6 ms·
> An engineer that has been at a largish company for 1 year is worth 20-30% more than the year they were hired because they have specific knowledge of the tech
by quietbritishjim 5y ago
> An engineer that has been at a largish company for 1 year is worth 20-30% more than the year they were hired because they have specific knowledge of the tech stack. Yet that engineer will likely be offered a 3-5% raise.
Although I agree with your overall point, I disagree with this line of reasoning. I think the pay offered to an engineer already takes into account that they will understand the tech stack after six months to a year. The situation is essentially the reverse of what you said: they're being overpaid initially compared to their productivity (but, quite rightly, that's the company's problem). Then their productivity catches up with their salary.
But I agree with your point in the years after that.
- koonsolo 5y agoI agree with the both of you, so here is my simple version: Companies rely on the fact that you stay a couple of years at least. So if you want to make good deal, you need to switch jobs more often.
- tclancy 5y agoA year to learn, a year to earn, a year to yearn.
- vwcx 5y ago*A year to learn, a yearn to earn, next year churn.
- koonsolo 5y agoI remember reading somewhere (but I can't remember where): "My job is not my job, my job is to find a better job"
- webmaven 5y agoI've come across "My job is to eliminate my job."
- imwillofficial 5y agoImpossible in reality for the most part, but a lofty goal to aim for.
- imwillofficial 5y agoI don’t think this line of thinking will bring out your best work.
- synergy20 5y agoThat sounds about right to me. The company also has risks in that its interviewing process indeed just found a good match and you will be as good in real as in paper(your resume), I think the salary part covers the first year, no raise for first year makes perfect sense unless you're absolutely undervalued when you're hired. The other side is that, if you're not as good as you're supposed to be, normally you won't get fired just in one year, you are actually overpaid. From the corporate side, the better engineers are covering the loss(those are overvalued but still too early to be laid-off). So the best and most capable ones will switch jobs after 3 years, not totally because the company is too greedy. Unless there is a way and culture to make your salary can go up and down each year based on your performance, there is no good solution(because pay-cut is not common no matter what). In the end those who are overpaid will more likely to stay, those who are undervalued will likely jump board. One way is to keep salary less important, like an average value that is reasonable for both sides, then the company can use monthly/quarterly/yearly bonus to reward the top employees, but who could like it when he has a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage that needs a sense of secure/stable income.
- simplestats 5y agoOverall I'd say the whole point of the interview process at senior level and beyond is to make as sure as possible that you are productive immediately. They give you tasks you can do without thorough knowledge of their process. And these days, lots of one-to-one meetings to hold your hand some and keep your productive. If you don't get a raise in the first year, it's often more about pedantry regarding the HR rules, which tend to be "optimized" by penny-pinching adjustments over the years to take advantage of employees every way they can (this is their job, squeezing money out of people any way they can). E.g. you weren't there for the last round of evaluations so you don't get a raise. Possibly no bonus too. You need to discuss all this stuff when negotiating, they'll be trying to help you work the system at that point, rather than using it against you.
- alisonkisk 5y ago
- varelse 5y agoAs long as you are classified as an at will employee you should give your employer at will loyalty. They don't owe you anything and you don't owe them anything either beyond the responsibilities of your job in exchange for whatever they're paying you. It's up to them to make sticking around your best option. But when I'm on interview panels and someone brings up that the person in question is a job hopper, rather than see that as a negative, I see it as a challenge to find a way to get that person to stick around. And the only thing that offends me when someone quits is if the offer to do so isn't better than sticking around. I am not popular with my fellow managers with this attitude and I expect downvotes for this. Bring 'em. It really doesn't matter to me anymore, the remainder of my career will be spent on making hard things easier rather than making easy things harder.
- ghaff 5y agoNo reason to downvote you. However, if someone has generally changed jobs every year or two and I wouldn't hire someone who I knew with certainty would only stay that long, I might think I'm special enough that I can keep them around. But I'd probably be wrong.
- varelse 5y agoAnd that's the thing, it's okay with me if I'm wrong. Or as I responded to a doctor who asked a similar question: "Do all your patients live?" It's not a question of being special to me, it's a challenge to figure out what will make them stick around and make the company money and it's usually strongly correlated in my experience.
- wonderwonder 5y agoI can only speak for myself but so much of my job hopping is geared towards both getting more money but just as importantly trying to find an environment I really like. I want to find work that is fulfilling and that does not make me dread Mondays. I have reached a level financially where while I can always use more I make more than I ever reasonably expected to make and I am making far far less than many on here. My years are precious I want to spend them somewhere that I like both the people I work with and the work I do.
- throway453sde 5y agoThey don't pay upfront. That's not how management thinks. Until attrition is below 50% hiring new people with a good hike is profitable than paying to people who don't leave.