140 points
*

I don’t get how corporate is so detached that they’re making these policies. I left my last job about a year ago because a competitor offered 30% more. My manager said they could do 3% and, with regular raises, I’d be at that amount in 10 years. I know his hands were tied and he was just grasping at any reason he could come up with to keep me, but that just makes me even more incredulous that companies are crafting policies like this.

Edit: This job also requires about a year of training to be halfway decent, with multiple business trips overseas, so they didn’t even save any money as far as I can tell.

permalink
report
reply
80 points

They’re not detached, they’re playing a different game. The game of the greedy little piggies.

If I give you a raise, well, it just might get out that we give raises around here! Suddenly, I got all these, lazy, do nothing greedy little piggies asking for more money! That 5k becomes 20k, then 50k, etc.! My hard earned slop is drying up quick!

But if I hire someone new, I send the exact opposite message. We don’t do raises here, and if you don’t like it, we have no trouble replacing you, greedy little piggie!

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Yeah I just show up to work and try to do a good job, so I can see how I’m not like them I guess. It really sucks having to change from a job I really liked to another just to keep up with inflation or get to the pay range they’re hiring ln

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

This is the real reason. A universally beaten-down workforce is how you keep people working hard for the minimum pay. One new employee being paid more than the others from the get-go isn’t anywhere near as damaging to the bottom-line as one employee getting a nice raise and inspiring the rest of the office to demand one as well. With the taboo against asking people how much they get paid, nobody will ever know that the new guy gets paid more, and soon enough even they’ll get paid well under what they’re worth with inflation constantly rolling away.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

I think it’s short sightedness. If you look at the costs over a decade it would be a no brainer to invest in retention, but if you’re only looking at the change in this quarter’s budget then it’s not as clear.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

And we’re just looking at salary difference with the new hire here. Hiring and onboarding the right person costs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It also sadly risks undeserving employees getting raises and becoming much harder to dispose of, especially in jurisdictions where it’s hard to fire people.

It’s shit. Top talent and young people suffer for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

The is the world the MBAs have created, saving money in the short term seems to be the only thing that matters to many companies. Also, for every one person who leaves to get more money, there may be several who stay at the lower wage

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I always assume they believe you are lying.

They are willing to risk the “ok cya here’s my 2 weeks” to never suffer the “lol I made that shit up thanks for the big raise”

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

In which case, who cares? If the person can do the job and is happy to do it for $5k less than a new hire and no training is required, you could be Pinocchio for all I care.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yeah but I addressed that in my earlier comment. These are job positions that require training and skills and it’s still easy come easy go for most of my industry as far as I can tell.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Essentially they’re hedging your bargain

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points
*

If they can’t really spring for higher salaries, but you’re too lazy to change jobs just yet, get them to pay for credentials and training that make you a more desirable hire. Make them load the gun you’ll shoot them with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Doing that at my new company. They’re paying for my master’s :)

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Hiring budgets are often very different from operational budgets. The job you’re moving to for a 30% raise has the same policies as your current job; you’re just seeing the other side of it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I’ve come to understand that but it’s a foolish way of operating on their part

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

They only loss out on the ones that leave. They win big on the ones that stay.

I wonder if anyone’s ever did the maths, I wouldn’t be surprised in many instances if it works out. However, it would be hard to estimate the impact of the employee resentment and loss due to losing knowledge.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Yes, middle management gets a bonus for keeping costs down, so it’s in their personal interest to refuse raises.

The one in charge of hiring gets a bonus for bringing in people because work needs to be done and there aren’t enough workers.

