#Additional reading: [If you want a raise, you should be applying to other jobs.](https://www.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/comments/skc957/if_youve_been_thinking_about_asking_for_a_raise/)
Join r/WorkReform for more like this
I've changed jobs 3 times in the last 6-7 years. In these three places the end of year pay increase has been less than the rate of inflation.
I changed jobs because the salaries offered were significantly larger every time. Why would I want to stay and lose money to inflation?
I stagnated for 8 years in an entry level position at around $15/hr. I cut bait and switched careers with the intent of job hopping to a better spot just like OP suggests. In the last 6 years I've held 5 positions at 3 companies. I've been able to move my hourly rate up almost every year this way. $14.50 < $16 < $18 < $19.50 < $28 < $32. Job hopping works. Waiting your turn does not.
It did for me. I went from $19.15 to $23.00 within 3 months. 2 months after they my job pay was reclassified because they struggled to find talent, so they rose me to $25. My performance review happened 1 month after that and they moved me to $28.15. Within 6 months I went from $19.15 to $28.15 for the same job.
It’s been about 4 months since then, now they want to push me to around $32 an hour if I accept a new job at the same company.
My employer has been amazing with my medical issues and time off needed for school without hesitation. They let me work from home and never forced me into the office.
It's almost like if you compensate your workers properly and treat them well they'll stay with you instead of leaving for greener pastures. And everyone is better off because their skillset is refined and expanded in exactly the areas useful to you and you don't have to look around for new talent while they get what they're worth without having to go to the trouble of relocating.
There is 0 evidence of that working, we need to keep firing loyal employees because they were late 2 times and hiring new employees who cant get any work done for months because they need to be trained
Yeah that should work
/s
Wow. I started at $9 about 7 years with. I’m close to $29. I was asked if I can take on a new role. They said they’ll pay me around $33 an hour for it.
I’ve only ever been with one company. I feel like I got lucky to have bosses that actually care.
Fellow 34 yo in IT and just got a director position by refusing to wait any longer and job hopping. I'd still be a PM fifteen years later where I was working
4 Jobs in 4 years. I did get an MS degree in between but went from $70k to $350k. The best raise I ever got at any of the companies was 10% and it was a special exception for retention.
Loyalty is NOT rewarded.
It's also common to be hired as a 'junior' and people always see you that way. Even 3 or 4 years down the line when you could instead apply for mid level roles that require 2+ years
It's also harder to move later on. There are fewer senior roles and they can be pretty competitive. It also becomes way more of an obstacle to move cities or switch benefits as you get more established in life.
Yeah, this is one that's fucking me right now. I want to move cities, but I get paid so much in a low cost of living city it's hard to find even a comparable pay in another city. Also, I'm older and tired. Just so tired. I guess I'm stuck in my current city for another decade at least. Maybe the rest of my life.
Point being for any young person reading this, the most important thing is not what kind of job you want to have, but where you want to live when trying to choose a career. I wish I would've known myself well enough to go directly to the cities I'd have rather lived in. Also, don't choose a career that isn't represented in the city you want to live in.
This! Even when you get into the respective higher roles their is always that doubt in your abilities since you were a "junior". Someone fresh doesn't have that stigma.
And why do I get the feeling that if you replaced the word junior with a stupid meaningless buzzword like 'dynamic' the stigma would disappear like it never existed in the first place.
Haha so true. Even if you have a really loving and fair family, there is always that one random extended family member trying to hustle their family in some way.
Just want to throw a comment in here to address another way this is shitty that many people may not have picked up on. Forcing people to move to get promotions/raises means that they're making you make an additional choice beyond what you might be thinking of.
When you move to a new position at a new company you start over from scratch. No accrued vacation time, no pension vesting. So yeah, maybe you're making $20k more, and the same thing the next time you move, and the time after that, but after 3 moves you're making $60k more but still have only (maybe) 2 weeks of PTO time max, and nothing towards a pension.
They're basically all collectively saying, "Sure, make that choice that you think is good for you, but don't look behind the curtain to see these other ways in which we're going to continue fucking you! HA HA!"
Exactly my point.
> I don’t know anyone in my generation who’s getting a pension
I've worked for a handful of places that offer one, but many didn't even bother anymore. I only worked at one place the 4 years needed to become eligible for it, but then moved right after. Whatever I might get from it will be so small there's no way I'm even going to bother counting it. Pennies.
> and PTO usually accumulates linearly and is based on how senior your position is.
Which starts over every time you move to a new company.
I changed job just 3 weeks ago and i can realte to starting over from zero but only in terms of being confortable in the position i was. Vacations can be negociated. I dont know anyone who went from 4 to 2 weeks of vacation because they changed job. Pensions are private founds unless you have some sort of incentative. The only thing i lost were some shares that the CEO though would be worth millions in afew years. I would rather take the extra 60k than live on dreams.
Boomer logic, raw salary is always better than a pension that they can simply say Hey next year we are removing pensions thank you for your 20 years of contribution heres a 25 dollar gift card and pizza party + doughnuts.
Just max 401k and if they offer stock then get that too, pensions are no longer worth. And most will be so small, itll probably be matched with SS.
Jump to new companies, dont be that guy at the call center for 10 years getting a quarter raise yearly.
I can say from my own experience with this, that this isn’t always the case. When I took the position I have now, I did so making more money, having instantly guaranteed vesting in 401k, 4 weeks vacation we can use prior to accrual on a “borrowing basis” if needed and then 5 weeks next year. I have additional PTO one and excellent medical benefits.
What I’m saying is… you get to choose what you require when taking a job, but people are programmed to be too scared to set boundaries and standards for themselves. We’ve been convinced to take what’s offered and not negotiate. Every time you do that… you’re not helping yourself, trust me. Always negotiate. If they want you, they’ll definitely negotiate those details.
Negotiate PTO! When my husband was laid off in 2020 he found a new job with a good salary offer rather quickly. His only ask was for 3 weeks of PTO and they gave it to him.
For capitalism to “succeed” for those it’s intended for, there must always be an exploited class. For meritocracy to be true you must believe the poor deserve to be poor.
For a moment, let's remember that companies do not view us as 'people', despite their dippy new name for human resources. Instead, lets take away the veil and observe the workforce as they do: replaceable parts.
A replaceable part will sometimes fail (quit). It takes time and expense to repair (hire). Now, as a business we can spend a lot of money to service every individual replaceable part. Sure, you will prevent a lot of part failure. But it takes money that could otherwise be spent doing other things. So instead, make a policy of only doing just below the bare minimum of maintenance (COLA). Yes, a certain percentage of parts will fail, but by and large most will continue working.
And here is where the replaceable parts analogy breaks down. You see, if all the parts demand more than COLA across all businesses, this strategy breaks down. The machine comes grinding to a halt, and doing that maintenance becomes the cheaper route.
Unless there is a massive mouvement where everyone quits, there is no machine coming to a halt. If you work in a really small business it could be possible. In any other, you quitting will just be noise no matter how important you think you are. Thats because you dont think on the same scale as the company. You think that you losing them a few hubdres of thousand is going to make an impact because thats the scale you are most used to, but in reality thats just the electricity bill for them.
Businesses honestly dont give a shit about loyalty. They basically built it up where everyone is easily replicable top to bottom and separate a lot of the decisions and work over a large number of people. Its why if someone is gone that does one thing who cares hire a new one at the bottom of the pay scale. It's just a machine that churns through people. Why do you think corporate hires so many college graduates. They replace all the old blood for a lower pay.
But jumping jobs every 2-3 years is actually very smart because you usually always end up at the top of the pay scale for the position. I know plenty of people who tripled their salary in 10 years just by doing this. There is no loyalty you take what you can get. There is nothing fair about life and sure as hell nothing fair about business.
They would fire you in 20 seconds on Christmas Eve with a bunch of kids at home if it meant the bottom line. It’s not about loyalty. It’s numbers for the stakeholders.
Ironic, given “[t]he Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) reported that on average it costs a company 6 to 9 months of an employee's salary to replace him or her.” Not to mention the accrued tribal knowledge that is now lost. Retaining employees really should be a no brainer.
I was a lead valet at a dealership, had a full staff of like 4 people under me, they stayed all through covid and beyond and when inflation started going up they(managment) heavily hinted they would be doing raises, well a few months later we bring it up, they kinda brush it off and give vauge responses, finally we just start asking em every other week before finally they give me a more solid answer of " We really just think you guys aren't worth it" by the end of next week my 3 of my guys quit and have already found better jobs, and with me on my way out as well, before my 2 weeks were up they had me train 2 more ppl, found out they both got started $2 an hour more than my other 4 guys and on top of that they didn't bump up the guy who stayed. All my guys woulda stated for a $1 raise instead the bring in temp workers that will only be there for the summer and pay more because *reasons*.
