Worth making the move?

txjustin's picture
Rank: Neanderthal | 2,609

This is mainly aimed at the more experience monkeys on the board.

I won't delve into my job or what I make except I don't work in IB, PE, or a HF. I have an upcoming interview with a bank that is about on par with my bank, except the pay is 30% higher for basically I'm doing now. I will have a few more responsibilities and freedom to make choices, but the pay is significantly more. I don't want to do what I'm doing now for a career, but I plan on an MBA in the near future for a career changer.

Keep in mind, I'm a little older than the typical new grad and am married.

Question is: Is it worth it to make this move for the increase in base pay?

Comments (64)

Best Response
Jun 8, 2011

I'm actually not really that experienced., but I have a 6 year old niece who is and I asked her if you should take a similar job that is on par with your current bank for a higher salary, and she said "yes".

Hope that helps a bit.

Jun 8, 2011
nontarget:

I'm actually not really that experienced., but I have a 6 year old niece who is and I asked her if you should take a similar job that is on par with your current bank for a higher salary, and she said "yes".

Hope that helps a bit.

Thank your niece for me.

Jun 8, 2011

How long have you been at your current job? How long have you been out of school? How long before you go to grad school?

First impulse, I would say 30% raise for the same thing is a for sure thing you should take. However there are things to think about... how much have you job changed, how long at current position, how long before you apply to grad school, why not go into a career you want now instead of later, do you like where you are currently working and what if the other job is a shithole work enviroment, etc.

Jun 8, 2011
Nobama88:

How long have you been at your current job? How long have you been out of school? How long before you go to grad school?

First impulse, I would say 30% raise for the same thing is a for sure thing you should take. However there are things to think about... how much have you job changed, how long at current position, how long before you apply to grad school, why not go into a career you want now instead of later, do you like where you are currently working and what if the other job is a shithole work enviroment, etc.

Been at my current job just over a year, been out of school 3 years, and applying this fall for next fall.

Good points about finding what i want now, but the money is actually pretty important to me in the short term. I will most likely stay where I am and look for jobs that align with my future career goals. I used to love my current bank, but i got a new boss and she likes to micromanage.

Jun 8, 2011
txjustin:
Nobama88:

How long have you been at your current job? How long have you been out of school? How long before you go to grad school?

First impulse, I would say 30% raise for the same thing is a for sure thing you should take. However there are things to think about... how much have you job changed, how long at current position, how long before you apply to grad school, why not go into a career you want now instead of later, do you like where you are currently working and what if the other job is a shithole work enviroment, etc.

Been at my current job just over a year, been out of school 3 years, and applying this fall for next fall.

Good points about finding what i want now, but the money is actually pretty important to me in the short term. I will most likely stay where I am and look for jobs that align with my future career goals. I used to love my current bank, but i got a new boss and she likes to micromanage.

I really dont think their is any reason not to take the raise then. Maybe talk to your current bank and tell them about the offer? See if you can get a raise from them (after you have a firm offer from the other bank ofc). Remember to not burn any bridges.

***I have no idea how grad schools look on this type of thing / if they care at all that you were one year at this bank and just going to the other bank as your applying, etc. So, I am not sure if they would care that you change work and are apping for school and wold prefer you stay with your current job longer or not...

Jun 8, 2011
txjustin:

i got a new boss and she likes to micromanage.

Oh hell no.....drop them like a hot potato. Do you realize how much this is going to piss you off after a short while? Run as fast as you can.

It seems the issue is whether or not this move is going to help or hurt your grad school application. Y/N?

Jun 8, 2011

I should add, the move won't necessarily propel my future career ambitions any further.

Jun 8, 2011

For the MBA part if you leave and are going to apply this fall just make sure that you have people that can write strong recs for you. Talk to the people you like at your current job and make sure somebody would be on board for that since you wouldn't want all your recs from people that you have only worked with for a few months.

