5 ms·

I have to ask: what reasons do you have in mind for the "sketch why this could happen". I have never worked for a large corporation, and besides usual miscommun

by cdavid 16y ago

I have to ask: what reasons do you have in mind for the "sketch why this could happen". I have never worked for a large corporation, and besides usual miscommunications between departements about official policy, I cannot find any reasonable explanation.

patio11 16y ago
1) Bob was hired prior to the minimum being enacted and no one has noticed. 2) Bob has fallen into a special case in our accounting package (e.g. "joined company through acquisition"), causing his salary to be marked "exempt from standard rules", and his manager has not been diligent with raising it to the company norms. 3) #2, but manager knew what was happening and did nothing to correct it anyway. Bob never complained, after all, and it made manager's budgets easier to balance. 4) No individual human anywhere in the corporation is responsible for evaluating Bob's compensation. Whoops. He's an orphaned node on the org chart because he was assigned to division A but expensed to B for the duration of a project which has since been canceled, was informally lent to C, but nobody told A yet, C doesn't expect him on their books, and B was eliminated in a reorg last year. 5) #4, except it is more severe: no one is in charge of reviewing Bob's salary because no one knows Bob exists. (This one is funny folklore... until it isn't.) 6) Hiring manager is citing a policy which does not exist and has never existed. This entire thread is based on a mistaken premise to begin with. 7) Hiring manager is citing a policy which exists for all Systems Engineers but Bob is classified as a Programmer: Systems (II) by manager Dave in 1997. P:S(II) was deprecated in 2002 -- didn't you get the memo, Dave? 8) #7. Dave didn't get the memo because he died in 2001.
- jimktrains2 16y ago
  9) The interviewee's friend could have been quoting his after-tax and/or after-loan take-home salary.
  - allwein 16y ago
    10) He was laid off a couple years ago but through some glitch in the payroll department, he still receives a paycheck.
    - metageek 16y ago
      11) He gets lower salary because he negotiated higher benefits instead. More options, for example.
- nitrogen 16y ago
  Some combination of #4 and #5 actually happened to me once. Naturally I quit, and despite giving notice to two separate departments, HR didn't know to expect me for an exit interview until I contacted them.
pkteison 16y ago
The rules for hiring minimums are divorced from and can go up much faster than the rules for raises. I know at least one employer where the standard way to get a decent raise is to quit and come back a year later, because they are locked in to certain % raises but that rule doesn't apply to a new hire.

by cdavid 16y ago

patio11 16y ago

1) Bob was hired prior to the minimum being enacted and no one has noticed. 2) Bob has fallen into a special case in our accounting package (e.g. "joined company through acquisition"), causing his salary to be marked "exempt from standard rules", and his manager has not been diligent with raising it to the company norms. 3) #2, but manager knew what was happening and did nothing to correct it anyway. Bob never complained, after all, and it made manager's budgets easier to balance. 4) No individual human anywhere in the corporation is responsible for evaluating Bob's compensation. Whoops. He's an orphaned node on the org chart because he was assigned to division A but expensed to B for the duration of a project which has since been canceled, was informally lent to C, but nobody told A yet, C doesn't expect him on their books, and B was eliminated in a reorg last year. 5) #4, except it is more severe: no one is in charge of reviewing Bob's salary because no one knows Bob exists. (This one is funny folklore... until it isn't.) 6) Hiring manager is citing a policy which does not exist and has never existed. This entire thread is based on a mistaken premise to begin with. 7) Hiring manager is citing a policy which exists for all Systems Engineers but Bob is classified as a Programmer: Systems (II) by manager Dave in 1997. P:S(II) was deprecated in 2002 -- didn't you get the memo, Dave? 8) #7. Dave didn't get the memo because he died in 2001.

jimktrains2 16y ago
9) The interviewee's friend could have been quoting his after-tax and/or after-loan take-home salary.
- allwein 16y ago
  10) He was laid off a couple years ago but through some glitch in the payroll department, he still receives a paycheck.
  - metageek 16y ago
    11) He gets lower salary because he negotiated higher benefits instead. More options, for example.
nitrogen 16y ago
Some combination of #4 and #5 actually happened to me once. Naturally I quit, and despite giving notice to two separate departments, HR didn't know to expect me for an exit interview until I contacted them.

pkteison 16y ago

The rules for hiring minimums are divorced from and can go up much faster than the rules for raises. I know at least one employer where the standard way to get a decent raise is to quit and come back a year later, because they are locked in to certain % raises but that rule doesn't apply to a new hire.