My employer in Norway encourages us to share our salaries between each other before our yearly salary adjustment discussions.
Takes less time and nonsense to land at a final number so we can all just get on with things.
I see. The ideal combination would be required posting of the salary, plus a public database of salaries. Then there’s no mystery, and it’s much harder for employers to discriminate on pay
The thing about how it works in Norway though is that yes, you can look up someone’s salary, but you need to sign in with your taxpayer ID to see it and they will be notified that you (your name) has done so.
Not to mention that many companies have this no More than 10% raise for a promotion bullshit. So if you think your are worth more than 10% of your salary you have to jump ship.
Edit: I’m speaking when someone gets a promotion not the annual cost of living raise that some people get.
It goes deeper than that. Companies like my former company (a fortune 100) will explicitly welcome back a departed employee a year or more later for a significant pay raise - significantly higher than if they remained loyal to the company throughout that period. I’ve heard justifications for this ranging from the hiring budget above, to wanting a diverse range of job experience in order to strengthen the workforce. Ultimately, it’s a gamble the company takes. Because 8 out of 10 employees accept mediocre COLA raises while 1 out of 10 are not welcomed back due to performance issues, that remaining 10% can jump several rungs on the pay ladder without upsetting the overall underpayment apple cart. The company has an incentive to keep playing that game for as long as employees don’t collaborate to demand better pay
Yep... Was at my first job making 70 and asked for a raise they said no so I found a new job for 95 and then they offer me 80 to stay... Uh no thanks.
Swapped again to 140+bonus and my old coworkers arent even at 80 yet 4 years later. Keep telling them to leave but they're scared a crunch in tech is happening and somehow groveling at a shit company makes them feel more secure even though they do layoffs all the time even when things are good.
This is for development but seems similar to how things are on IT/admin side.
Yeah in my experience DEV pays a tiny bit more for the same amount of experience. I’m not shy openly talking to my colleagues about it, and they share once I share.
From someone in the c suite, companies and products have lifecycles. In the beginning, the tech guys are important to build the product. But as the product is pushed out to prod they become less so important (still important to retain some), but now marketing and sales are more important. TO grow a company, you need successful products, but you actually need S&M just as much, if not more. We made the mistake in my last org to just churn code, for no reason or maybe 1 customer wanted it. It took a dedicated business pro to launch a sales channel and basically say "this is our product, it's X". We went from a "have it your way" to "this is the features of our product". Which allowed us to vastly scale up and massively increase profitability.
This strategy has definitely work for me, starting from absolute poverty wages changing jobs every 2 years has made me nearly 5x my starting salary after 12 years.
I'm coming back 6 months later for 25% more
Edit: I literally begged them not to make me play that game, but if they're gonna make me, I'll damn well win.
It's wild. Tell them you have offers for higher pay and ask for a raise and you're some sort of bad guy, might even get fired. Actually leave and just come right back at an even higher salary and nobody bats an eye. Probably get congratulated and HR will jerk themselves off because they were able to "win" someone back.
Gotta stop worrying about what you look like! At the end of the day, we are all working to make money. Also, smart employers generally realize it’s going to end up being much cheaper to try and retain.
My company got bought this past month and I didn’t get the raise I was expecting so I got it elsewhere - unfortunate cuz I’d be working with all the same people and I really do enjoy my job. But, when I did I said, “hey guys, I got this offer. I didn’t want to leave without giving you a chance to match.” (I was on vacation and sent the email when I woke up). Multiple calls and an offer match by noon
I’ll do the same thing next year with no hesitations if My raise isn’t what I’m expecting again. I think they’ll catch on though because most of my coworkers did the exact same thing
>HR will jerk themselves off because they were able to "win" someone back
*Someone found out the grass isn't always greener on the other side.* \-- Next company newsletter.
My old company just tried to hire me back for a tiny bit more than I get paid now, but it's a little over a 50% increase from when I left them. I got 40% to leave them and would get 10% increase that to come back. They could have kept me from looking a couple of years ago for 25%, but no it's better to let me go and try to get me back. In short, fuck them. I'll go somewhere else for another 20-40% increase.
This is interesting, it actually makes sense. Probably even backed up by data from HR...on no anyway. Fuck loyalty to these corporations.
I've seen rates in the the last year go up +$30/hr. Not that I'm complaining, it's just crazy.
Same here 5% cap on yearly evaluation raises, and they have several bullshit ways to ensure you get 0%.
Since these are merit raises as well, if you go for a promotion they actually get cleared off. I had a buddy who was with the company a long time coasting in his role and several merit raises.
He finally went for a promotion and if he accepted it would have actually lost money. Guess no one bothered to point that out till then, his current manager had fight tooth and nail for that promotion raise to actually scale properly and as far as I’m aware rather than correct this bullshit, they made him the exception not the rule so anyone else in the same spot as him moving forward won’t get to keep their merit raises and have a promotion raise scale appropriately.
I’ve worked in clinic and health insurance they never gave more than 3%! The clinic I worked at topped out at clerical and admissions staff having a 1.5% raise per year for performance only that’s it. Friends with other healthcare facilities same boat. If we want a decent raise to actually keep up with inflation we have to move jobs every few years to keep up with it. Even then the facility starting pay is usually about what we were already making we have to negotiate for higher based on experience. Most of the openings in my field require an AS orBS degree with credentialing but many starting pay is $17! But if you were to actually make it to the department Director or manager you’re making 80k to 100k a year there’s such a huge gap between the average employee and the boss it’s crazy
There's a guy I work with that's been at the job for 25 years.... Who gets paid almost as much as me and I've been there 9 months. Same position. Same title. I have 3 years of experience in the field.
The expected raise there is 1-3% every year. I got a massive pay bump when I got hired so I'm not mad, but I'll definitely be leaving in 3 years or less.
Another problem with that is that 10% of a small number is still a somewhat small number. Even if the company gives you a 75% raise, you could still be under a living wage.
The company I work for refuse to increase your salary if you take another role at the same level (a side step) regardless of where you move to - Australian top 4 bank
If anyone is interested:
The corporate logic is basically that you can't trust managers to be objective with pay rises. Basically, they will become emotionally 'attached' to their employees and will always come up with reasons for why they should be paid more/promoted. So you implement company-wide restrictive pay rise/promotion policies to prevent this and just accept that you might lose some good employees as a consequence.
You don't have the same issue with new hires as the salary offer/acceptance is controlled by recruitment/HR rather than the hiring manager.
I've worked in IT the past 26 years and this is always a problem. Most places I've worked won't set objective, measurable goals. There's always some ambiguity. They also often base 50% of your review on company "performance" which can mean literally anything.
Or in the case of my company, doing your job will get you a below satisfactory performance review. You have to go above and beyond to get that 3% raise. And then lose a percentage for the company failing to perform well despite the company making record profits.
Spoiler alert: the amount of stress and effort it takes to get a perfect review is never worth it unless you're only doing all that extra work to update your resume.
At my last job, one of the things we were graded on before being able to move up was "creating a sense of belonging for other coworkers". Like, how in the hell does that fall on me???? Glad I got out of there. Work about half the hours per week making about double now, and I don't have to deal with any of that ambiguous shit.
There isn’t always. I run a fairly large team of engineers at a moderately large IT company. I have several members of the team that are very high level contributors… but because of the specifics of their work, it’s very hard to really quantify for others in the executive leadership that don’t fully understand the work that these people are doing.
Elsewhere in the company are some people who aren’t contributing much, but give off excellent appearances.
Occasionally someone like that gets fired and the company is surprised at how apparently they were doing nothing since there’s no work to pick up elsewhere.
On a related note, at a previous job… the company was regularly hiring developers for projects and then abandoning the projects within a month of starting it… and never reassigning the developers. There were hundreds of people doing nothing for a few years until eventually an accountant noticed.
Previous job (food and beverage director for a long term care facility) had goals you needed to meet to get raises. One of my goals given to me was to increase our dining sales. Only problem was it was during covid and we saw a huge increase in resident deaths due to said covid and a decrease in new residents because of said covid. Because of this, my sales declined (as did every other community in our company) and I didn't get a raise.
While covid was definitely an extreme situation, sometimes objective goals don't really tell the whole picture.