You are also supposed to get a rec from your current boss, but can not do this if you explain a reason why you can't. If you did change jobs I'd guess that adcoms would understand if you told them you didn't get one from your current boss because you just started. I would explain your reasoning more along the lines of "since I just started my current boss doesn't have enough background" rather than "I just started and I don't want them to know." Could you get a rec from the old boss that you liked at your current bank? If so this would probably fill in just fine.

Jun 8, 2011

You really owe your new firm 18 months. I would suggest not transferring unless you think you can get a deferral.

Jun 8, 2011
IlliniProgrammer:

You really owe your new firm 18 months. I would suggest not transferring unless you think you can get a deferral.

Im not sure I agree with this. Yes, it takes a company roughly 18 months to make the money back on hiring you but a company is not going to think twice about dropping you if its in their best interest so why should you think twice about dropping them if a better opportunity arises? Business is business. Now like I mentioned earlier, Im not sure how the business school or a future employer will look at it. They may think you 'owed' your last company 18 months or they may not think anything of it.

Jun 8, 2011
IlliniProgrammer:

You really owe your new firm 18 months. I would suggest not transferring unless you think you can get a deferral.

I don't owe any firm anything unless I signed a contract, I didn't.

Jun 9, 2011
IlliniProgrammer:

You really owe your new firm 18 months. I would suggest not transferring unless you think you can get a deferral.

You don't owe your firm shit. At will employment.

Jun 9, 2011
lebowski:
IlliniProgrammer:

You really owe your new firm 18 months. I would suggest not transferring unless you think you can get a deferral.

You don't owe your firm shit. At will employment.

Burning bridges isn't smart though I agree with your point at the most basic level

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford

Jun 10, 2011
lebowski:
IlliniProgrammer:

You really owe your new firm 18 months. I would suggest not transferring unless you think you can get a deferral.

You don't owe your firm shit. At will employment.

From a legal and ethical perspective, you might be right, but from a practical perspective, you couldn't be more wrong. A guy with a resume peppered with 12-month stints- when most folks in his role stay at the same employer at least 2-3 years- looks like a job hopper and a flake.

Jun 8, 2011

Sure, but your potential next manager is going to wonder how quickly you're going to leave him if you left your last job after just 12 months. It is going to be much harder to get a job if your resume shows that you started applying to schools almost the second you got there.

I agree on the surface that you don't owe your firm anything and they don't owe you anything, but if you're seen as a job hopper- or if you as a firm are seen as mistreating employees, karma stinks. Having several years of 2-3 year periods of employment rather than 12 months makes you a significantly more competitive candidate. And if the only thing that's better about this job is a 30% pay raise for one year (perhaps less if you plan to quit early to travel before your MBA), it may not be worth it when you are instead looking for a job that's perhaps 50% more than your new and improved comp post-MBA.

Just wanted to make sure this factor also got considered. It's something that often goes overlooked.

Jun 8, 2011

Thanks for pointing out those things. I actually hadn't thought of them that deep. I do appreciate it.

Also, the raise would be closer to 40% minimum. I'll tell you the situation. I was contacted by a recruiter earlier this week and after two rounds of speaking with them I got the interview. I actually go on the interview tomorrow morning so I have not idea of anything yet. I did tell the recruiter my minimum base salary though.

I'll do no traveling pre MBA, I'm married. As of right now, if I stayed with my current employer, post MBA would be closer to a minimum of a 100+% raise. I don't make a lot as I'm not in IB.

Jun 8, 2011

I'm just curious, what do you do? PM me is you want.

Jun 8, 2011
nontarget:

I'm just curious, what do you do? PM me is you want.

I'm a credit analyst in the real estate division of my bank

Jun 8, 2011

What are your thoughts about approaching your bank and asking them whether they can make a competitive offer? I've never done this so I can't offer any advice, but I would imagine you have some sort of feeling as to whether that is even something your boss(es) would entertain.

I agree that you don't owe anyone anything, but IP makes a great point about being competitive going forward.