The incentives make the system as it is. And good long term incentives seem to be few and far between.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I had something similar happen. I lined up a second job that was offering almost double the pay. And my current company was just at a loss they couldn’t even offer me online work it was just like a goodbye. Though now I’ve kind of hit a paid cap for my particular field so I doubt that golden moment will happen again

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I think that’s the point where I’d start considering trying to find something else in the same company. If I can make lateral moves for pay raises, I’d prefer that to toeing the company line and hoping they’re nice enough/like me enough to promote me

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

And that’s exactly what I’m doing 👍. Going for that senior role. While trying to avoid management lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I had that happen to a team member (me as a manager). She came to give me notice, the pay jump was huge. 45k to 70k. I loved her and I tried to swing it with my boss, but the ultimate answer was no and she left. I hope she is happy now. She really was awesome and I wish she stayed working for me, but I’m happy for her. She was a single mom to 2 teenagers so there’s no way she couldn’t accept that money

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

In my experience, a lot of management positions are filled by people that are meeting a need of feeling a sense of power and control over others. They don’t care about the company anymore than they have to to meet this need.

Also, it’s possible that they’re worried that if they give you a raise, you’ll tell others and they will demand one as well. They rather hire a new person without social ties to other workers that wont share what their salary is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

The lower management people that I’ve worked with haven’t been like that for the most part. I guess my frustration is mostly with the fact that the message of retaining people isn’t getting to the people who make decisions on things like that

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That seems pretty credulous based on your anecdote. Also, you’d surpass 30% in 9 years of 3% raises.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

One less year is not a compelling reason to stay either. 2 weeks << 9 years

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I’m an engineering student.

I like to say: “You know the joke that business majors are stupid?” and that’s it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
53 points

The answer is you already have the 40k person, it’s not broken, there’s no urgency for HR to approve additional funding.

That person says they’re leaving, now HR can approve a counter offer, but also, can you trust they won’t leave later? Maybe we shouldn’t.

You’ve failed to give a raise and they’ve now left. Now there’s a gap and the team can’t pick up the slack. Oh shit, guess we better hire someone else. Oh, the market average rate we all pay the same company to provide says the rate is higher than 4 years ago, so they get hired with the higher rate.

Isn’t that unfair to the existing employees? We’ll see point 1. It ain’t broke, we can’t approve more funding.

permalink
report
reply
33 points

This is why the idea of maintenance is something that should be better appreciated. If that person’s pay kept up in the first place, an employee can expect to not need to find another job and the problem never appears in the first place.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
*

Shitty companies will never care about things which can’t go on a spreadsheet or entry in their earnings report.

But I agree.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points
*

It’s because they know one dissatisfied person leaving is cheaper than either giving everyone a raise or creating 1 satisfied but many angry people after the others were ‘unfairly’ looked over for a raise.

That and for many people/managers it’s just the default to do nothing until required.

Edit: this is part of why unions are so important.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

That is only true when employees are not skilled and do not gain inside knowledge.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Small business with one person leaving having a catastrophic impact, sure.

Giant corporation, one person can’t tip the scales, regardless of skill and knowledge.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Then why do we pay CEOs millions of dollars?

This is a rhetorical question.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Small businesses do the same shit.

As an embedded systems engineer, I left a small business to triple my pay. They eventually replaced me with someone at twice my old salary, but they couldn’t hack it and the company folded not long after.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

You’d be surprised. I’ve worked for a fortune 500 and knew people that, if the left, would cause a multi million dollar facility to grind to a halt for at least a month. And management was only barely aware of how important they were

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I was at a small company for 7 years working 50-60 hours weeks. I left for a large company where I work 40…at most. Usually I get my stuff done and have a “free” day.

Even including the overtime pay at the first job, my checks here are over 50% bigger.

It took the threat of poaching for the boss to do anything but they wound up giving my coworker a raise. Clearly they had the money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Didn’t forget paying 20% of their salary to a recruiter

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Plus the lack of productivity for onboarding and training the new hire…

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

And the sapped productivity from existing employees training the new employee

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Yes, the best way to increase your salary drastically is to change jobs.

permalink
report
reply

Funny: Home of the Haha

!funny@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to /c/funny, a place for all your humorous and amusing content.

Looking for mods! Send an application to Stamets!

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We’re all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.


Other Communities:

Community stats

  • 7.3K

    Monthly active users

  • 837

    Posts

  • 11K

    Comments