The one-salary experiment, ten years in • Hacker News Board

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#301

Post by virgilp » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 7:08 PM UTC

wsy wrote: post #283

virgilp wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't view myself as coffee - if your employees are fungible resources, I don't want to work for you (99.9% of the cases, there may be exceptions, but they're just that - exceptions).

I never compared you or anyone else to coffee, and I'm not an employer. My post was about viewing the employer-employee relationship as a business relationship _when you are the employee_.

It was a generic "you" - and yes, you did make an analogy that does not apply since employees are not fungible.

You also present now a distorted view about business relationships - they're about trust far more often than they are about squeezing the best price. That's it really - once I learn that I can't trust my employer to compensate me fairly, that business relationship is broken, and short-term money can't fix it.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#302

Post by wsy » Tue, Apr 02, 2019, 10:37 PM UTC

virgilp wrote: post #301

wsy wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never compared you or anyone else to coffee, and I'm not an employer. My post was about viewing the employer-employee relationship as a business relationship _when you are the employee_.

It was a generic "you" - and yes, you did make an analogy that does not apply since employees are not fungible. You also present now a distorted view about business relationships - they're about trust far more often than they are about squeezing the best price. That's it really - once I learn that I can't trust my employer to compensate me fairly, that business relationship is broken, and short-term money can't fix i…

My example is about supply and demand, in particular if you are willing to pay a higher price than the supplier asks. Fungible or not doesn't matter at all, the only relevant factor for the discussion is the difference in price you are willing to pay and the supplier is asking.

Indeed, all business relationships are about trust. But they also are about business. I know of no other business relationship where the supplier expects that the consumer will pay him fairly. So what is so special about an employment contract, compared to all other businesses?

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#303

Post by virgilp » Wed, Apr 03, 2019, 4:33 AM UTC

wsy wrote: post #302

virgilp wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a generic "you" - and yes, you did make an analogy that does not apply since employees are not fungible. You also present now a distorted view about business relationships - they're about trust far more often than they are about squeezing the best price. That's it really - once I learn that I can't trust my employer to compensate me fairly, that business relationship is broken, and short-term money can't fix i…

My example is about supply and demand, in particular if you are willing to pay a higher price than the supplier asks. Fungible or not doesn't matter at all, the only relevant factor for the discussion is the difference in price you are willing to pay and the supplier is asking. Indeed, all business relationships are about trust. But they also are about business. I know of no other business relationship where the supp…

> So what is so special about an employment contract, compared to all other businesses?

Oh, this is really easy to answer. For example, the fact that purchaser dictates the price, not supplier - to such an extent, that purchaser voluntarily and periodically decides to start paying more, without explicit intervention from supplier. Oh, and also decides to reward supplier with bonus payments when receiving good-quality merchandise.

But it's not about that - if you think about it, it's probably related to the expectation of exclusivity. Is there any business that is expected to exclusively supply to only one customer? If so, I'd suspect they'd be very concerned about that consumer paying them fairly.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#304

Post by mkane848 » Wed, Apr 03, 2019, 3:43 PM UTC

scruple wrote: post #261

mkane848 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This hurt to read, got hosed on my last performance review/raise because my supervisor threw me under the bus for things he never voiced as issues when HIS boss started asking questions he didn't know the answer to (because I do all the work). Got the same raise/bonus as someone he referred to as "retarded", so I've been working on #1 because I've already caught myself doing #2 because even after voicing concerns and…

> someone he referred to as "retarded" Yikes. Even if I had gotten a huge raise, 25% or higher, if I heard my manager say this I'd be looking for a new job that day. There's no way that person is fit for their position. If they're willing to say that about someone in front of you, you have to assume they're willing to say the same thing about you in front of someone else. The point being that that behavior is very to…

In the same conversation, he said "You're friends with outside of work, right? Look, don't tell him this, but we can get 10 of him, we can't find many of you" then still gave me a 2.5% raise. I literally don't get what sort of person you have to be to confirm that someone's my friend, then proceed to shit on them in a professional setting. Head of the department (his direct boss) was sitting there too. The co-worker in question has basically been single-handedly tackling security and busts his ass, but luckily his supervisor isn't terrible and goes to bat so he at least got the raise he deserved (he's still looking for other jobs too, don't worry).

Been looking (not as hard as I should be) for a new job since that review, unfortunately being stubborn about staying in central New Jersey isn't doing me any favors. Just trying to maintain my sanity in the meantime while I look around :/

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#305

Post by scruple » Wed, Apr 03, 2019, 4:01 PM UTC

mkane848 wrote: post #304

scruple wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> someone he referred to as "retarded" Yikes. Even if I had gotten a huge raise, 25% or higher, if I heard my manager say this I'd be looking for a new job that day. There's no way that person is fit for their position. If they're willing to say that about someone in front of you, you have to assume they're willing to say the same thing about you in front of someone else. The point being that that behavior is very to…

In the same conversation, he said "You're friends with outside of work, right? Look, don't tell him this, but we can get 10 of him, we can't find many of you" then still gave me a 2.5% raise. I literally don't get what sort of person you have to be to confirm that someone's my friend, then proceed to shit on them in a professional setting. Head of the department (his direct boss) was sitting there too. The co-worker…

That's honestly insane. I mean, you know that people like that are a dime a dozen, and that they're obviously out there in companies all throughout departments as rank and file and in management and executive positions. I guess it's just a little bit extra terrifying to wake up one day and realize it's your boss, and from what you're saying it's his boss, too.