Also, do you have any idea of what career or industry you intend to target for a post MBA position? One thing to consider would be post MBA pay. Some industries, like IB/PE are fairly standard, if you come in as a post MBA associate, you will likely be making as much as the guy next to you because the pay seems to be fairly standard. If you go into other industries, your post MBA pay might be based on your pre MBA salaries which obviously would benefit from a move to the other firm. Of course you have to weigh the difference in pay against the potential cost of looking like a job hopper...though I feel as though that would be less of an issue coming out of bschool because people are likely to conclude you are older, more mature, have reflected on what you have done and know where you want to go.

Regards

Jun 8, 2011

Hmmm. I'm not going to be very good at doing this evaluation for you without knowing you, knowing how much you like/dislike your job, etc, but let me give you one framework for looking at this on the financial front:

Salary Increase for 12 months + Optionality of not going to school > 18 months of post-MBA salary impact*PV/FV.

Just make sure you approach this with a certain degree of sobriety. I'm just a little concerned here because I'm seeing you starting to shift the numbers, and I'm not sure an extra 10% is going to make a huge difference here. It may or may not be the case with you, but sometimes you see people thinking with a lot of bias towards one outcome trying to shift numbers and facts in a certain direction to favor that outcome. Regardless, you really want to talk this over with your parents and your non-work industry friends who know you a lot better.

Jun 8, 2011
IlliniProgrammer:

Hmmm. I'm not going to be very good at doing this evaluation for you without knowing you, knowing how much you like/dislike your job, etc, but let me give you one framework for looking at this on the financial front:

Salary Increase for 12 months + Optionality of not going to school > 18 months of post-MBA salary impact*PV/FV.

Just make sure you approach this with a certain degree of sobriety. I'm just a little concerned here because I'm seeing you starting to shift the numbers, and I'm not sure an extra 10% is going to make a huge difference here. It may or may not be the case with you, but sometimes you see people thinking with a lot of bias towards one outcome trying to shift numbers and facts in a certain direction to favor that outcome. Regardless, you really want to talk this over with your parents and your non-work industry friends who know you a lot better.

Thanks for all the great advice you've given IP. I do appreciate it and hope this thread helps someone else besides just me. You've given me a lot to reflect on and think about. Cheers

Jun 9, 2011

Don't transfer brah. Over and over I have heard that when applying to MBA (etc.) most all the applications are good and the only way for the decision makers to narrow down the list is to go through and look for weaknesses / mistakes / reasons to reject a candidate.

The fact that you have only worked 4,5,6, etc. months at a new job is a great excuse to cross your ass off. "Oh, well, Billy just started at B's bank - I think that he is a great candidate, but maybe he would be be an even better candidate if he worked for a year at B's - got a little more experience in a new work environment and re-applied next year"

Forgive my weirdness, but I think its a valid thought.

Jun 9, 2011

If the other firm offers you a position for 30% more, quit.

I will write a letter of rec from you. I have two masters and never had my direct manager write jack shit for me. GMAT and years working are what matter. Get someone who is at a decent level and knows you to write a letter. How does the school know how your org chart is structured.

Churn and burn people. Trust me, your company wont think twice about shit canning you with zero notice.

Jun 9, 2011
ANT:

Churn and burn people. Trust me, your company wont think twice about shit canning you with zero notice.

Yup.

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011

Honestly, fuck grad school TX. I've met you before and know the deal better than most. Keep working for a while and bank cash. You are going to need solid work experience before you can really apply to any program worth noting and you can work at this new place for two years.

Besides, your boss is a micro manager. The most annoying trait a boss can have. No way you will last 2 years with that lording over you. Besides, she wont give you a glowing recommendation anyway.

Jun 9, 2011
ANT:

Besides, your boss is a micro manager. The most annoying trait a boss can have. No way you will last 2 years with that lording over you. Besides, she wont give you a glowing recommendation anyway.

^^^^ TOTALLY TRUE!!!!!!!! ^^^^

A bad boss can kill your career. A good one can open every door. Why not go on the interview, land the offer and then revisit this question?

