My raise, drum roll please.....

[Achiever51]

4eaxfm -
Minicorp tended to hire at the low end of the local salary scale compared to MEGACorp ...then would bring up the salaries to local par based on performance. Guess they got burned several times bringing in a higher paid employee who didn't work out, so they decided to take this approach of bringing them in at a low salary to see if they "fit" the culture before throwing more $$ at them. Don't know if it would work for other firms, but for this one it did. The employees at this firm were extremely loyal and tended to stay for years -- many felt as if they were personally invested in the mission of the firm. By the way, over time the raises adjusted to more of the local standard.

As for benefits, for a small firm, the health care plan was extraordinary -- better than what I had at MEGACorp -- although the employees had to underwrite 25% of the cost using pre-tax dollars. Vacation, other bennies were on par with other local firms.

CubeRat --
I'm not there anymore -- FIRE'd as of December 31, 2006 -- but I called today to see if they're hiring. Sorry -- nope! (good thing I didn't call on Monday...the entire staff was at the opening day baseball game!)

[vvsonikvv]

let me ask a question.

You work for a company. You are paid Salary X. You think you deserve Salary X + 10%. Your company only gives you a raise of 3%. The market offers openings at 12% increase. So if you want more money, you goto another company... So then your original company will hire someone else. And since the market value is Salary X + 12%, that's how they pay that person who filled your position.

And, it probably cost them money to recruit that person, and they have to train the person and have them on a learning curve. Why would they not give you that % increase that you wanted in the first place? Becuase if you did, you would stay, they wouldnt lose money recruiting someone else, or lose time away because they needed to be trained.

It's almost paradoxical that people just jump every 3 years to get paid what they are worth... and the company pays what that person was originally worth, but just pays it to someone else... who doesnt get to benefit, are those who under perform, because they wont get hired anyway. So i guess, is that the reason they would just let you jump?

[Spanky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laurence 4.57%

It is disappointing despite an average of 3% and especially you have put so much effort into your work. The pay is not in proportion to amount of effort and energy put forth into the work. It is dependent on how much they value the job/position/contribution. The way to measure your contribution is usually subjective by nature even though they claim it is objective. The key is to manage expectations and deliver slightly more than what expect.

I have learned over the years not to expect any big raises and appreciate whatever they give me.

[Spanky]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vvsonikvv let me ask a question. You work for a company. You are paid Salary X. You think you deserve Salary X + 10%. Your company only gives you a raise of 3%. The market offers openings at 12% increase. So if you want more money, you goto another company... So then your original company will hire someone else. And since the market value is Salary X + 12%, that's how they pay that person who filled your position. And, it probably cost them money to recruit that person, and they have to train the person and have them on a learning curve. Why would they not give you that % increase that you wanted in the first place? Becuase if you did, you would stay, they wouldnt lose money recruiting someone else, or lose time away because they needed to be trained. It's almost paradoxical that people just jump every 3 years to get paid what they are worth... and the companood.y pays what that person was originally worth, but just pays it to someone else... who doesnt get to benefit, are those who under perform, because they wont get hired anyway. So i guess, is that the reason they would just let you jump?

Since they (or HR) assume that the majority will not jump ship....no need to pay them more unless you have to. In addition, they believe that it is good to get some new blood.

[laurence]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vvsonikvv let me ask a question. You work for a company. You are paid Salary X. You think you deserve Salary X + 10%. Your company only gives you a raise of 3%. The market offers openings at 12% increase. So if you want more money, you goto another company... So then your original company will hire someone else. And since the market value is Salary X + 12%, that's how they pay that person who filled your position. And, it probably cost them money to recruit that person, and they have to train the person and have them on a learning curve. Why would they not give you that % increase that you wanted in the first place? Becuase if you did, you would stay, they wouldnt lose money recruiting someone else, or lose time away because they needed to be trained. It's almost paradoxical that people just jump every 3 years to get paid what they are worth... and the company pays what that person was originally worth, but just pays it to someone else... who doesnt get to benefit, are those who under perform, because they wont get hired anyway. So i guess, is that the reason they would just let you jump?

That's where vesting, vacation etc. come in. At my company, you stick around for 5 years and you accrue 5 weeks vacation a year, plus another 6 holidays, plus we have the 9-80 schedule ( I don't have work tomorrow!) plus you are fully vested in the pension at 5 years, so I get something like $500 at age 65 ( in today's dollars!) and it goes up each year I work beyond that. A coworker of mine is doing 2 weeks in Costa Rica, followed by 3 weeks in Europe. He wrote "have a nice April!" on his white board. So it's not just about the money, there are things that keep you around.

[Spanky]

Yea -- the golden handcuff to keep people: vacation days, vesting of 401K, or pensions (if any).