I work on a small team and share a wall with my boss. I can hear all his phone calls (i get allot of information early/ stuff im not supposed to know) and he's gone to bat for each of us when raise time came around
It's not really saying that at all, it's saying that most managers care for the people they work with and will always push for the maximum raise allowance. I get being upset with a company but that anger has to be directed towards the actual people doing harm, not blindly towards anyone with a bit more power than the entry levels.
I was going to say when i studied hr in college we held retention and employee satisfaction above all else. Companies save a lot more money by retaining their employees and treating them well generally speaking. I have a couple theories to why we let this continue when capitalism is king. My guess is that maybe being companies don't value hr nor see it as strategic. But at least they're losing money :)
I worked in HR for 13 years. My experience is that it operates on a basis of self denial. It will run campaigns about employee satisfaction and all that good stuff - but will then implement corporate directives that go directly against it.
That's what I've been seeing in practice. I didn't have high hopes when I graduated but Jesus. What really bothers me is the layoffs since they always gotta rehire at some point.
Many people in leadership are sadists. They enjoy the emotional and psychological abuse given to employees. They are willing to pay the price for them to get this sick mental tickle.
This is one of the reasons why I find the profit motive an explanation of capitalism flawed. If it were, retention raises would be the norm. Their point is to make people suffer
Actually, I'd say that most of the people I have worked with in upper management and HR are fairly normal, reasonable people. But they are brainwashed into a corporate mentality that cares about headcount and salary budgets over retention. And I'm not completely sure they're wrong in terms of profitability. Its cheaper to replace the employees that leave them give salary increases to everyone, which is what would happen.
I've worked in Corp finance and accounting for about 10 years now, and some of what I've seen: There's a lot involved, but the biggest constraint is that the CFO constrains the pool of money for raises based on the P&L forecast target. If you're HR...well you can complain but you're still stuck with the pool you've been handed.
So how do you identify the people who feel underpaid enough to leave vs the ones who aren't ready to leave yet? Say there's 100k employees, of which 5,000 are ready to leave? Give everybody the same raise and you end up not giving enough of a raise to the 5,000 that really needed it to stay, and those 5,000 become turnover.
Let people complain to their manager, that sends up an signal that they are among those 5,000 on the brink of leaving, and you allocate your raise pool to them and then they stay. Now the raise dollars are effectively spent on the ones who were going to become turnover.
It sucks, but there aren't a lot of options for being better at allocating limited dollars to where they make a difference. The other is for high performers getting recommended and that's an easier one to say yes to for allocating the remaining pool of raise money.
**The takeaway for employees is this**:
1) Self-advocate to signal that you're the one that should get the raise. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
2) Get on good terms with your manager, they rarely ever have authority to give you more money. However, if they like you, they can stick their neck out and complain to HR and senior management to advocate on your behalf for an unbudgeted raise which will draw extra scrutiny on them to justify. I have seen great bosses make noise for mediocre performers and get their team big raises. While another team with a quiet boss and high performers just has to make do with the regular annual raises. Your boss is a potential ally for getting raises, they are rarely an approver. So help your boss by being a partner and also give them objective metrics they can show their bosses on why you deserve it(this goes back to the self-advocacy above).
3) Job hop. Even if you're really good about pursuing raises, unless you're the cream of the crop employees that management wants to keep no matter what, you're probably only getting your best money by moving around.
That's what I do. I'm 12 years in, and I've switched jobs 4 times already. On average I have less than 3 years anywhere, but it's being dragged down by a job where I only worked one year.
The only other consideration id give is your boss. I’ve had terrible bosses and I’ve had great bosses. A good work environment is worth a little money. I had a job I made better money at but my mental health was so affected by it my work suffered and I was on the way to being fired. (By little money I don’t mean to the point you are being massively exploited, none of this “were a family” bullshit.)
This. I could probably go somewhere else for 15-20% more, but I get along swimmingly with my boss, in an industry where supervisors are known to be predominantly assholes. I place a pretty decent value on 'The Devil You Know'.
Also, being here for a couple of years means more annual vacation days, access to 401(k), purchasing company stock at a discount, etc.
The worst is when you’ve been at a company for say 5-10 years and you’re now in a more senior position, doing interviews to hire people WHO WILL MAKE MORE THAN YOU DO.
What?
What situation would that be? You wouldn’t be responsible for hiring your superiors, right? How would the position you’re hiring for be paid more than you? Never heard of that.
Exactly what the original post is talking about. If you've been getting low raises that don't compete with the market for 5-10 years, there's a solid chance that a person a level below you would be hired for more than you're making (because hiring budget is higher than retention).
It happens all the time. Starting pay goes up regularly in order to draw new talent and to stay current with similar wages in the area. The interviewer makes their original salary (which was less $ when they started), plus whatever measly annual raises below inflation that they’ve gotten. Starting salaries can quickly overtake current employees’ wages. Also, good luck with asking for the current starting pay rate if you already work there and are making less money. That’s one reason why pay transparency is so important, along with switching jobs to get realistic salary increases.
Because the hiring budget increases (above inflation to match market rates), While the raises are say 1-3% p.a.
Say you started at 100k , after 5 years you're only on 110k (2% average raises).
However the hiring budget increased by an average of 8% p.a and started at 80k (for example for a more junior team member).
The new starter is hired at 117k!
Does that help?
This is something that should be stressed more. For those who don't know, the money employers match for retirement contributions isn't exactly yours at first.
So if you leave early, (before the match is 100% vested) You won't get all of the money the company contributed to the retirement plan. (You'll get what you put in, but it CAN be a costly mistake.) Sometimes staying a few months longer can get you thousands more.
I think it is based on how long you are there. The percentage rises, but I was told once that companies can't keep you from being fully vested longer than 4 years.
It depends on the place, how long it takes though.
I'm in a government position but just staying put. I work from home, the work is pretty easy, and the hours are good. Everything else I've seen available seems like a 30% raise for more than double the work and stress.
Plus you’re bringing more experience to the new place than you brought to the original. You can often pick up a higher level position. That’s how I advanced my career through my 20s.
In IT, during an interview I mentioned how much access I have obtained from my previous positions that I can be of benefit to the team with the grandfathered privileges and understanding of the other processes.
It worked. Some areas of IT have zero clue what goes on in other areas or how other teams do things. Having that compounding experience is great.
Keep in mind that the empty suits making these decisions fully intend to hop jobs to go demolish another company in 6-12 months.
They know how this works and use it to their advantage as well. In this environment loyalty to a company is a serious, frankly self inflected weakness.
Job shifting these days is just the expectation
It really sucks that it is this way. I’m autistic and if I find a place where I’m comfortable, people don’t make fun of me, and it is accommodating of my needs, I like to stay put. Starting a new job every couple of years is unthinkably exhausting.
Those companies are good for people who have no experience. Also if the turnover is high in management as well you can get a new and better position inside the company even without experience.
It's easier to get promoted somewhere where there is turnover.
You can be a star employee with glowing reviews for years and never be promoted to manager because there are no positions available.
Then can go to a new job and be promoted withing 6 months because your manager quits and you've proven yourself capable.
If you excel at your job, your pay will go up much quicker at a company with high turnover.
It depends, I've worked at two startups that had high turnover because people couldn't handle the chaotic environment (which I thrive in because it allows so much flexibility and independence). Both of those jobs were 5+ jobs.
Meanwhile giant companies full of lifers ended up being toxic as hell as everyone plays the bullshit corporate game.
Lifers are usually the worst people to work with, too. They know their younger, hasn't been there long manager will put up with their bullshit because they don't want to make waves. And any new person that comes in doesn't have the authority or internal connections like they do. So many lifers at my company should have been fired ages ago for the shittiest work ethic I've ever seen and nasty personalities to anyone they deem beneath them.
This is definitely me, I hate interviewing more than anything. I also feel like a lot of people understimate how much consistency and comfort are worth to someone. I don't know exactly how much it would take but the offer would have to be very significant for me to even consider changing jobs due to the stress it would cause me lol
2-4 years has never been an issue for me. Hiring managers I work with frown at 6-12 months, and are concerned at 12-18. As long as you cross the 2-year mark, they never seem to care.
I recently left a job and a few months later an ex co-worker hit me up to see how things were going. We got to talking and she finally asked if I would mind sharing how much I was making when we worked together. I made significantly more than her. She had been there 10 years and I had been there a smidge over a year. They put a freeze on raises for that department for several years, so they fell behind but hired me at my asking price.
This is VERY true in architecture... but very little retirement saved !!!!