Jun 9, 2011

they ask for salary for every job on ur grad school app. So a 30% increase in salary is gonna indicate career progression. Whatever you describe you actually do/did may be considered BS, salary progression is one of the best metrics.
Also it will be easier for you to find a job you want with a 30% higher salary, i mean all else equal, for a job paying 150/year, purely psychologically HR will consider someone making 130 as a better fit than someone making 100 in the previous job.
Also starting fresh in a new company you would get to break out of the grove you were getting pegged into, and actually may end up have more opportunities.

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011

And support Ant on recommendation.
That's also something to consider.
Your old boss with whom you have a year's worth of rec letter equity is gone, so from the point of view of rec qualifications, you would be starting from the beginning in both places.

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011

I was hesitant to weigh in on this because I don't know enough about B School admissions to make an honest assessment but I think that if and when you get the offer at the other place, you would be well served to go to your current bank, show them/tell them about the offer and put the ball in their court. If this other position is truly exactly what you are doing now, in the same city, and they're offering you 30% more, clearly you aren't being paid the market rate for your skills.

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford

Jun 9, 2011

But what would you accomplish by "putting the ball in their court"?
It's not like they don't know that they have been underpaying.

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011
Argonaut:

But what would you accomplish by "putting the ball in their court"?
It's not like they don't know that they have been underpaying.

You give them the chance to give your market rate or you leave. If you're valued (and having met Justin, I doubt he's dead weight) it could lead to the money you want while keeping the continuity of your current firm on the resume.

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford

Jun 9, 2011

.

Jun 9, 2011
happypantsmcgee:
Argonaut:

But what would you accomplish by "putting the ball in their court"?
It's not like they don't know that they have been underpaying.

You give them the chance to give your market rate or you leave. If you're valued (and having met Justin, I doubt he's dead weight) it could lead to the money you want while keeping the continuity of your current firm on the resume.

Thanks for the advice Happy. I'll wait and see what happens then go to my boss if I get an offer.

Jun 9, 2011
happypantsmcgee:
Argonaut:

But what would you accomplish by "putting the ball in their court"?
It's not like they don't know that they have been underpaying.

You give them the chance to give your market rate or you leave. If you're valued (and having met Justin, I doubt he's dead weight) it could lead to the money you want while keeping the continuity of your current firm on the resume.

What I'm saying is why would you be giving them the chance? They already fucked you over once (because they sure as hell know what the market rate is), all you would be doing is giving them a chance to f you over again. I personally would rather work with people that don't try to take advantage of me any time I lower my guard.

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011
happypantsmcgee:
Argonaut:

But what would you accomplish by "putting the ball in their court"?
It's not like they don't know that they have been underpaying.

You give them the chance to give your market rate or you leave. If you're valued (and having met Justin, I doubt he's dead weight) it could lead to the money you want while keeping the continuity of your current firm on the resume.

Exactly. If you have an outside offer, it does not hurt to ask. I didn't bring this up because I figured it would be awkward to ask for and get a raise if you are going to be hitting folks up for recs in two months anyways, though.

Jun 9, 2011

Take the new job. You don't owe anything to your current employer. You provide a service to them and they pay you, nothing more nothing less. Think about your family and what you could with 30% more money coming in.

Jun 9, 2011

Also, even if they give you a counter offer right now, they will start looking to replace you, or keep you pidgeon-holed in a specific role. Managers say come back to ask us for a counter offer so that they are not left without a key employee mid-project/transaction, because it's cheaper for them to give a raise than stall or half ass the project/transaction while they find suitable replacement.

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011
Argonaut:

Also, even if they give you a counter offer right now, they will start looking to replace you, or keep you pidgeon-holed in a specific role. Managers say come back to ask us for a counter offer so that they are not left without a key employee mid-project/transaction, because it's cheaper for them to give a raise than stall or half ass the project/transaction while they find suitable replacement.

Not necessarily, but in txjustin's case it's also not necessarily a bad thing if he is planning on leaving soon anyways.There is absolutely no harm in giving your current employer a look- and say what terms you'll stay under- before you leave, if you are certain you'd rather work at another firm than your current employer under the existing terms.

