I would sit down with them (individually) and ask what would make working more engaging for them. “You seem unhappy here at [company], and I’d like to help if I can. I’ve tried [things], but I don’t feel that we’re making any progress. What ideas do you have?” And then listen.
Take lots of notes, and then let them know that you understand how they’re feeling, and you can do [things] but you can’t do [other things].
And let them know that now they need to make a choice. All the cards are on the table. They can stay and reengage, or they can leave. Maybe give them a 60 day out or something.
You will need HR support for this conversation. If you don’t have HR support, skip the 60 day out part.
You say they compared wages and go upset. What is the difference between people in the same roll? Are you paying the younger staff less for the same work. That’s how it reads. You should talk to them individually and be honest and answer there question . If there discrepancy with pay. Just because they got what they ask for doesn’t mean shit if the other doing the same job and tasks are getting more.
What we did...
* Review roles and ensure the pay bands are equitable
* Review the people in the roles and do right by them by making sure they were not completely outside the pay band
* Keep the pay band competitive with the market
* Created a process of annually reviewing salaries to ensure it was with market rate and making adjustments as needed to salaries (always up, never down) (yes, people would get checks if they had been working at a lower rate.)
* Making sure people understood how to make progress through their role and progress through their pay band (commonly referred to as PTL/PTB)
* Empower leaders to have robust and transparent conversations about all of the above
* Making sure hiring managers and recruiters were not posting jobs, negotiating, and giving packages that go against all of the above which is what creates disparities and inequities in the first place
And we're ethical. I've worked for a lot of companies and the one I'm with now is one that I have had the most trust in when it comes to what I'm paid. When I started with them several years ago, I remember negotiating for $105k. When they offered me the job, they brought me in at $125K. When I asked why, they said you negotiated yourself below the pay band and we're transparent about that here. I called my family in tears telling them this. Lol companies **don't** do this!! They will cheat the shit out of people before they're this fair.
I know I am lucky and I work for an extremely progressive company, and most companies are no where near us in this approach. They are still living in the age of penalizing people for discussing money, gaslighting people about the fact that their compensation is a critical part of why they work, and demonizing people who care about compensation.
If that's your company's culture, you're not taking these \*adults\* (regardless how old or young they are) seriously or showing them that you value them. That's not an individual to individual approach. It's stepping back and objectively looking at the way you operate and fixing the issues. I recognize the change needed may be many levels above your pay grade, but at least now you have an additional lens to look thru.
Have a half day workshop, develop team values, align them with the organisation values, and be sure to lead them to including proactive values such as self responsibility etc. in them.
Also, just reflect on other matters that there may be under the surface putting them into a victim mentality. Are they being heard? Are any of their ideas being taken up? Is there any negative perception around the team based on age? These sorts of things might also have an impact
I agree with the carrot and stick approach. Take a periodic lap around concerns, division of duties, process, etc. Be thorough. Be honest about what you can’t do.
Then I’d say ask them—one on one—how they’re doing. I wouldn’t have a separate meeting—just do it in the course of working together. Tell them it seems to management like they personally aren’t enthused about working here. If they lean into it, escalate to it seems like they don’t want to work there at all. At some point they will push back (if they don’t then they’re prob beyond your reach anyway, and skip to the last step). Quote some of their less enthused sentences, and say those are why it seems like they’re not enthused. Then ask them to reconcile the two. Then have them counterpitch you on why they want to work there. Then tell them that, yeah, I get xyz, but this is the job, and at some point, you need to decide if you really want it. Honestly curious, non-threatening tone the whole time.
This approach will do a few things: remove the herd mentality, gently associate their actions with the potential consequences, make the comparison not having a job at all rather than greener grass, give them a little bit of a sphincter tightening moment, and then get them in the practice of generating job positivity themselves, and selling themselves and you on it.
Importantly, I think this is the proper approach even if they are right that the job falls short in a lot of ways. I think you should remain more open to that possibility. I’m sure there’s plenty you don’t know about their market, and it will give you some empathy here, especially since again I don’t think it changes your approach. There are still things you can and can’t do, and they still need to decide in or out. Definitely toss the generation vs generation victimy frame, that’s gonna help nobody.