[4EAXFM]

Achiever51:
Thanks for sharing your experiences with Mini-corp. I've always wondered how the other half lives.


justin:
Are you saying Mega's are more demanding of their employees than mini's? My limited experience with mini's makes me think just the opposite. One of the two mini-corps I considered joining some years back flat out told me at the interview that they expected 50 hour work weeks from everyone. 25% more work, plus their offer was 10% lower than Mega-corp's, where I typically work a standard 40 hour work week, and the overtime I've had to put in is mostly paid for. I can probably count on my fingers and toes the number of hours I've given away over my entire career.


vvsonikvv:
I've often wondered about the same thing. I'd love for an HR person to weigh in on this, but I can only assume some bean counter determined that the turnover costs to replace employees leaving for higher paying jobs is overshadowed by the savings from keeping salaries down on the rest of the current employees. I think most people have some resistance to accepting a new job. If you like your job and the group you work with, diving into the unknown is less appealing. If your family is established and comfortable where you're at, no one wants to move. Most people I know who have left jobs would have stayed for just a fraction of the raise they accepted to leave. I think the bean counters know this, and set raises accordingly. It's kind of like how car manufacturers run the numbers to determine whether it's cheaper to fix a defect with an expensive recall, or payout the lawsuits they expect to receive from lives lost due to said defect. It may not be the "right" thing to do, but it's the more profitable thing to do.

[justin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4EAXFM justin: Are you saying Mega's are more demanding of their employees than mini's? My limited experience with mini's makes me think just the opposite. One of the two mini-corps I considered joining some years back flat out told me at the interview that they expected 50 hour work weeks from everyone. 25% more work, plus their offer was 10% lower than Mega-corp's, where I typically work a standard 40 hour work week, and the overtime I've had to put in is mostly paid for. I can probably count on my fingers and toes the number of hours I've given away over my entire career.

At minicorp, we have no performance reviews. We don't get overtime and most rarely work overtime. We were hired for 40, but told 42 or so hrs/wk would position you well to advance. : (screw that, right!).

I'm pretty sure I get by with doing less work (if I want to slack off) because there isn't a lot of accountability. Megafirms have billable goals, ratio goals, profitability goals, etc. that you would have to meet in order to remain employed there long term.

[2B]

I don't know where I fit into all this anymore. I used to be important and worked 60+ hours every week but I got layed off. I should have FIRE'd but didn't understand the concept in 2002. Now that I do, I don't really care about most of the BS and I am trying to determine when to bail.

I am now in a job where I am now getting paid straight time OT and can work all I want (which is very little). I have flexible hours and generally take Fridays off. I screw around most of the day, surf the internet and generally play with engineering computer programs that interest me. I make red, green and blue marks on drawings. There is no stress. I got my raise last month and I'm now making more than my best year before I got layed off -- bonus included. I get calls from headhunters who can get me even more money with another company but they might expect me to work most of the day.

My raise -- 5%. I have no idea if that is above or below the company average. I have not had a performance review since I've been here and I don't intend to ask for one.

I feel sorry for anyone still back at my old company. I've heard its turned into a "hell hole" but I now know it always was.

[4EAXFM]

Quote:

Originally Posted by justin At minicorp, we have no performance reviews. We don't get overtime and most rarely work overtime. We were hired for 40, but told 42 or so hrs/wk would position you well to advance. : (screw that, right!). I'm pretty sure I get by with doing less work (if I want to slack off) because there isn't a lot of accountability. Megafirms have billable goals, ratio goals, profitability goals, etc. that you would have to meet in order to remain employed there long term.

Wow, this is just so polar opposite to what my Mega-corp coworkers and I think. What color is the sun on the world you live in?

Trust me when I say we've got slackers galore in Mega-land. They're the guys Andre1969 lamented about who don't do dooky yet get 80% of the raise you do. There are a few cardinal sins you can fired for like commiting timecard fraud and viewing pornography from work, but incompetence and lazy @ss syndrome don't seem to make the list. I worked with a gal who literally took over 2 months of paid sick leave and personal time within a year. And when she was putting in her time, it was counterproductive, doing such a crappy job that others had to clean up after her. Granted, she isn't rocketing up the promotional ladder, but she's still around! We also have a lot of old timers in the aerospace industry (average age of 54 according to IEEE), many of whom are just coasting to retirement. This really pisses off the younger engineers who are 2 or 3 paygrades below the greybeards, but feel like they are just as productive as the old timers, if not more so. One particularly uppitty younger co-worker of mine took advantage of an open forum discussion with a VP to complain about this phenomenon. The VP acknowledged the problem after hearing from multiple others with similar experiences, but said there really isn't much they can do about it. It's very hard to fire someone in a Mega-corp, and I think if we held a Mega-corp vs. mini-corp slack-off contest, Mega-corp would win hands down.

[Texas Proud]

Hey 4EAXFM...

Being one of those 'old greybeards'..... maybe it is that we have a bit more knowledge than the young guys... our group just hired some 20 something to come in and do 'process improvement'... all of my co-workers are surprised I did not go for the job as I am more than qualified.. but they want me in JERSEY

But, I have seen the start of this guys work and he is going down a couple of dead end roads... they will not work. I know they will not, but he does not and is working HARD to go down them.. I have made some suggestions of a better course, but since it is not his idea we continue down the dead end road... so, I will not 'work hard' to make it look like we are getting somewhere when in the end we will come back and start over again..