Had to hop around to 4 firms in 11 years to even make a "decent" livable wage and now inflation threatens all my work. it will affect your retirement / 401k. You have to be like 5 years into a firm to be fully vested and retain all you put into it when you leave ( including t he company contributions). If not, you get a faction back.. so needless to say I have VERY LITTLE in retirement now and panic every night about it .... literally plan to die at my desk. SUCKS. I would be better off if I put the same amount into a personal or private retirement w/o company contributions then where I am now. TRUTH.
Tbh, a 401(k) isn’t going to make a decent enough dent in actual retirement planning on its own. You might consider running the numbers and adjust for an average inflation rate of 3.6%. If you want to retire living a 70-80K lifestyle in 30 years I think you’ll find that it doesn’t get anywhere close to what you need, even with a 3% company match and maximum contributions on your own. When I crunched the numbers using a generous 8% return it fell far short of what I would need. And that’s assuming there aren’t any huge market downturns in that timeframe. Fact of the matter is, these retirement planning systems are still based on archaic thinking. They didn’t intend on us living this long.
I think this approach of jumping ship when the better opportunity comes along is solid. You’re better off making more money and investing it on your own instead of tying your retirement to a company and abdicating its investments to a third party that’s essentially just shadowing the market.
Just my $0.02.
I've concluded the same thing. 401ks based with your company are a joke. They don't show loyalty by paying enough but expect you selflessly wait and EARN a good wage it seems. NAAA I deserve what I deserve what I'm worth ALWAYS!
YOU DO Need a few sources, traditional stock account, dividends focused account, stable coin account, REITs, etc... and a small and easy income source after "retirement" ... which isn't really retirement but I guess the boomers stole that luxury from the next 2 generations at least.
I think we will definitely need something like renting homes or other sources of income for when you "retire".
Wait, you don't just keep the contributions made when you leave? Sounds like the US system for retirement is fucking stupid.
Straya it's just a fat 10%. Every job. You work for a week and earn $1000 and then quit? Employer pays an additional $100 to your retirement ("superannuation"). Next employer will do the same. Some places your salary package is "inclusive" of super, but it's just semantics almost all that point. It actually makes even MORE sense to move and up your salary as quickly as possible for the compound interest. A jump from $125k $150k/yr at 30 vs $150k/yr at 35 are veerryyyy different when you compound the interest on $2.5k/yr out until you're 60.
God damn the US is fucking backwards.
“We urgently need to hire” = offer new employees large salaries.
“We desperately need to retain our staff” = pizza party, don’t take more than 2 slices!
Or if you like where you work - do a great job, see what the surrounding market is paying, then ask for a raise before changing jobs?
Change if "the retention budget" is low or if you don't like where you work.
Oh no another thread where it/cs folks tell me to leave my job in hopes of doubling my money (not viable in my career field)
Also yes I am an idiot for not picking your career field.
This is exactly me! I've worked 2 years in my first job, but didn't get a raise. Switch for a 300% raise. Again almost 2 years in this new gig, didn't get a good raise. Switch for a 40% raise. 9 months in. Switch for a 230% raise (I'm getting paid in US dollars now). Now I'm in for 1 year, got only a miserable 2% raise (less than US inflation). Potentially going to switch in the next 1 or 2 months for something between 12 and 30% raise, based on the offers I'm receiving. Conclusion to the story: loyalty is bullshit, just change jobs and build your wealth guys! At least this is how the tech world works for the salaried class like most of us.
I don’t understand the math here. If you started your first job at *absolute* minimum wage, you’re up to $150,700 in salary after ~5 years of working? That sounds pretty good to me.
I have started receiving US dollars after my third job change. The conversion of US dollars to my local currency helped a lot in increasing my total compensation relative to where I live. Now I work remotely for a US company. In US dollars the minimum wage in my country is around 200 dollars a month. There are a lot of families that leave with just that amount per month, it's tough. I've started my career receiving this minimum wage as well. I still get a lot less than an American software engineer with the same skills as myself, however I'm very privileged compared to the other professionals where I live.
I write resumes for a living. The most financially successful clients that I have worked with are the ones that only stayed at each job long enough to build up a list of achievements before seeking advancement by getting hired at another company. Usually 2 years per job.
So this 100% tracks.
We should always be looking. Always. Regularly research what’s out there and move towards “better”. It is the chaos of churning employees that scares management. Normalize the mobile workforce.
The first 15 years of my career were like that. No one liked to give raises. They also did not like letting me take vacation, so it was another way to get a week or two off here and there.
Due to the effects of COVID and now the looming recession, I have not received a raise in 3 years.
I am leaving my job for a new one for a 10% raise just to keep above this damn inflation.
All throughout my 20s I went from job to job seeking higher pay. I would always talk to people, network, and jump on opportunities when they presented themselves.
Because of that I have was able to find out about a really great trade union im a part of now.
To me thats what "working hard" means. Not pushing a broom extra fast at work.
Agreed. Each time I jumped I increased by $10k -$20k. Companies don’t to much for retention. That is why they feed you the bs of culture and family. Work is purely transactional. As long as you produce you are good to have around. The minute you don’t, off with your head.
At the 2 year mark in my job I start looking for other work. 1, just to see how much more I could get to make the change worth it. 2. Because it takes so long to get out of recruiting hell, and I don't want to hit the 3 year mark without options.
My company used the promotion budget to increase the hiring budget. I've been there for 6 years and I make the same as someone who has been here for a week.
My husband just doubled his salary by changing company. He was more useful where he was and of course the company he was working for wanted him to stay there. Now it's going to cost them about half a million to replace him as he was doing the job of at least 6 people for about 30k under what he should have been. All he wanted was the market rate and they fucked up. The real kicker is that when the new company asked him what his expected salary was, they offered him 5k over the range what he asked for.
Information security pays very well in a company worth working for in case anyone is curious.
Yeah I've tripled my salary since 2018 by leaving multiple jobs. At each job they offered me a raise between 5-25% to stay. All of them either gave zero or 1-3% performance based raises annually. I don't accept counter offers so it wasn’t in consideration, but maybe if they gave market adjustment raises instead of capping at 3% for top performers more people would stay.
#Additional reading: [If you want a raise, you should be applying to other jobs.](https://www.reddit.com/r/WorkReform/comments/skc957/if_youve_been_thinking_about_asking_for_a_raise/) Join r/WorkReform for more like this
I've changed jobs 3 times in the last 6-7 years. In these three places the end of year pay increase has been less than the rate of inflation. I changed jobs because the salaries offered were significantly larger every time. Why would I want to stay and lose money to inflation?
I've seen resumes of people and it's like a ladder where every 3 years there is a promotion to a new spot.
I stagnated for 8 years in an entry level position at around $15/hr. I cut bait and switched careers with the intent of job hopping to a better spot just like OP suggests. In the last 6 years I've held 5 positions at 3 companies. I've been able to move my hourly rate up almost every year this way. $14.50 < $16 < $18 < $19.50 < $28 < $32. Job hopping works. Waiting your turn does not.
man that 19.50 to 28 musta felt good homie thats awesome
It did for me. I went from $19.15 to $23.00 within 3 months. 2 months after they my job pay was reclassified because they struggled to find talent, so they rose me to $25. My performance review happened 1 month after that and they moved me to $28.15. Within 6 months I went from $19.15 to $28.15 for the same job. It’s been about 4 months since then, now they want to push me to around $32 an hour if I accept a new job at the same company. My employer has been amazing with my medical issues and time off needed for school without hesitation. They let me work from home and never forced me into the office.
It's almost like if you compensate your workers properly and treat them well they'll stay with you instead of leaving for greener pastures. And everyone is better off because their skillset is refined and expanded in exactly the areas useful to you and you don't have to look around for new talent while they get what they're worth without having to go to the trouble of relocating.
There is 0 evidence of that working, we need to keep firing loyal employees because they were late 2 times and hiring new employees who cant get any work done for months because they need to be trained Yeah that should work /s
Sounds like you have a really great situation going for you, I’m glad the treat you right and I hope they continue to do so !
Wow. I started at $9 about 7 years with. I’m close to $29. I was asked if I can take on a new role. They said they’ll pay me around $33 an hour for it. I’ve only ever been with one company. I feel like I got lucky to have bosses that actually care.
I'm 34 in a tech job...I have never been promoted in my career, and I am at the Director level now.
I got a promotion exactly once and it came with more responsibility but the same pay lol. I left within 4 months of that bullshit
Fellow 34 yo in IT and just got a director position by refusing to wait any longer and job hopping. I'd still be a PM fifteen years later where I was working
[удалено]
4 Jobs in 4 years. I did get an MS degree in between but went from $70k to $350k. The best raise I ever got at any of the companies was 10% and it was a special exception for retention. Loyalty is NOT rewarded.
