4 ms·

> The employee now knows that he could have gotten the same thing the employer is now offering before the counteroffer. This only matters if the employee was u

by imagist 10y ago

> The employee now knows that he could have gotten the same thing the employer is now offering before the counteroffer. This only matters if the employee was under the delusion that the company had the employee's best interests in mind. This is true at very few companies. If your company speaks of itself as if it's "a family", it's likely that this is just an attempt to create employee loyalty that they can leverage into lower salaries. > The employer knows that the employee is spending a non-trivial amount of time to interview and talk to other employers. This only matters if the employer is under the delusion that their employees are in it for anything other than money. It would be extraordinarily difficult to prop up this delusion in the tech industry where staying at companies more than two years is unusual, so I can't imagine many employers care. > I agree there should be no trust here, but we are conditioned to think that there should be. If you agree there should be no trust here, why are you making an argument based on trust? Just because people are conditioned to think something which allows them to be exploited doesn't mean they should stick to the exploitable thinking in the rare case where it ceases to be exploitable.

jimmywanger 10y ago
> It would be extraordinarily difficult to prop up this delusion in the tech industry where staying at companies more than two years is unusual, so I can't imagine many employers care. I dispute that. I generally stay at companies for 4 or 5 years, and I know multiple people who have stayed at Google for 10 years. >If you agree there should be no trust here, why are you making an argument based on trust? I'm not making an argument. I'm saying that trust (rightly or wrongly) sometimes seems like something that should be expected (to those who haven't been working for a while especially) and can be used to guilt people into acting in not their own best interests, or to act in a retaliatory way against employees.
- imagist 10y ago
  > I dispute that. I generally stay at companies for 4 or 5 years, and I know multiple people who have stayed at Google for 10 years. Yeah, but Google isn't representative of the industry as a whole. > I'm not making an argument. You said, "Counteroffers are poison for both the employee and the company." That's a very strong position you're taking. > I'm saying that trust (rightly or wrongly) sometimes seems like something that should be expected (to those who haven't been working for a while especially) and can be used to guilt people into acting in not their own best interests, or to act in a retaliatory way against employees. This is true, but inapplicable to the decision of whether to take a counteroffer. If you're the employee, "I might be being guilted into not acting in self-interest" is a concern that doesn't really support OR oppose taking counteroffers in general, it's just a general consideration (and the answer is basically to recognize that most companies only care about you as much as you can produce value for them). And while certainly some employers are prone to acting in a retaliatory way toward employees who look elsewhere, making a counteroffer is exactly the opposite of retaliatory behavior--it's recognizing that the loyalty ploy didn't work, and renegotiating.
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    > You said, "Counteroffers are poison for both the employee and the company." That's a very strong position you're taking. My opinion is that counteroffers are poison, generally because some employers or employees have unrealistic views on what loyalty means, and it always turns out badly for the employee. > This is true, but inapplicable to the decision of whether to take a counteroffer. If the employer, management, and employee have a good, realistic and mature view on employee/employer relationships and trust, that is correct. However, it's fairly common (especially for new managers) for them to think of employees looking for other jobs as a personal affront, and will make your life miserable. Life sometimes isn't as tidy as it should be.
    - imagist 10y ago
      > However, it's fairly common (especially for new managers) for them to think of employees looking for other jobs as a personal affront, and will make your life miserable. Why would someone who takes my looking for other jobs as a personal affront make a counteroffer?
      - jimmywanger 10y ago
        Many reasons. Maybe he thinks you're indispensable to the team, but will never fully trust you any more. Maybe he needs to close a deal with an external customer, and he doesn't have enough time to train up another person to take care of your job responsibilities, and he really needs to close that round of funding. Maybe his hiring pipeline is dry, either because your skills are hard to find, or maybe because candidates picked up on his managerial faults. Maybe he needs time to vet external consultants to take over your job, and needs you to stick around to train them, stick around longer than 2 weeks or however long you gave notice for. All these situations are the worst. He thinks he needs you, but doesn't really want you around. That way you stick around in an environment where management doesn't like you, and whenever there is a viable alternative, they'll dump you for the alternative. Edit: Another reason why the situation is bad is because management will never let on why exactly they're trying to retain you. They'll string you along until they figure that you're not longer indispensable, and then cut you lose. And you have no idea whether or not that's what he's actually thinking, or "I am an adult and I can respect the logical choices that this guy is going to make to better his career."