Now, don't get me wrong.. I have seen some good young people... they are a joy to work with... but experience is worth some extra $$$$s

[2B]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4EAXFM We also have a lot of old timers in the aerospace industry (average age of 54 according to IEEE), many of whom are just coasting to retirement. This really pisses off the younger engineers who are 2 or 3 paygrades below the greybeards, but feel like they are just as productive as the old timers, if not more so.

This is true in many areas. My current department has a median age of 52.3 years. However, over half of the older group are over 58. In 10 years at least half of the department will be gone. This expertise will be missed; but as I've seen over and over again, the world will go on.

Many companies have policies to move greybeards out of the way which was part of my demise in my prior position. We were "blocking." It didn't help that on average our medical premiums were higher and, as we approached retirement vesting, our retirement plan costs grew rapidly. Getting rid of me and other older employees made "good business sense."

I was only hired by my present company because they were desperate for technical skills. I get no retirement benefits (other than 401k) and modest medical coverage. I know that when they don't have someone to bill my time to I will be gone just as quickly as I got here which is fine with me.

I have heard that in Germany you can't find an engineer over 50. They all get forced retired. The German government is trying to get companies to hire these older engineers back because of their labor shortage particuarly in technically trained fields. I haven't heard if they are successful.

[4EAXFM]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Texas Proud Hey 4EAXFM... Being one of those 'old greybeards'..... maybe it is that we have a bit more knowledge than the young guys...our group just hired some 20 something to come in and do 'process improvement'... all of my co-workers are surprised I did not go for the job as I am more than qualified.. but they want me in JERSEY But, I have seen the start of this guys work and he is going down a couple of dead end roads... they will not work. I know they will not, but he does not and is working HARD to go down them.. I have made some suggestions of a better course, but since it is not his idea we continue down the dead end road... so, I will not 'work hard' to make it look like we are getting somewhere when in the end we will come back and start over again.. Now, don't get me wrong.. I have seen some good young people... they are a joy to work with... but experience is worth some extra $$$$s

I agree whole heartedly, and I truly wasn't voicing my own opinions when I mentioned Mr. Young Uppitty. I'm more of a mid-timer who recently moved into a greybeard-class paygrade, so my view of the world is somewhat different (I don't have much to be bitter about, for one ). But I do see where Mr. Uppitty is coming from. We have some greybeards who absolutely are putting their experience to good use and more than justify their top-dollar wages. They may not be working as hard as the youngers guys do, but their knowledge is invaluable. It's the whole "$1 to swing the hammer, $999 for knowing where to swing it" thing. Others though, I can't help but feel are way past their prime. Time marches on, business areas come and go, and new technologies are always usurping the old. Some folks are able to adapt to the changing world while others are left obsolete. But they don't get fired, at least not in my neck of the woods. Instead, they are relegated crap tasks like obtaining price quotes from vendors or turning the crank on a simulation to collect data points. I think part of the problem is also due to lack of proper incentives and motivation for the senior folks. I'm sure somewhere along their careers they were kicking butt and taking names to earn the paygrades they enjoy. But for engineers at least, once you reach the top of the technical ladder, the only way to continue moving up is by going managerial and moving up the executive track. That's a fate worse than death to most engineers, so it's the end of the line for big pay raises. Knowing there will be no more promotions for the rest of your life kind of takes the wind out of one's sails.

[Sarah in SC]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4EAXFM Well if you're gonna raise your hand, how about answering the question? I'd really like to hear what compensation is like in Tiny Town.

Well, let's see, I got a raise from my dad when I got married--up $2 an hour, so that is one. Raise "time" isn't really a time, but more like a casual discussion at random times. I've never had an annual review that was about more money. I do remember a job that started at $25k and by the end of the year was paying $36K. That was pretty funny.

The job I have now has gone up 75% from my starting pay in 3 years. More flexibility, more volatility in tiny town, I think. My experience has been that folks work in MiniCorp for reasons other than pensions, regular raises, networking opportunities and the sort that would drive you to work for Mega corp. I think that there is a personality type that likes the zeal associated with small business, and having been raised by an entrepreneur, I like it, I just don't want to run one of my own.

I think I am paid a fair bit for what I do all day, and they buy me lunch every now and again.
Sarah

Sarah

[wabmester]

The BLS report on wages came out today. Compare yourself to the averages here:

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/cewqtr.txt

Check out King County, WA (home of Redmond) for the average salary and raise in the information sector.

*Average* weekly salary = $2,812 ($146K/year), up 19.4%!

[Spanky]

Quote:

*Average* weekly salary = $2,812 ($146K/year), up 19.4%!

That's a great pay, but it is not as high as that of natural resources and mining in Dallas, Texas ($3,640 weekly).

[Spanky]

Quote:

... But for engineers at least, once you reach the top of the technical ladder, the only way to continue moving up is by going managerial and moving up the executive track. That's a fate worse than death to most engineers, so it's the end of the line for big pay raises. Knowing there will be no more promotions for the rest of your life kind of takes the wind out of one's sails.

I guess not getting big raises or big promotions is not a big deal. How much more money do you really need anyway? Having a job is better than being forced to retire unless the severance package is so attractive than you cannot refuse.