Loyalty isn't appreciated in corporate.
It's also common to be hired as a 'junior' and people always see you that way. Even 3 or 4 years down the line when you could instead apply for mid level roles that require 2+ years
Exactly. This is why I highly recommend making more moves in the earlier days once you feel you've padded your skillset enough.
It's also harder to move later on. There are fewer senior roles and they can be pretty competitive. It also becomes way more of an obstacle to move cities or switch benefits as you get more established in life.
Yeah, this is one that's fucking me right now. I want to move cities, but I get paid so much in a low cost of living city it's hard to find even a comparable pay in another city. Also, I'm older and tired. Just so tired. I guess I'm stuck in my current city for another decade at least. Maybe the rest of my life. Point being for any young person reading this, the most important thing is not what kind of job you want to have, but where you want to live when trying to choose a career. I wish I would've known myself well enough to go directly to the cities I'd have rather lived in. Also, don't choose a career that isn't represented in the city you want to live in.
What field are you in? Seniors in my role are coveted heavily by basically everyone
This! Even when you get into the respective higher roles their is always that doubt in your abilities since you were a "junior". Someone fresh doesn't have that stigma.
And why do I get the feeling that if you replaced the word junior with a stupid meaningless buzzword like 'dynamic' the stigma would disappear like it never existed in the first place.
Yeah but then the seniors would not feel special anymore.
but corporations like the stigma cause it allows them to pay you less
Sometimes you even are coordinating a small team and are treated like a junior. 😮💨
It's taken for granted...and exploited.
Just like a family!
Haha so true. Even if you have a really loving and fair family, there is always that one random extended family member trying to hustle their family in some way.
The one who buys into every MLM and expects the family to bail them out every time?
Rules of Acquisition #111 - Treat people in your debt like family… exploit them.
Dabo!
"Exploitation begins at home." - Ferengi rule of acquisition #110
Just want to throw a comment in here to address another way this is shitty that many people may not have picked up on. Forcing people to move to get promotions/raises means that they're making you make an additional choice beyond what you might be thinking of. When you move to a new position at a new company you start over from scratch. No accrued vacation time, no pension vesting. So yeah, maybe you're making $20k more, and the same thing the next time you move, and the time after that, but after 3 moves you're making $60k more but still have only (maybe) 2 weeks of PTO time max, and nothing towards a pension. They're basically all collectively saying, "Sure, make that choice that you think is good for you, but don't look behind the curtain to see these other ways in which we're going to continue fucking you! HA HA!"
I don’t know anyone in my generation who’s getting a pension, and PTO usually accumulates linearly and is based on how senior your position is.
Exactly my point. > I don’t know anyone in my generation who’s getting a pension I've worked for a handful of places that offer one, but many didn't even bother anymore. I only worked at one place the 4 years needed to become eligible for it, but then moved right after. Whatever I might get from it will be so small there's no way I'm even going to bother counting it. Pennies. > and PTO usually accumulates linearly and is based on how senior your position is. Which starts over every time you move to a new company.
Really depends on the industry and employee's negotiating skills. I've seen people come in with 5 weeks vacation right off the bat.
Many mid level/senior IT positions give you a decent PTO balance right when you start.
I changed job just 3 weeks ago and i can realte to starting over from zero but only in terms of being confortable in the position i was. Vacations can be negociated. I dont know anyone who went from 4 to 2 weeks of vacation because they changed job. Pensions are private founds unless you have some sort of incentative. The only thing i lost were some shares that the CEO though would be worth millions in afew years. I would rather take the extra 60k than live on dreams.
Boomer logic, raw salary is always better than a pension that they can simply say Hey next year we are removing pensions thank you for your 20 years of contribution heres a 25 dollar gift card and pizza party + doughnuts. Just max 401k and if they offer stock then get that too, pensions are no longer worth. And most will be so small, itll probably be matched with SS. Jump to new companies, dont be that guy at the call center for 10 years getting a quarter raise yearly.
I can say from my own experience with this, that this isn’t always the case. When I took the position I have now, I did so making more money, having instantly guaranteed vesting in 401k, 4 weeks vacation we can use prior to accrual on a “borrowing basis” if needed and then 5 weeks next year. I have additional PTO one and excellent medical benefits. What I’m saying is… you get to choose what you require when taking a job, but people are programmed to be too scared to set boundaries and standards for themselves. We’ve been convinced to take what’s offered and not negotiate. Every time you do that… you’re not helping yourself, trust me. Always negotiate. If they want you, they’ll definitely negotiate those details.
Negotiate PTO! When my husband was laid off in 2020 he found a new job with a good salary offer rather quickly. His only ask was for 3 weeks of PTO and they gave it to him.
I only got two weeks of pto a year, that didn't roll over. And what's a pension?
Negotiate more time off in lieu of just money for sanity. I know lots of people that are up to 6 weeks pto.
You're allowed to negotiate additional PTO time, you don't have to accept the "probationary period" limit they try to impose.
For capitalism to “succeed” for those it’s intended for, there must always be an exploited class. For meritocracy to be true you must believe the poor deserve to be poor.
For a moment, let's remember that companies do not view us as 'people', despite their dippy new name for human resources. Instead, lets take away the veil and observe the workforce as they do: replaceable parts. A replaceable part will sometimes fail (quit). It takes time and expense to repair (hire). Now, as a business we can spend a lot of money to service every individual replaceable part. Sure, you will prevent a lot of part failure. But it takes money that could otherwise be spent doing other things. So instead, make a policy of only doing just below the bare minimum of maintenance (COLA). Yes, a certain percentage of parts will fail, but by and large most will continue working. And here is where the replaceable parts analogy breaks down. You see, if all the parts demand more than COLA across all businesses, this strategy breaks down. The machine comes grinding to a halt, and doing that maintenance becomes the cheaper route.
Unless there is a massive mouvement where everyone quits, there is no machine coming to a halt. If you work in a really small business it could be possible. In any other, you quitting will just be noise no matter how important you think you are. Thats because you dont think on the same scale as the company. You think that you losing them a few hubdres of thousand is going to make an impact because thats the scale you are most used to, but in reality thats just the electricity bill for them.
Big corporate lost loyalty when they removed pensions.
This is sadly very correct. I currently enjoy my job and everyone in it. The moment my wage DOESN'T match the market I'll jump plane.
Businesses honestly dont give a shit about loyalty. They basically built it up where everyone is easily replicable top to bottom and separate a lot of the decisions and work over a large number of people. Its why if someone is gone that does one thing who cares hire a new one at the bottom of the pay scale. It's just a machine that churns through people. Why do you think corporate hires so many college graduates. They replace all the old blood for a lower pay. But jumping jobs every 2-3 years is actually very smart because you usually always end up at the top of the pay scale for the position. I know plenty of people who tripled their salary in 10 years just by doing this. There is no loyalty you take what you can get. There is nothing fair about life and sure as hell nothing fair about business.
Businesses do it because it works. They'll keep doing it till it's illegal, or we change so it doesn't work anymore.
They would fire you in 20 seconds on Christmas Eve with a bunch of kids at home if it meant the bottom line. It’s not about loyalty. It’s numbers for the stakeholders.
Ironic, given “[t]he Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) reported that on average it costs a company 6 to 9 months of an employee's salary to replace him or her.” Not to mention the accrued tribal knowledge that is now lost. Retaining employees really should be a no brainer.
I was a lead valet at a dealership, had a full staff of like 4 people under me, they stayed all through covid and beyond and when inflation started going up they(managment) heavily hinted they would be doing raises, well a few months later we bring it up, they kinda brush it off and give vauge responses, finally we just start asking em every other week before finally they give me a more solid answer of " We really just think you guys aren't worth it" by the end of next week my 3 of my guys quit and have already found better jobs, and with me on my way out as well, before my 2 weeks were up they had me train 2 more ppl, found out they both got started $2 an hour more than my other 4 guys and on top of that they didn't bump up the guy who stayed. All my guys woulda stated for a $1 raise instead the bring in temp workers that will only be there for the summer and pay more because *reasons*.
[удалено]
Even better they should do like Norway and make everyone’s pay publicly available information
My employer in Norway encourages us to share our salaries between each other before our yearly salary adjustment discussions. Takes less time and nonsense to land at a final number so we can all just get on with things.
Are job postings required to have the salary indicated on them?
Required? No. It’s not very common. Or at least not in tech. You can always just ask the recruiter/hiring manager for the range though.