You have a duty to give an employer 18 months. And you have a duty to give them an opportunity to counter before you leave. I also think that the devil you know is better than the devil you don't, and your existing employer deserves a bit of a discount to keep you- if I am getting an offer that's equivalent to 80-85% of my hourly rate away and I like my team, I'm probably going to stay. Now obviously if you think you'd really like the team away or you don't like your current work situation, that changes the numbers, but you do owe your manager the look.

Jun 9, 2011

Get the offer first and then reevaluate.....until then, you don't have all of the information needed to make a decision.

Totally disagree about owing any employer any 'service time':
* Military, yes, you sign a contract.
* Employer - only if it works to your advantage.

Jun 9, 2011

Why would you not mind being underpaid?

As far as there's no harm - if you met a new girl that treats you well, would you go back to you ex-gf that treated you badly and say: "I want to be with you, but I want you to match how this other girl is treating me" , and most importantly why?

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011
Argonaut:

Why would you not mind being underpaid?

Well, if you like the people you work with or have a good manager to work for, that's EASILY worth a 15% discount to the unknown manager. One of my very first managers in the programming world was an amazing guy- totally chill and handed out a lot of good career advice. Guys like that make work 20-30% less work EASILY. And even if you only have an OK manager, starting over and being the new guy is a lot of work, and there is always the risk you get a tough manager. Interestingly, it's the tough managers who are always looking to hire people because they get the most turnover.

Finally, of course, there are gigantic transaction costs involved in switching jobs. Your manager kinda expects you to understand that. If you leave without offering your team a chance to counter, that's going to piss a lot of people off. And a pretty fair counter is the offer away minus 10%, IMHO.

As far as there's no harm - if you met a new girl that treats you well, would you go back to you ex-gf that treated you badly and say: "I want to be with you, but I want you to match how this other girl is treating me" , and most importantly why?

Because if you're going back for an MBA anyways in twelve months, it's always good to have a long, continuous stretch at the same employer when you're applying for that job out of school. It makes you a more competitive candidate. I understand your take on things Argonaut, but I just have to side with HPM here. There is a hard-to-quantify but significant financial cost to being seen as a job hopper, and this is a free way of avoiding it.

To get back to your analogy, if you know you're going to have to be single in a year, it looks much better to your next gf if you've had one gf in the past three years rather than being seen as a player. You may as well keep putting up with your current gf if she can match the situation away and you have gotten along ok for a long time.

The exception is if txjustin is absolutely sure he would enjoy working on his new team more. In that case, there is no need to go back to his manager. But otherwise, going back to your manager and asking for a match is a potential free improvement to his offer, and if he thinks he is going back for an MBA anyways, he doesn't have to worry about the potential for a layoff.

Conventional wisdom is that it usually makes sense to offer your current manager the chance to counteroffer. And given this case- where OP is going to school in a year anyways on the same job offer paying more, if it doesn't make sense here, when does it? The only reason not to do it is if OP doesn't like his current manager/team.

Jun 9, 2011
IlliniProgrammer:

Well, if you like the people you work with or have a good manager to work for, that's EASILY worth a 15% discount to the unknown manager.

So you are saying that you should pay your coworkers and your boss 15% of your salary for enjoying their company? I'm pretty sure txjustin has a wife, and 15% extra to the household would yield a bigger improvement in his quality of life. Also I'm gonna say, without adequate statistical proof, but just based on my observation, that a boss who adequately compensates employees is more likely to be a better boss to work for. I've had both kinds and the bosses who cared about my quality of life, from offering me adequate pay and counceling me on work-life balance, career opportunities, relationships, etc to ensuring that my work place is ergonomic and explaining to me the dangers of repetitive stress injuries etc etc are the bosses I would go back to work for in an instant, because I know they are not gonna try to f me over.

IlliniProgrammer:

One of my very first managers in the programming world was an amazing guy- totally chill and handed out a lot of good career advice. Guys like that make work 20-30% less work EASILY.