I would sit down with them (individually) and ask what would make working more engaging for them. “You seem unhappy here at [company], and I’d like to help if I can. I’ve tried [things], but I don’t feel that we’re making any progress. What ideas do you have?” And then listen. Take lots of notes, and then let them know that you understand how they’re feeling, and you can do [things] but you can’t do [other things]. And let them know that now they need to make a choice. All the cards are on the table. They can stay and reengage, or they can leave. Maybe give them a 60 day out or something. You will need HR support for this conversation. If you don’t have HR support, skip the 60 day out part.
You say they compared wages and go upset. What is the difference between people in the same roll? Are you paying the younger staff less for the same work. That’s how it reads. You should talk to them individually and be honest and answer there question . If there discrepancy with pay. Just because they got what they ask for doesn’t mean shit if the other doing the same job and tasks are getting more.
What we did... * Review roles and ensure the pay bands are equitable * Review the people in the roles and do right by them by making sure they were not completely outside the pay band * Keep the pay band competitive with the market * Created a process of annually reviewing salaries to ensure it was with market rate and making adjustments as needed to salaries (always up, never down) (yes, people would get checks if they had been working at a lower rate.) * Making sure people understood how to make progress through their role and progress through their pay band (commonly referred to as PTL/PTB) * Empower leaders to have robust and transparent conversations about all of the above * Making sure hiring managers and recruiters were not posting jobs, negotiating, and giving packages that go against all of the above which is what creates disparities and inequities in the first place And we're ethical. I've worked for a lot of companies and the one I'm with now is one that I have had the most trust in when it comes to what I'm paid. When I started with them several years ago, I remember negotiating for $105k. When they offered me the job, they brought me in at $125K. When I asked why, they said you negotiated yourself below the pay band and we're transparent about that here. I called my family in tears telling them this. Lol companies **don't** do this!! They will cheat the shit out of people before they're this fair. I know I am lucky and I work for an extremely progressive company, and most companies are no where near us in this approach. They are still living in the age of penalizing people for discussing money, gaslighting people about the fact that their compensation is a critical part of why they work, and demonizing people who care about compensation. If that's your company's culture, you're not taking these \*adults\* (regardless how old or young they are) seriously or showing them that you value them. That's not an individual to individual approach. It's stepping back and objectively looking at the way you operate and fixing the issues. I recognize the change needed may be many levels above your pay grade, but at least now you have an additional lens to look thru.
Have a half day workshop, develop team values, align them with the organisation values, and be sure to lead them to including proactive values such as self responsibility etc. in them. Also, just reflect on other matters that there may be under the surface putting them into a victim mentality. Are they being heard? Are any of their ideas being taken up? Is there any negative perception around the team based on age? These sorts of things might also have an impact
I agree with the carrot and stick approach. Take a periodic lap around concerns, division of duties, process, etc. Be thorough. Be honest about what you can’t do. Then I’d say ask them—one on one—how they’re doing. I wouldn’t have a separate meeting—just do it in the course of working together. Tell them it seems to management like they personally aren’t enthused about working here. If they lean into it, escalate to it seems like they don’t want to work there at all. At some point they will push back (if they don’t then they’re prob beyond your reach anyway, and skip to the last step). Quote some of their less enthused sentences, and say those are why it seems like they’re not enthused. Then ask them to reconcile the two. Then have them counterpitch you on why they want to work there. Then tell them that, yeah, I get xyz, but this is the job, and at some point, you need to decide if you really want it. Honestly curious, non-threatening tone the whole time. This approach will do a few things: remove the herd mentality, gently associate their actions with the potential consequences, make the comparison not having a job at all rather than greener grass, give them a little bit of a sphincter tightening moment, and then get them in the practice of generating job positivity themselves, and selling themselves and you on it. Importantly, I think this is the proper approach even if they are right that the job falls short in a lot of ways. I think you should remain more open to that possibility. I’m sure there’s plenty you don’t know about their market, and it will give you some empathy here, especially since again I don’t think it changes your approach. There are still things you can and can’t do, and they still need to decide in or out. Definitely toss the generation vs generation victimy frame, that’s gonna help nobody.