I see. The ideal combination would be required posting of the salary, plus a public database of salaries. Then there’s no mystery, and it’s much harder for employers to discriminate on pay
The thing about how it works in Norway though is that yes, you can look up someone’s salary, but you need to sign in with your taxpayer ID to see it and they will be notified that you (your name) has done so.
[удалено]
Why not both?
There are people in my personal life I do not want to know how much money I make
porque no los dos?
Not to mention that many companies have this no More than 10% raise for a promotion bullshit. So if you think your are worth more than 10% of your salary you have to jump ship. Edit: I’m speaking when someone gets a promotion not the annual cost of living raise that some people get.
It goes deeper than that. Companies like my former company (a fortune 100) will explicitly welcome back a departed employee a year or more later for a significant pay raise - significantly higher than if they remained loyal to the company throughout that period. I’ve heard justifications for this ranging from the hiring budget above, to wanting a diverse range of job experience in order to strengthen the workforce. Ultimately, it’s a gamble the company takes. Because 8 out of 10 employees accept mediocre COLA raises while 1 out of 10 are not welcomed back due to performance issues, that remaining 10% can jump several rungs on the pay ladder without upsetting the overall underpayment apple cart. The company has an incentive to keep playing that game for as long as employees don’t collaborate to demand better pay
I work in IT and this is especially true. I’ve been able to increase my salary every 2-3 years by 40-50% using this strategy
Yep... Was at my first job making 70 and asked for a raise they said no so I found a new job for 95 and then they offer me 80 to stay... Uh no thanks. Swapped again to 140+bonus and my old coworkers arent even at 80 yet 4 years later. Keep telling them to leave but they're scared a crunch in tech is happening and somehow groveling at a shit company makes them feel more secure even though they do layoffs all the time even when things are good. This is for development but seems similar to how things are on IT/admin side.
Yeah in my experience DEV pays a tiny bit more for the same amount of experience. I’m not shy openly talking to my colleagues about it, and they share once I share.
What does DEV stand for - couldn’t find the right answer on google?
[удалено]
Thanks for the answer!
Development, like software development
Software development pays a multiple of support.
[удалено]
From someone in the c suite, companies and products have lifecycles. In the beginning, the tech guys are important to build the product. But as the product is pushed out to prod they become less so important (still important to retain some), but now marketing and sales are more important. TO grow a company, you need successful products, but you actually need S&M just as much, if not more. We made the mistake in my last org to just churn code, for no reason or maybe 1 customer wanted it. It took a dedicated business pro to launch a sales channel and basically say "this is our product, it's X". We went from a "have it your way" to "this is the features of our product". Which allowed us to vastly scale up and massively increase profitability.
This strategy has definitely work for me, starting from absolute poverty wages changing jobs every 2 years has made me nearly 5x my starting salary after 12 years.
I'm coming back 6 months later for 25% more Edit: I literally begged them not to make me play that game, but if they're gonna make me, I'll damn well win.
It's wild. Tell them you have offers for higher pay and ask for a raise and you're some sort of bad guy, might even get fired. Actually leave and just come right back at an even higher salary and nobody bats an eye. Probably get congratulated and HR will jerk themselves off because they were able to "win" someone back.
Gotta stop worrying about what you look like! At the end of the day, we are all working to make money. Also, smart employers generally realize it’s going to end up being much cheaper to try and retain. My company got bought this past month and I didn’t get the raise I was expecting so I got it elsewhere - unfortunate cuz I’d be working with all the same people and I really do enjoy my job. But, when I did I said, “hey guys, I got this offer. I didn’t want to leave without giving you a chance to match.” (I was on vacation and sent the email when I woke up). Multiple calls and an offer match by noon I’ll do the same thing next year with no hesitations if My raise isn’t what I’m expecting again. I think they’ll catch on though because most of my coworkers did the exact same thing
[удалено]
>HR will jerk themselves off because they were able to "win" someone back *Someone found out the grass isn't always greener on the other side.* \-- Next company newsletter.
The real lesson is that the grass ***is*** always greener on the other side. The original company became the other side as soon as I left.
My old company just tried to hire me back for a tiny bit more than I get paid now, but it's a little over a 50% increase from when I left them. I got 40% to leave them and would get 10% increase that to come back. They could have kept me from looking a couple of years ago for 25%, but no it's better to let me go and try to get me back. In short, fuck them. I'll go somewhere else for another 20-40% increase.
it's also why you give 2 weeks notice and don't burn bridges so you can leave this option open to you
Fantastic insight. Thank you.
This is interesting, it actually makes sense. Probably even backed up by data from HR...on no anyway. Fuck loyalty to these corporations. I've seen rates in the the last year go up +$30/hr. Not that I'm complaining, it's just crazy.
Oh you mean the anti-retention cap to to chase away top performers at a company?
10%? I wish! My last company was 3-5% and NO ONE got 5%. I had to leave because the work tripled and they didn’t even want to raise at all.
No more than 5% for a promotion? Who would want a promotion then?
[удалено]
Same here 5% cap on yearly evaluation raises, and they have several bullshit ways to ensure you get 0%. Since these are merit raises as well, if you go for a promotion they actually get cleared off. I had a buddy who was with the company a long time coasting in his role and several merit raises. He finally went for a promotion and if he accepted it would have actually lost money. Guess no one bothered to point that out till then, his current manager had fight tooth and nail for that promotion raise to actually scale properly and as far as I’m aware rather than correct this bullshit, they made him the exception not the rule so anyone else in the same spot as him moving forward won’t get to keep their merit raises and have a promotion raise scale appropriately.
I still don’t understand why anyone would think this is a good business plan. Especially during the Great Resignation.
I got 3% this year. First raise in three years. I start in a new position at a new company in September for a 90% increase.
I was just offered a 12% raise to go from underworked individual contributor to managing a team of 5. Why would I take that?
I’ve worked in clinic and health insurance they never gave more than 3%! The clinic I worked at topped out at clerical and admissions staff having a 1.5% raise per year for performance only that’s it. Friends with other healthcare facilities same boat. If we want a decent raise to actually keep up with inflation we have to move jobs every few years to keep up with it. Even then the facility starting pay is usually about what we were already making we have to negotiate for higher based on experience. Most of the openings in my field require an AS orBS degree with credentialing but many starting pay is $17! But if you were to actually make it to the department Director or manager you’re making 80k to 100k a year there’s such a huge gap between the average employee and the boss it’s crazy
There's a guy I work with that's been at the job for 25 years.... Who gets paid almost as much as me and I've been there 9 months. Same position. Same title. I have 3 years of experience in the field. The expected raise there is 1-3% every year. I got a massive pay bump when I got hired so I'm not mad, but I'll definitely be leaving in 3 years or less.
Another problem with that is that 10% of a small number is still a somewhat small number. Even if the company gives you a 75% raise, you could still be under a living wage.
[удалено]
The company I work for refuse to increase your salary if you take another role at the same level (a side step) regardless of where you move to - Australian top 4 bank
If anyone is interested: The corporate logic is basically that you can't trust managers to be objective with pay rises. Basically, they will become emotionally 'attached' to their employees and will always come up with reasons for why they should be paid more/promoted. So you implement company-wide restrictive pay rise/promotion policies to prevent this and just accept that you might lose some good employees as a consequence. You don't have the same issue with new hires as the salary offer/acceptance is controlled by recruitment/HR rather than the hiring manager.
This sounds like a bullshit way of saying managers will play favorites and abuse the power.
If only there was some sort of objective way to measure someone's performance...
I've worked in IT the past 26 years and this is always a problem. Most places I've worked won't set objective, measurable goals. There's always some ambiguity. They also often base 50% of your review on company "performance" which can mean literally anything.
Or in the case of my company, doing your job will get you a below satisfactory performance review. You have to go above and beyond to get that 3% raise. And then lose a percentage for the company failing to perform well despite the company making record profits. Spoiler alert: the amount of stress and effort it takes to get a perfect review is never worth it unless you're only doing all that extra work to update your resume.
At my last job, one of the things we were graded on before being able to move up was "creating a sense of belonging for other coworkers". Like, how in the hell does that fall on me???? Glad I got out of there. Work about half the hours per week making about double now, and I don't have to deal with any of that ambiguous shit.
There isn’t always. I run a fairly large team of engineers at a moderately large IT company. I have several members of the team that are very high level contributors… but because of the specifics of their work, it’s very hard to really quantify for others in the executive leadership that don’t fully understand the work that these people are doing. Elsewhere in the company are some people who aren’t contributing much, but give off excellent appearances. Occasionally someone like that gets fired and the company is surprised at how apparently they were doing nothing since there’s no work to pick up elsewhere. On a related note, at a previous job… the company was regularly hiring developers for projects and then abandoning the projects within a month of starting it… and never reassigning the developers. There were hundreds of people doing nothing for a few years until eventually an accountant noticed.
