4 ms·

"... unless they switch jobs" That is how raises happen. The economy doesn't grow uniformly - new industries take off and cannibalize old industries, and the

"... unless they switch jobs" That is how raises happen. The economy doesn't grow uniformly - new industries take off and cannibalize old industries, and the people in the old industries eventually lose their jobs while all of the gains in growth go to people in the new industries. Folks who expect better-than-inflation raises without switching into a hotter industry or moving into a new role remind me of the Parable of the Drowning Man [1]. You have to help yourself and go move into the areas that are making money. Assume that about 20% of your actual job should consist of hunting for a better job (and that > 50% should be setting you up for a better job - ideally you are learning new skills in your current job that will be useful in higher-paying positions). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_drowning_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_drowning_man

joshspankit 4y ago
Well I mean there’s a valid argument to be made that giving an employee a raise instead of finding/training a new employee is not only cheaper in the short term, but can provide exceptional ROI in the long-term (depending on industry of course). As long as the employee is producing X amount of value for the company and the value is greater than the total cost of that employee the math is simple, reasonable, and healthy.
- nostrademons 4y ago
  There are pretty heavy countervailing forces in favor of standardized salary bands for everyone. Employees compare notes; it can be demoralizing to hear that the company thinks your teammate is worth 20% more than you, and it instantly leads to politicking as everybody else asks for raises. While in the eyes of the business owner there may be clearly some employees that generate more value than others, good luck convincing all the employees that some of their teammates' work is more valuable. This tendency is more pronounced in bigger companies (where performance is more illegible), but the problem with small companies is that there are wide variations in their profitability and hence their ability to offer high salaries (and this is usually less than what big companies offer, hence their ability to get big). Job-switching here is the economy doing its job and funneling resources to the activities that generate the most consumer value.
- nixonpjoshua 4y ago
  This works so long as the company giving raises is successful vs the broader economy - however in the process of "creative destruction" in the economy a lot of what drives growth is new firms or innovative firms displacing old firms, thus the ability to pay a raise will be diminished in firms that fall into the "old" category vs the firms eating their lunch. It is just a statistical reality that if you stay at the same firm for 40 years that it is likely to at some point become an "old" firm.
soared 4y ago
Yeah that makes 100% sense, the issue is if you switch jobs too often is hurts your chances of being able to do that in the future. So it’s impossible to keep your pay in line with inflation, unless every ~4 years you switch to a role that has pay that makes up for your prior 4 years of inflation losses.
- surgical_fire 4y ago
  > the issue is if you switch jobs too often is hurts your chances of being able to do that in the future. I've been hearing this for 20 years so far. Still no problems.

joshspankit 4y ago

Well I mean there’s a valid argument to be made that giving an employee a raise instead of finding/training a new employee is not only cheaper in the short term, but can provide exceptional ROI in the long-term (depending on industry of course). As long as the employee is producing X amount of value for the company and the value is greater than the total cost of that employee the math is simple, reasonable, and healthy.

nostrademons 4y ago
There are pretty heavy countervailing forces in favor of standardized salary bands for everyone. Employees compare notes; it can be demoralizing to hear that the company thinks your teammate is worth 20% more than you, and it instantly leads to politicking as everybody else asks for raises. While in the eyes of the business owner there may be clearly some employees that generate more value than others, good luck convincing all the employees that some of their teammates' work is more valuable. This tendency is more pronounced in bigger companies (where performance is more illegible), but the problem with small companies is that there are wide variations in their profitability and hence their ability to offer high salaries (and this is usually less than what big companies offer, hence their ability to get big). Job-switching here is the economy doing its job and funneling resources to the activities that generate the most consumer value.
nixonpjoshua 4y ago
This works so long as the company giving raises is successful vs the broader economy - however in the process of "creative destruction" in the economy a lot of what drives growth is new firms or innovative firms displacing old firms, thus the ability to pay a raise will be diminished in firms that fall into the "old" category vs the firms eating their lunch. It is just a statistical reality that if you stay at the same firm for 40 years that it is likely to at some point become an "old" firm.

soared 4y ago

Yeah that makes 100% sense, the issue is if you switch jobs too often is hurts your chances of being able to do that in the future. So it’s impossible to keep your pay in line with inflation, unless every ~4 years you switch to a role that has pay that makes up for your prior 4 years of inflation losses.

surgical_fire 4y ago
> the issue is if you switch jobs too often is hurts your chances of being able to do that in the future. I've been hearing this for 20 years so far. Still no problems.