Yeah, but they are also not gonna ask you to work for less either

IlliniProgrammer:

Because if you're going back for an MBA anyways in twelve months, it's always good to have a long, continuous stretch at the same employer when you're applying for that job out of school.

but before you start looking for jobs out of school, you need a recommendation to get in. If he lost a year's worth of recommendation by having the managers switch, then he is in no better position by staying. A longer stretch would be nice if he had the manager that really likes him write him a rec letter in the end.

IlliniProgrammer:

It makes you a more competitive candidate. I understand your take on things Argonaut, but I just have to side with HPM here. There is a hard-to-quantify but significant financial cost to being seen as a job hopper, and this is a free way of avoiding it.

clearly it is not a free way. There's money on the table.

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011
Argonaut:

Why would you not mind being underpaid?

As far as there's no harm - if you met a new girl that treats you well, would you go back to you ex-gf that treated you badly and say: "I want to be with you, but I want you to match how this other girl is treating me" , and most importantly why?

Absolutely fucking awful analogy

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford

Jun 9, 2011

Totally disagree about owing any employer any 'service time':
* Military, yes, you sign a contract.
* Employer - only if it works to your advantage.

Agree, but my point is that most employees don't realize that having a longer track record at their current employer makes them a strong candidate at their next job. If I see a long string of new jobs every twelve months, I see a flake. I also see someone who's going to leave on me before I can make my money back on hiring him- or worse, who hasn't been doing well at any of his old jobs and has been getting fired or forced out.

Two years is a long enough period for most managers to be happy. More importantly, it is enough time for them to evaluate your work and get rid of you if you're not doing well. If I see one year in some high-flying LBO group at Drexel-Burnham, that doesn't tell me anything. If I see two years as a retail broker in Buffalo at Shearson, that at least tells me that some manager at Shearson made the right decision in hiring this kid. Is he a good fit here at EF Hutton? That requires a lot more thinking, but worst comes to worst, he obviously knows the mechanics of a retail stock trade, and he is a much more compelling candidate than the job hopper from Drexel.

So I really think the optimal period for staying in the same job is 2-3 years. That's long enough to send a clear signal that you were a good hire and having 5-7 years of 2-3+ year stints is a really strong signal that you're going to stick it out long enough for your hiring manager to make money off of you.

Ethically, perhaps you don't owe your employer anything and they don't owe you anything. But nobody wants to work for a company that's having a lot of layoffs, and nobody wants to hire a job hopper. So pragmatically, you think your next employer owes its current employees something, and your next employer thinks you owe your current firm something.

Jun 9, 2011
IlliniProgrammer:

Totally disagree about owing any employer any 'service time':
* Military, yes, you sign a contract.
* Employer - only if it works to your advantage.

Agree, but my point is that most employees don't realize that having a longer track record at their current employer makes them a strong candidate at their next job. If I see a long string of new jobs every twelve months, I see a flake. I also see someone who's going to leave on me before I can make my money back on hiring him- or worse, who hasn't been doing well at any of his old jobs and has been getting fired or forced out.

Two years is a long enough period for most managers to be happy. More importantly, it is enough time for them to evaluate your work and get rid of you if you're not doing well. If I see one year at Goldman, that doesn't tell me anything. If I see two years as a retail broker in Buffalo at Shearson, that at least tells me that some manager at Shearson made the right decision in hiring this kid. Is he a good fit here at EF Hutton? That requires a lot more thinking, but worst comes to worst, he obviously knows the mechanics of a retail stock trade.

So I really think the optimal period for staying in the same job is 2-3 years. That's long enough to send a clear signal that you were a good hire and having 5-7 years of 2-3 year stints is a really strong signal that you're going to stick it out long enough for your hiring manager to make money off of you.

Ethically, perhaps you don't owe your employer anything and they don't owe you anything. But nobody wants to work for a company that's having a lot of layoffs, and nobody wants to hire a job hopper. So pragmatically, you think your next employer owes its current employees something, and your next employer thinks you owe your current firm something.

Good call.