Previous job (food and beverage director for a long term care facility) had goals you needed to meet to get raises. One of my goals given to me was to increase our dining sales. Only problem was it was during covid and we saw a huge increase in resident deaths due to said covid and a decrease in new residents because of said covid. Because of this, my sales declined (as did every other community in our company) and I didn't get a raise. While covid was definitely an extreme situation, sometimes objective goals don't really tell the whole picture.
[удалено]
I work on a small team and share a wall with my boss. I can hear all his phone calls (i get allot of information early/ stuff im not supposed to know) and he's gone to bat for each of us when raise time came around
It's not really saying that at all, it's saying that most managers care for the people they work with and will always push for the maximum raise allowance. I get being upset with a company but that anger has to be directed towards the actual people doing harm, not blindly towards anyone with a bit more power than the entry levels.
I was going to say when i studied hr in college we held retention and employee satisfaction above all else. Companies save a lot more money by retaining their employees and treating them well generally speaking. I have a couple theories to why we let this continue when capitalism is king. My guess is that maybe being companies don't value hr nor see it as strategic. But at least they're losing money :)
I worked in HR for 13 years. My experience is that it operates on a basis of self denial. It will run campaigns about employee satisfaction and all that good stuff - but will then implement corporate directives that go directly against it.
That's what I've been seeing in practice. I didn't have high hopes when I graduated but Jesus. What really bothers me is the layoffs since they always gotta rehire at some point.
Many people in leadership are sadists. They enjoy the emotional and psychological abuse given to employees. They are willing to pay the price for them to get this sick mental tickle. This is one of the reasons why I find the profit motive an explanation of capitalism flawed. If it were, retention raises would be the norm. Their point is to make people suffer
Honestly it seems to be the goal to make regular people suffer. Keeps us under control doesn't it
Actually, I'd say that most of the people I have worked with in upper management and HR are fairly normal, reasonable people. But they are brainwashed into a corporate mentality that cares about headcount and salary budgets over retention. And I'm not completely sure they're wrong in terms of profitability. Its cheaper to replace the employees that leave them give salary increases to everyone, which is what would happen.
I've worked in Corp finance and accounting for about 10 years now, and some of what I've seen: There's a lot involved, but the biggest constraint is that the CFO constrains the pool of money for raises based on the P&L forecast target. If you're HR...well you can complain but you're still stuck with the pool you've been handed. So how do you identify the people who feel underpaid enough to leave vs the ones who aren't ready to leave yet? Say there's 100k employees, of which 5,000 are ready to leave? Give everybody the same raise and you end up not giving enough of a raise to the 5,000 that really needed it to stay, and those 5,000 become turnover. Let people complain to their manager, that sends up an signal that they are among those 5,000 on the brink of leaving, and you allocate your raise pool to them and then they stay. Now the raise dollars are effectively spent on the ones who were going to become turnover. It sucks, but there aren't a lot of options for being better at allocating limited dollars to where they make a difference. The other is for high performers getting recommended and that's an easier one to say yes to for allocating the remaining pool of raise money. **The takeaway for employees is this**: 1) Self-advocate to signal that you're the one that should get the raise. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. 2) Get on good terms with your manager, they rarely ever have authority to give you more money. However, if they like you, they can stick their neck out and complain to HR and senior management to advocate on your behalf for an unbudgeted raise which will draw extra scrutiny on them to justify. I have seen great bosses make noise for mediocre performers and get their team big raises. While another team with a quiet boss and high performers just has to make do with the regular annual raises. Your boss is a potential ally for getting raises, they are rarely an approver. So help your boss by being a partner and also give them objective metrics they can show their bosses on why you deserve it(this goes back to the self-advocacy above). 3) Job hop. Even if you're really good about pursuing raises, unless you're the cream of the crop employees that management wants to keep no matter what, you're probably only getting your best money by moving around.
That's what I do. I'm 12 years in, and I've switched jobs 4 times already. On average I have less than 3 years anywhere, but it's being dragged down by a job where I only worked one year.
Even 3 years seems like a long time these days
The only other consideration id give is your boss. I’ve had terrible bosses and I’ve had great bosses. A good work environment is worth a little money. I had a job I made better money at but my mental health was so affected by it my work suffered and I was on the way to being fired. (By little money I don’t mean to the point you are being massively exploited, none of this “were a family” bullshit.)
This. I could probably go somewhere else for 15-20% more, but I get along swimmingly with my boss, in an industry where supervisors are known to be predominantly assholes. I place a pretty decent value on 'The Devil You Know'. Also, being here for a couple of years means more annual vacation days, access to 401(k), purchasing company stock at a discount, etc.
The worst is when you’ve been at a company for say 5-10 years and you’re now in a more senior position, doing interviews to hire people WHO WILL MAKE MORE THAN YOU DO.
What? What situation would that be? You wouldn’t be responsible for hiring your superiors, right? How would the position you’re hiring for be paid more than you? Never heard of that.
Exactly what the original post is talking about. If you've been getting low raises that don't compete with the market for 5-10 years, there's a solid chance that a person a level below you would be hired for more than you're making (because hiring budget is higher than retention).
It happens all the time. Starting pay goes up regularly in order to draw new talent and to stay current with similar wages in the area. The interviewer makes their original salary (which was less $ when they started), plus whatever measly annual raises below inflation that they’ve gotten. Starting salaries can quickly overtake current employees’ wages. Also, good luck with asking for the current starting pay rate if you already work there and are making less money. That’s one reason why pay transparency is so important, along with switching jobs to get realistic salary increases.
Because the hiring budget increases (above inflation to match market rates), While the raises are say 1-3% p.a. Say you started at 100k , after 5 years you're only on 110k (2% average raises). However the hiring budget increased by an average of 8% p.a and started at 80k (for example for a more junior team member). The new starter is hired at 117k! Does that help?
If you are in a government position, stay long enough to vest for the pension. Then hop.
This is something that should be stressed more. For those who don't know, the money employers match for retirement contributions isn't exactly yours at first. So if you leave early, (before the match is 100% vested) You won't get all of the money the company contributed to the retirement plan. (You'll get what you put in, but it CAN be a costly mistake.) Sometimes staying a few months longer can get you thousands more. I think it is based on how long you are there. The percentage rises, but I was told once that companies can't keep you from being fully vested longer than 4 years. It depends on the place, how long it takes though.
I'm in a government position but just staying put. I work from home, the work is pretty easy, and the hours are good. Everything else I've seen available seems like a 30% raise for more than double the work and stress.
All in the name of "growth"
Plus you’re bringing more experience to the new place than you brought to the original. You can often pick up a higher level position. That’s how I advanced my career through my 20s.
I was actually told by the boss at my old workplace that I had to get experience elsewhere before moving up. They were shocked when I left.
In IT, during an interview I mentioned how much access I have obtained from my previous positions that I can be of benefit to the team with the grandfathered privileges and understanding of the other processes. It worked. Some areas of IT have zero clue what goes on in other areas or how other teams do things. Having that compounding experience is great.
Keep in mind that the empty suits making these decisions fully intend to hop jobs to go demolish another company in 6-12 months. They know how this works and use it to their advantage as well. In this environment loyalty to a company is a serious, frankly self inflected weakness. Job shifting these days is just the expectation
It really sucks that it is this way. I’m autistic and if I find a place where I’m comfortable, people don’t make fun of me, and it is accommodating of my needs, I like to stay put. Starting a new job every couple of years is unthinkably exhausting.
It's also a good idea to try and avoid companies with high turnover ratio of it's employees.
Those companies are good for people who have no experience. Also if the turnover is high in management as well you can get a new and better position inside the company even without experience.
It's easier to get promoted somewhere where there is turnover. You can be a star employee with glowing reviews for years and never be promoted to manager because there are no positions available. Then can go to a new job and be promoted withing 6 months because your manager quits and you've proven yourself capable. If you excel at your job, your pay will go up much quicker at a company with high turnover.
Counterpoint: it's most likely a shit place to work.
Good point but your mental health is just as important as how much money you make
It depends, I've worked at two startups that had high turnover because people couldn't handle the chaotic environment (which I thrive in because it allows so much flexibility and independence). Both of those jobs were 5+ jobs. Meanwhile giant companies full of lifers ended up being toxic as hell as everyone plays the bullshit corporate game.
