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

201–210 of 560 posts

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

#201

Post by jacquesm »

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…

> 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.

As your potential employee I'd be more than happy to shake your hand and leave. Very rarely does a company deserve employee loyalty, and you as a linemanager should at least try to earn your employee's loyalty by paying them what they are worth, rather than what you can get away with.

Remember, you too have a boss, treat your subordinates like you would like to be treated.

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

#202

Post by richardknop »

conanbatt wrote: post #188
richardknop wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're name's likely to get further up the redundancy list than you'd probably like. Playing the devil's advocate, here's employee response which makes sense from his/her perspective: But I have job offer paying 30% more. I could actually get multiple offers like that from several companies. So I am not afraid of your threat of "getting further up the redundancy list".

Then it's in both parties interest for the employee to leave.. everyone is happy at the end, provided the employer can replace the worker, and the former can get a better option.

Yes. Hence why it's the best way to get a big raise to keep your salary in sync with the market and not stagnate. I was just trying to push against the idea that somehow it's wrong to accept a job offer which offers substantially bigger salary. Nothing wrong with that.

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

#203

Post by Sevii »

uiri wrote: post #146
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this work with equal pay legislation though - if you're male then you can't get a pay increase above a female because if that's discovered the company is in for a heap of pain??

I agree that this is a problem. Women are socialised to be less aggressive than men. They are also much less likely, statistically speaking, to negotiate their salary when starting a new job - never mind proactively seeking a raise based on their market value. The solution - of course - is to have an employer policy of paying market rate, all the time. Satya Nadella got in hot water for talking about this problem in…

It's not agressiveness that's the main difference, men are willing to sacrifice a lot more for their careers on average.

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

#204

Post by eof »

bitexploder wrote: post #192
boomboomsubban wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 unhappy, without the threats. This doesn't agree with the research here, and your first statement doesn't agree with your second. If you value your team, they shouldn't…

The research I am aware of says if someone comes into your office with a competing offer they are likely to be gone in 6 months. https://hbr.org/2016/07/setting-the-record-straight-using-an... Outside offers to get a raise are a risky business at best. If someone is unhappy enough to do this it isn't just compensation most of the time.

there doesn't appear to be any research in that article, just opinions? it doesn't surprise if that's true that you are likely to be gone; especially if you count the times that you aren't given a competitive counter offer.

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

#205

Post by kurtisc »

cgio wrote: post #47
maxxxxx wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I talk to my director he seems to actually dislike people who have worked under him for more than 5 years. He likes "fresh blood". If you stay around you are a loser.

For how long has he stayed around? Or does he not report to anyone? Director sounds like an employee role too...

Director is the UK term for CEO

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

#206

Post by thehardsphere »

lostboys67 wrote: post #180
thehardsphere wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, it is how the world works. If there was really a gender pay gap for women who are doing the exact same work as men with the exact same experience as men, then it would be trivial for employers to reduce their costs by only hiring women. Yet, nobody ever does this.

No it isn't I know one large uk tech company that is Terified of its gender pay gap becoming public. Like wise the BBC being forced to disclose pay rates for talent some Male presenters have taken pay cuts btw

Individual companies having a gender pay gap doesn't mean the market has a gender pay gap. And if you work at one of those companies and are told that you can't be given a raise because of the internal, secret gender pay gap, you should quit that company and find a new job.

I mean, even if it's true that particular company is paying its women worse than its men, and even if legislation means they can't quickly fix it (I don't know how onerous this legislation is in the U.K.), the proper response on the part of any employee who is given these excuses ought to be "Look, that sounds like you have a difficult problem, but that isn't my problem. My problem is that my salary is $X when it should be $X+Y." Because at the end of the day their excuses aren't going to change the fact that they can either fix your problem or not, and if they don't fix your problem somebody else in the labor market can.

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

#207

Post by repomies6999 »

wyclif wrote: post #166
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…

without the threats I wouldn't dispute that seeking offers before a request for raise might not go over well (depending on the specific business), but I think calling it a "threat" is needlessly weaponizing salary negotiation in a market where everyone acknowledges salaries have been flat for a long time.

I believe the flatnessof salaries applies to jobs overall. I would guess most people at HN work in IT where salaries haven't been that flat.

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

#209

Post by FussyZeus »

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 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.

A serious question for scaryclam (or anyone who agrees with him): Why is this? Excluding a few people with dream jobs, I didn't get hired at Company X because I love what they do or I feel they add to the world in a meaningful way: you guys needed code written or systems maintained or whatever it might be, I needed money. That is the extent of our relationship. Even if we've worked together for a long while and developed a bit of a friendship, it seems like the whole stigma surrounding bringing job offers into a workplace is based on a few things that when said aloud sound insane:

1) That I would be willing to subvert my own potential success for the good of Company X, which seems at best like a weird trade-off and at worst like some sort of cult;

2) That Company X doesn't want other people in my department to see what they could be making elsewhere, in which case see #1 for each of them and add to it a line of disingenuity to it too;

3) That Company X already knows that there are better competing jobs in the area (or close enough to threaten them anyway) and are taking internal action to prevent those threats from costing them employees in mass by trying to prevent employees from knowing about them, instead of raising pay/benefits to be more competitive

In any situation where a company is attempting to hide information of any kind, you can usually find a solid financial motive for doing so. I'm not saying that a company should always be paying everyone as much as they possibly can; obviously, each side of this table has their side to fight for. But if one of the sides is being dishonest about the facts then that side has already lost points going to that table; you say you'd fire me if I came to you with a job offer? Odds are that's known and I'm already on my way out, and whether you want to call it good or bad, that means you've lost me, and you're probably winding up to lose a few more.

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

#210

Post by Sleeep »

k__ wrote: post #149

Sure, I mean who gives you more than a 20% raise? When you change jobs, you can renegotiate everything. More money, more holidays, less hours, etc. Last time I changed jobs, I worked less hours and got 20% more money, my last boss would have laughed at me if I wanted this.

Um... I've gotten a 20%+ raise before, I also have several weeks more vacation than I started with. If you prove yourself as valuable and ask for compensation to match, your employer may be more flexible than you realize. You can renegotiate your current employment at any time as well.

You have to actually prove yourself as valuable first though.

Post reply on HN