Up until this moment, I've taken the pure 'Slash and Burn' approach. Probably a good idea to plan ahead a bit.....

Jun 9, 2011

Illini, your points are perfectly valid for a 5-10% margin; if the boss is grossly underpaying - and i would consider 30-40% to be grossly underpaid, there's no amount of charm to justify that.
but yeah, if i have a great boss, i wouldn't even bother interviewing for a 5-10% raise.

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011

From an admissions perspective, I would think that being paid 30-40% more looks way more attractive than having kept the job an extra year. Your salary is an [imperfect] estimate of what you can offer an employer, and schools will want someone who will get a well-paying job upon graduation, since this will improve their statistics.

Also, many of us here (myself included) are looking at this much differently than we would if we had a family. Priorities change, and money NOW becomes more important. Take the money.

Good luck!

Jun 9, 2011

Agreed there. TXJustin should obviously ask for a pay raise to stay if he gets the offer, no matter how good the manager is. That's what I've been saying all along. But for a manager you like, you state the number you're getting offered, you offer a 10-20% discount, and that way, if you're pretty sure your manager really needs someone in your role, he now knows your replacement cost is 11-25% than your pay and you're pretty darned safe to boot.

Jun 9, 2011

what i am saying is that there's a significant difference between a manager that is possibly underpaying you 5-10% (it really could be the market rate, but someone else is just offering you above market), and a manager that is underpaying you 30-40%. If the latter manager actually has resources to drum up even a 20% raise, and your work is valuable enough for them to counter offer, then why was he/she not treating you fairly before?
in a situation like that the issue is not purely monetary, it is a structural deficiency so to say. it is the kind of manager and the company you should leave, even if they counter offer with 10% higher

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011
Argonaut:

what i am saying is that there's a significant difference between a manager that is possibly underpaying you 5-10% (it really could be the market rate, but someone else is just offering you above market), and a manager that is underpaying you 30-40%. If the latter manager actually has resources to drum up even a 20% raise, and your work is valuable enough for them to counter offer, then why was he/she not treating you fairly before?

Because the threat of losing an employee is a much stronger motivation to drum up resources. Staying at a firm is just like staying with a landlord. The price moves less against you in a falling wage/rising rent environment but less for you in a rising wage/falling rent environment. To keep pace with the market, you have to point out a better offer away and ask how close they'll come to matching it. They will never more than match it, but it can still help you by reducing risk and variance costs.

in a situation like that the issue is not purely monetary, it is a structural deficiency so to say. it is the kind of manager and the company you should leave, even if they counter offer with 10% higher

I don't know. Again, there's a lot of inertia in wage pricing in both directions. An offer away cuts that inertia and gets you a pragmatic decision as to whether you are worth the market rate to them. But yes, every couple of years you will have to get an offer away and reset your salary up. But if you've worked there for a while, you also know that you're not going to get axed quite as quickly in favor of someone cheaper if wages start falling, and you will not have to spend a year as low man on the totem pole. So it's all a bunch of trade-offs.

Jun 9, 2011
IlliniProgrammer:

I don't know. Again, there's a lot of inertia in wage pricing in both directions. An offer away cuts that inertia and gets you a pragmatic decision as to whether you are worth the market rate to them. But yes, every couple of years you will have to get an offer away and reset your salary up. But if you've worked there for a while, you also know that you're not going to get axed quite as quickly in favor of someone cheaper if wages start falling, and you will not have to spend a year as low man on the totem pole. So it's all a bunch of trade-offs.

You make a lot of assumptions. if it's cutting time, the people that will be cutting you are your boss' bosses, they don't care about the non-verbal agreement you made with your boss about him not cutting you in return for you taking lower pay.
You know what they say about verbal agreements - they are not worth the paper they are written on.
Frankly I don't even know what could be said about non-verbal agreements.

More is good, all is better

Jun 9, 2011

eh, not necessarily an evil bitch, most likely just weak and clueless. trying to please her boss the best she knows how

More is good, all is better

Jun 10, 2011
Comment