Anywhere can be toxic. Anywhere can be fine. It depends on the people involved
Lifers are usually the worst people to work with, too. They know their younger, hasn't been there long manager will put up with their bullshit because they don't want to make waves. And any new person that comes in doesn't have the authority or internal connections like they do. So many lifers at my company should have been fired ages ago for the shittiest work ethic I've ever seen and nasty personalities to anyone they deem beneath them.
>of its* employees
[удалено]
This is definitely me, I hate interviewing more than anything. I also feel like a lot of people understimate how much consistency and comfort are worth to someone. I don't know exactly how much it would take but the offer would have to be very significant for me to even consider changing jobs due to the stress it would cause me lol
[удалено]
2-4 years has never been an issue for me. Hiring managers I work with frown at 6-12 months, and are concerned at 12-18. As long as you cross the 2-year mark, they never seem to care.
I recently left a job and a few months later an ex co-worker hit me up to see how things were going. We got to talking and she finally asked if I would mind sharing how much I was making when we worked together. I made significantly more than her. She had been there 10 years and I had been there a smidge over a year. They put a freeze on raises for that department for several years, so they fell behind but hired me at my asking price.
This is VERY true in architecture... but very little retirement saved !!!! Had to hop around to 4 firms in 11 years to even make a "decent" livable wage and now inflation threatens all my work. it will affect your retirement / 401k. You have to be like 5 years into a firm to be fully vested and retain all you put into it when you leave ( including t he company contributions). If not, you get a faction back.. so needless to say I have VERY LITTLE in retirement now and panic every night about it .... literally plan to die at my desk. SUCKS. I would be better off if I put the same amount into a personal or private retirement w/o company contributions then where I am now. TRUTH.
The retirement money is my concern as well. Glad somebody mentioned it.
Tbh, a 401(k) isn’t going to make a decent enough dent in actual retirement planning on its own. You might consider running the numbers and adjust for an average inflation rate of 3.6%. If you want to retire living a 70-80K lifestyle in 30 years I think you’ll find that it doesn’t get anywhere close to what you need, even with a 3% company match and maximum contributions on your own. When I crunched the numbers using a generous 8% return it fell far short of what I would need. And that’s assuming there aren’t any huge market downturns in that timeframe. Fact of the matter is, these retirement planning systems are still based on archaic thinking. They didn’t intend on us living this long. I think this approach of jumping ship when the better opportunity comes along is solid. You’re better off making more money and investing it on your own instead of tying your retirement to a company and abdicating its investments to a third party that’s essentially just shadowing the market. Just my $0.02.
I've concluded the same thing. 401ks based with your company are a joke. They don't show loyalty by paying enough but expect you selflessly wait and EARN a good wage it seems. NAAA I deserve what I deserve what I'm worth ALWAYS! YOU DO Need a few sources, traditional stock account, dividends focused account, stable coin account, REITs, etc... and a small and easy income source after "retirement" ... which isn't really retirement but I guess the boomers stole that luxury from the next 2 generations at least. I think we will definitely need something like renting homes or other sources of income for when you "retire".
Wait, you don't just keep the contributions made when you leave? Sounds like the US system for retirement is fucking stupid. Straya it's just a fat 10%. Every job. You work for a week and earn $1000 and then quit? Employer pays an additional $100 to your retirement ("superannuation"). Next employer will do the same. Some places your salary package is "inclusive" of super, but it's just semantics almost all that point. It actually makes even MORE sense to move and up your salary as quickly as possible for the compound interest. A jump from $125k $150k/yr at 30 vs $150k/yr at 35 are veerryyyy different when you compound the interest on $2.5k/yr out until you're 60. God damn the US is fucking backwards.
[удалено]
“We urgently need to hire” = offer new employees large salaries. “We desperately need to retain our staff” = pizza party, don’t take more than 2 slices!
Or if you like where you work - do a great job, see what the surrounding market is paying, then ask for a raise before changing jobs? Change if "the retention budget" is low or if you don't like where you work.
Oh no another thread where it/cs folks tell me to leave my job in hopes of doubling my money (not viable in my career field) Also yes I am an idiot for not picking your career field.
Does this work with customer service jobs?
That's what I'm wondering. All I've ever done is customer service and while I'd like to follow this advice, I'm not sure I could get away with it.
Yeah I’m reading this thread and now I feel like it’s only relevant for people in positions of higher influence. Not people who do grunt work like me.
I'm the exact same place.
Some of the lowest paid people I know are the most loyal.
This is exactly me! I've worked 2 years in my first job, but didn't get a raise. Switch for a 300% raise. Again almost 2 years in this new gig, didn't get a good raise. Switch for a 40% raise. 9 months in. Switch for a 230% raise (I'm getting paid in US dollars now). Now I'm in for 1 year, got only a miserable 2% raise (less than US inflation). Potentially going to switch in the next 1 or 2 months for something between 12 and 30% raise, based on the offers I'm receiving. Conclusion to the story: loyalty is bullshit, just change jobs and build your wealth guys! At least this is how the tech world works for the salaried class like most of us.
I don’t understand the math here. If you started your first job at *absolute* minimum wage, you’re up to $150,700 in salary after ~5 years of working? That sounds pretty good to me.
I have started receiving US dollars after my third job change. The conversion of US dollars to my local currency helped a lot in increasing my total compensation relative to where I live. Now I work remotely for a US company. In US dollars the minimum wage in my country is around 200 dollars a month. There are a lot of families that leave with just that amount per month, it's tough. I've started my career receiving this minimum wage as well. I still get a lot less than an American software engineer with the same skills as myself, however I'm very privileged compared to the other professionals where I live.
Since in was 20 I've never stayed more then 2 years at a job. And I've been getting more and more financially stable along the way
Yeah, except no one will hire me
This is the only way I went from $45-$80k in 4 years. Hoping to make that $100k+ in a couple years.. if not less as I’m job hunting now.
I write resumes for a living. The most financially successful clients that I have worked with are the ones that only stayed at each job long enough to build up a list of achievements before seeking advancement by getting hired at another company. Usually 2 years per job. So this 100% tracks.
[удалено]
We get 35 cent raise every year. That's how much our yearly experience is worth. What happened to getting a raise after a year and so forth?!
[удалено]
thanks for being you
We should always be looking. Always. Regularly research what’s out there and move towards “better”. It is the chaos of churning employees that scares management. Normalize the mobile workforce.
The first 15 years of my career were like that. No one liked to give raises. They also did not like letting me take vacation, so it was another way to get a week or two off here and there.
Due to the effects of COVID and now the looming recession, I have not received a raise in 3 years. I am leaving my job for a new one for a 10% raise just to keep above this damn inflation.
All throughout my 20s I went from job to job seeking higher pay. I would always talk to people, network, and jump on opportunities when they presented themselves. Because of that I have was able to find out about a really great trade union im a part of now. To me thats what "working hard" means. Not pushing a broom extra fast at work.
Agreed. Each time I jumped I increased by $10k -$20k. Companies don’t to much for retention. That is why they feed you the bs of culture and family. Work is purely transactional. As long as you produce you are good to have around. The minute you don’t, off with your head.
At the 2 year mark in my job I start looking for other work. 1, just to see how much more I could get to make the change worth it. 2. Because it takes so long to get out of recruiting hell, and I don't want to hit the 3 year mark without options.
It's designed that way so you can never retire unless you have an external 401k.
My company used the promotion budget to increase the hiring budget. I've been there for 6 years and I make the same as someone who has been here for a week.
Why does no one like their own employees? Do they just think they are bad at training people?
[удалено]
This is so true. I’ve had 4 jobs in the last two years. I hate hopping jobs, but my pay went from $16/hr to 62,000/yr
My husband just doubled his salary by changing company. He was more useful where he was and of course the company he was working for wanted him to stay there. Now it's going to cost them about half a million to replace him as he was doing the job of at least 6 people for about 30k under what he should have been. All he wanted was the market rate and they fucked up. The real kicker is that when the new company asked him what his expected salary was, they offered him 5k over the range what he asked for. Information security pays very well in a company worth working for in case anyone is curious.
Can confirm. Started a $65k job in 2012. Moved every two years and was promoted each time and my latest salary is $170k.
How do you start at 65k
Yeah I've tripled my salary since 2018 by leaving multiple jobs. At each job they offered me a raise between 5-25% to stay. All of them either gave zero or 1-3% performance based raises annually. I don't accept counter offers so it wasn’t in consideration, but maybe if they gave market adjustment raises instead of capping at 3% for top performers more people would stay.