by imagist 10y ago

jimmywanger 10y ago

> It would be extraordinarily difficult to prop up this delusion in the tech industry where staying at companies more than two years is unusual, so I can't imagine many employers care. I dispute that. I generally stay at companies for 4 or 5 years, and I know multiple people who have stayed at Google for 10 years. >If you agree there should be no trust here, why are you making an argument based on trust? I'm not making an argument. I'm saying that trust (rightly or wrongly) sometimes seems like something that should be expected (to those who haven't been working for a while especially) and can be used to guilt people into acting in not their own best interests, or to act in a retaliatory way against employees.

imagist 10y ago
> I dispute that. I generally stay at companies for 4 or 5 years, and I know multiple people who have stayed at Google for 10 years. Yeah, but Google isn't representative of the industry as a whole. > I'm not making an argument. You said, "Counteroffers are poison for both the employee and the company." That's a very strong position you're taking. > I'm saying that trust (rightly or wrongly) sometimes seems like something that should be expected (to those who haven't been working for a while especially) and can be used to guilt people into acting in not their own best interests, or to act in a retaliatory way against employees. This is true, but inapplicable to the decision of whether to take a counteroffer. If you're the employee, "I might be being guilted into not acting in self-interest" is a concern that doesn't really support OR oppose taking counteroffers in general, it's just a general consideration (and the answer is basically to recognize that most companies only care about you as much as you can produce value for them). And while certainly some employers are prone to acting in a retaliatory way toward employees who look elsewhere, making a counteroffer is exactly the opposite of retaliatory behavior--it's recognizing that the loyalty ploy didn't work, and renegotiating.
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  > You said, "Counteroffers are poison for both the employee and the company." That's a very strong position you're taking. My opinion is that counteroffers are poison, generally because some employers or employees have unrealistic views on what loyalty means, and it always turns out badly for the employee. > This is true, but inapplicable to the decision of whether to take a counteroffer. If the employer, management, and employee have a good, realistic and mature view on employee/employer relationships and trust, that is correct. However, it's fairly common (especially for new managers) for them to think of employees looking for other jobs as a personal affront, and will make your life miserable. Life sometimes isn't as tidy as it should be.
  - imagist 10y ago
    > However, it's fairly common (especially for new managers) for them to think of employees looking for other jobs as a personal affront, and will make your life miserable. Why would someone who takes my looking for other jobs as a personal affront make a counteroffer?
    - jimmywanger 10y ago
      Many reasons. Maybe he thinks you're indispensable to the team, but will never fully trust you any more. Maybe he needs to close a deal with an external customer, and he doesn't have enough time to train up another person to take care of your job responsibilities, and he really needs to close that round of funding. Maybe his hiring pipeline is dry, either because your skills are hard to find, or maybe because candidates picked up on his managerial faults. Maybe he needs time to vet external consultants to take over your job, and needs you to stick around to train them, stick around longer than 2 weeks or however long you gave notice for. All these situations are the worst. He thinks he needs you, but doesn't really want you around. That way you stick around in an environment where management doesn't like you, and whenever there is a viable alternative, they'll dump you for the alternative. Edit: Another reason why the situation is bad is because management will never let on why exactly they're trying to retain you. They'll string you along until they figure that you're not longer indispensable, and then cut you lose. And you have no idea whether or not that's what he's actually thinking, or "I am an adult and I can respect the logical choices that this guy is going to make to better his career."