> unfortunately being stubborn about staying in central New Jersey isn't doing me any favors. Just trying to maintain my sanity in the meantime while I look around :/

I know that all too well. I'm not dealing with managers who are as outwardly assholish as you are but there's more problems than solutions where I work. My current flavor of employment handcuffs are a full-time remote position. The job itself isn't that bad, but I'm underpaid and overworked. The full-time remote plus the little bit of autonomy that I have in my work keeps me from looking too hard. Complacency, by any other name.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#306

Post by robocat » Wed, Apr 03, 2019, 9:07 PM UTC

robocat wrote: post #43

caprese wrote: post #40

> the average software developer in Wellington NZ makes NZ$64k. We pay more than that, but when you become a remote company, people start looking for the $134k USD These are two different scales, so for help I will normalize them: $64,000 NZD = $43,641.60 USD $134,000 USD = $134,000 USD

I am very skeptical of that reported average. The average salary in Wellington, is NZ$59,649. Maybe get a new graduate for $50k.

"Skilled IT candidates are in high demand across the country and employers are offering more to secure talent with a 3.1 per cent increase in average pay to $110,657"

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/109953426/trade-me-data-sho...

Why is payscale so horribly wrong? Are employers spamming it to use as an argument for lower pay?

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#307

Post by readingnews » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:17 PM UTC

Waterluvian wrote: post #80

readingnews wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I worked at your firm. I once worked at a place and saved them millions in one year. At the yearly review, they said "well, that was some good work". That was the entire review. When I said "how about giving me an extra 1k a year (a bit less than others who had been there for a while were getting) I was told we had no extra cash. Well... wow, I just saved you like 1.5 million dollars. I am not asking for that,…

I think what's most telling is what you did after that meeting. Did you quit and go work elsewhere? Don't get me wrong, I don't think companies should be so short sighted as to nickel and dime employees. But your one true source of leverage is to actually get up and leave.

Yes, I did leave. The real problem is: the only method of pay increase is leaving. Well, so now I am the "new guy" every two to three years. I have no real investment in the company, and they have none in me. Right or wrong, is that the workforce that we want to cultivate? I have not been at any company more than a few years because of this (literally, not boasting, I do something great, they recognize wow this person is great, and I receive nothing so I leave)... the problem is that as one ages, this gets old (no pun intended). Job hopping as an old person in an IT/tech field is not pretty, and probably not fashionable.

My concern is, how do new, young(er) people get raises? I would use my time as a cautionary tale... job hopping seems to fine at the start, but as you progress it gets worse. My issue is that I am still underpaid by a long shot. If I stayed at the first company I would still be making 1/3 of what I am now, but I am also making 1/2 of what the "new guy" makes. Not sure where this is all going (on a large scale, not my story), or how this is helping the country/economy.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#308

Post by readingnews » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 3:23 PM UTC

cannonedhamster wrote: post #107

readingnews wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I worked at your firm. I once worked at a place and saved them millions in one year. At the yearly review, they said "well, that was some good work". That was the entire review. When I said "how about giving me an extra 1k a year (a bit less than others who had been there for a while were getting) I was told we had no extra cash. Well... wow, I just saved you like 1.5 million dollars. I am not asking for that,…

So I've been at places that literally wouldn't give me a title increase with no monetary benefit. I'd saved them boatloads of money and doing far more than my job description. Upper management had a bonus structure based on cutting costs. Not actually performing the job, just how much they could cut. I left that place and immediately made nearly 20k more per year, then next job another 25k, then another 20k and I'm n…

Those are some great points. I am not going to boast, but I do know most of them, and I was a manager of an IT team at a great organization that gave us proper, informed training, so most of these points are very familiar (we thought about the employee perspective). My current location does not offer any "real" jobs like some previous posters were pointing out (e.g. the big 5 or 10 companies). Oddly, I think getting in now would be very difficult. I was a Sr IT worker, then a Manager of Sr. IT workers, in addition to an enterprise architect. But I am getting older, and I think they want younger.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#309

Post by tdeck » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 6:01 PM UTC

eloisant wrote: post #205

zdragnar wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard from multiple managers that offering someone money to stay typically buys another 9 months or so of their employment. They'll soon find other reasons to be looking for a job. There are, of course, exceptions; it's just a general rule.

This is true if the reason to leave was something else than money to start with. If someone asks a raise because he feels like he's not getting paid what he's worth, giving a raise will definitely help him stay. Or, if he has regular raises, he'll be less likely to get in the "why am I not paid my worth" mentality. Typically I've seen companies paying high salaries for newly hired senior developers because the market…

I left my last job because of money, and I definitely would have stayed if they'd made a solid offer, probably even if it was lower than what I make now. But although I got great performance reviews and had plenty of internal domain knowledge they wouldn't even entertain the idea.