? Rewarding loyalty to the business is not a meaningless gesture, nor should it be an affront to new people. The difficult thing from the employer's perspective is balancing the reward for many different aspects of each employee that makes that employ…

Companies shouldn't reward loyalty, especially when that means punishing performance. Loyalty is only meaningful in the sense that your company-specific knowledge makes you more valuable to the company.

All other things being equal, a 25-year-old who just joined the company and automated 5 people's worth of work is worth several multiples of the 35-year-old analyst who'd been at the company for 10 years and was doing one of the (now automated) jobs. Yet most companies will pay the 25-year-old significantly less. This is just plain dumb and irrational, and encourages top performers to go elsewhere.

Re: Salary Negotiations: What is Possible When There's no More Money

#53

Post by snowwrestler »

SatvikBeri wrote: post #51
crusso wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you're saying that companies shouldn't give yearly raises except for inflationary increases? Wouldn't that be an implication of not considering time with the company? Rewarding loyalty to the business is not a meaningless gesture, nor should it be an affront to new people. The difficult thing from the employer's perspective is balancing the reward for many different aspects of each employee that makes that employ…

Companies shouldn't reward loyalty, especially when that means punishing performance. Loyalty is only meaningful in the sense that your company-specific knowledge makes you more valuable to the company. All other things being equal, a 25-year-old who just joined the company and automated 5 people's worth of work is worth several multiples of the 35-year-old analyst who'd been at the company for 10 years and was doing…

Companies should reward loyalty because it is expensive to hire and train new employees.

It's possible to do both, using two tools: promotions and performance bonuses. If the 25-year-old is more of a rock star than the 35-year-old, promote the 25-year-old. Or, give them a nice fat performance bonus for that particular project.

But what is going to keep the 25 year old there for 10 more years? You can only promote someone so much. This is why companies provide merit raises within positions, and how a 35-year-old ends up making more than a 25-year-old for the same job.

Re: Salary Negotiations: What is Possible When There's no More Money

#54

Post by crusso »

SatvikBeri wrote: post #51
crusso wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you're saying that companies shouldn't give yearly raises except for inflationary increases? Wouldn't that be an implication of not considering time with the company? Rewarding loyalty to the business is not a meaningless gesture, nor should it be an affront to new people. The difficult thing from the employer's perspective is balancing the reward for many different aspects of each employee that makes that employ…

Companies shouldn't reward loyalty, especially when that means punishing performance. Loyalty is only meaningful in the sense that your company-specific knowledge makes you more valuable to the company. All other things being equal, a 25-year-old who just joined the company and automated 5 people's worth of work is worth several multiples of the 35-year-old analyst who'd been at the company for 10 years and was doing…

Loyalty is only meaningful in the sense that your company-specific knowledge makes you more valuable to the company.

I couldn't disagree more. Loyalty is its own benefit that's worth compensating people for. I value people who come into a group and do more than just contribute a bunch of code. I value people who contribute to the culture and the framework of the ongoing enterprise.

Furthermore, I want newcomers to see how I treat the current employees with respect and reward for being contributing parts of the team not just this past week, but for years.

I'm not at all saying that just occupying a seat in the office should get you rewards. It shouldn't. But occupying the seat AND being productive while you're there is a benefit to me as a company founder.

Give me a competent employee whom I can rely upon year after year vs some hotshot code slinger who is here today and gone tomorrow.

I call it the "Mike Krzyzewski" team building strategy.

Re: Salary Negotiations: What is Possible When There's no More Money

#55

Post by SatvikBeri »

crusso wrote: post #54
SatvikBeri wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies shouldn't reward loyalty, especially when that means punishing performance. Loyalty is only meaningful in the sense that your company-specific knowledge makes you more valuable to the company. All other things being equal, a 25-year-old who just joined the company and automated 5 people's worth of work is worth several multiples of the 35-year-old analyst who'd been at the company for 10 years and was doing…

Loyalty is only meaningful in the sense that your company-specific knowledge makes you more valuable to the company. I couldn't disagree more. Loyalty is its own benefit that's worth compensating people for. I value people who come into a group and do more than just contribute a bunch of code. I value people who contribute to the culture and the framework of the ongoing enterprise. Furthermore, I want newcomers to se…

It sounds like we actually agree in practice and I've just heard the word "loyalty" used differently from the way you've heard it used. Apologies if I used the wrong definition, and let me try to clarify my point:

I completely agree that contributing to culture and the business is valuable. What annoys me is how much a lot of companies value seniority over anything else. The attitude of "Well, X is older and has been here longer than Y, so they should get paid more" is incredibly prevalent even in the USA. Especially in tech-heavy jobs, I've seen plenty of cases where someone might contribute 5x or 10x as much value as the average person in their position...and receive a 10% higher raise as a result.

Re: Salary Negotiations: What is Possible When There's no More Money

#56

Post by crusso »

SatvikBeri wrote: post #55
crusso wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loyalty is only meaningful in the sense that your company-specific knowledge makes you more valuable to the company. I couldn't disagree more. Loyalty is its own benefit that's worth compensating people for. I value people who come into a group and do more than just contribute a bunch of code. I value people who contribute to the culture and the framework of the ongoing enterprise. Furthermore, I want newcomers to se…

It sounds like we actually agree in practice and I've just heard the word "loyalty" used differently from the way you've heard it used. Apologies if I used the wrong definition, and let me try to clarify my point: I completely agree that contributing to culture and the business is valuable. What annoys me is how much a lot of companies value seniority over anything else. The attitude of "Well, X is older and has been…

A HN sub-thread that moves toward consensus. Wonders never cease. ;)

Re: Salary Negotiations: What is Possible When There's no More Money

#58

Post by msrpotus »

aplusbi wrote: post #24

When I was negotiating my salary with my previous employer the only thing I asked for was more vacation time. They refused and instead offered me an extra $3000 so I could take unpaid time off. They ended up working me to the bone for 6 months then laid me off once the product shipped. Little things like this can really give you insight into how a company works. If a company is only willing to negotiate on money then…

That said, at least you got to keep the extra money.

Re: Salary Negotiations: What is Possible When There's no More Money

#59

Post by umsm »

krschultz wrote: post #50
MatthewPhillips wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're talking about someone who couldn't afford a cell phone. Money becomes less important the more of it you have.

I took a semester off to live with some ski bums in Colorado. Them: "Why do you work so hard?" Me: "So I can get rich" (young and stupid response) Them: "Well, what are you going to do when you are rich?" Me: "Ski all the time" Them: "Dude, you don't have to be rich to ski all the time. We freaking clean toilets, but I ski 100+ days a year". That conversation changed my life. I realized that getting rich was a stupid…

Relevant fisherman story:

http://paulocoelhoblog.com/2010/09/08/the-fisherman-and-the-...

Re: Salary Negotiations: What is Possible When There's no More Money

#60

Post by zeckalpha »

ssebro wrote: post #45
Articulate wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea I don't make much money as an editor. see: http://www.articulateventures.com/thoughts-on-being-an-emplo...

Please, please fix "I am a good writer, the content that I create is quiet good (I think)". That's the first line of your paragraph about gramatical oversights, and you say "quiet" instead of "quite". Also, the "(i think)" makes me feel like you're not a professional. ALSO, I'm sure you can hire someone on craigslist to give your work a second read for gramatical mistakes, if that's really a blind spot you care about…

I thought that was a pun!
Post reply on HN