3 ms·

At the time of a counteroffer, it's reasonable to plan around the possibility that accepting it means being fired shortly after, and maybe followed with a compr

by pekk 13y ago

At the time of a counteroffer, it's reasonable to plan around the possibility that accepting it means being fired shortly after, and maybe followed with a compromised recommendation on back channels. You've made yourself an irritant. It's common for employers in this industry to feel so entitled to your labor that they feel betrayed and hustled, categorize you as an uppity liability, and have to re-establish face with aggressive moves. If asking for a raise isn't enough to get it and you can't offer a specific marginal-value carrot in return, the only leverage you can develop is another offer. But it's too big a stick - you probably aren't just going to get another raise without causing hard feelings and inviting retaliation. You wouldn't try get improvements out of an abusive relationship by letting your SO know you had options. The only way you can build a mutually better deal, including a better salary, is if there is justifiable trust. Employers can earn that trust by fair dealing - like paying fairly well before we both have to deal with nags, demands, and sales pitches. Employers who can't earn their employees' trust have shown failures of leadership and deserve to be walked out on.

sokoloff 13y ago
I've been a hiring manager for the better part of the last decade. I cannot imagine any situation where I'd counter an employee's offer while simultaneously plotting to get rid of them down the road. In most cases, I don't even try to counter, as it's usually pointless, but in those cases where I do make a counter-offer, I'm doing it intending to keep them in the fold "permanently" (3+ years, ideally longer).
- pekk 13y ago
  Depends on the individual (and the tendency varies with the industry). Anyone who responds on HN claims to behave in an ideal way, but if you took this for an indicator of the industry you'd be surprised almost immediately - whether because these claims are often untrue or simply because the people making them are so unrepresentative.
  - sokoloff 13y ago
    Other than pathological or sociopathic management tendencies, I can't see any common scenario when it would make sense to counter while planning to fire. Suppose Abel is working for Manny; Abel gets a better offer and tells Manny. Manny decides to counter. In order for it to make sense for Manny to counter and plan-to-fire Abel, he has to be planning to hire Baker to do Abel's job, but wants to keep Abel around a while for stability and to on-board Baker. That's enormously expensive and risky compared to just paying Abel more in the first place or to just counter-and-keep Abel. If the job is that critical, pay Abel. If it's not that critical, just let the job stay open until you hire Baker. Taking on the severance costs to fire Abel later (and pay higher UE insurance) just to "get back at him" is self-defeating more than it could possibly hurt an employee who has just today proven he could get a higher-paying job. So, where's the "win" for any rational Manny?
    - DominikR 13y ago
      Baker will probably be more motivated than Able who apparently started to interview for a new job. That would be a big motivation for me, especially if his job is critical.
    - karmajunkie 13y ago
      There was a pretty well-respected guy (we'll call him Sam) known to almost everyone of note in town here, who had built a great team for a company with a fairly boring and unsexy (though profitable) product, who wanted to leave to be part of the founding team of another company. They made a counter, he accepted, and then they secretly began a search for his replacement, eventually axing him some months later. The epilogue to his story is that most of the team he built worked for Sam, not the company. Within six months the team had disintegrated, with almost all of the senior staff having moved on after seeing the way Sam was treated. Frankly, any management worth their salt would have seen that one coming way before cutting Sam loose. The lesson here is that even though its against their own self-interests, the counter-and-fire thing happens, and probably more frequently than not (though a single vague anecdote does not evidence make, I admit.) I think any engineer who thinks they ought to be making more should ask for it. But they should also be prepared to move on if they don't get what they want, unless they really trust their managers. And never take the counter.

by pekk 13y ago

sokoloff 13y ago

I've been a hiring manager for the better part of the last decade. I cannot imagine any situation where I'd counter an employee's offer while simultaneously plotting to get rid of them down the road. In most cases, I don't even try to counter, as it's usually pointless, but in those cases where I do make a counter-offer, I'm doing it intending to keep them in the fold "permanently" (3+ years, ideally longer).

pekk 13y ago
Depends on the individual (and the tendency varies with the industry). Anyone who responds on HN claims to behave in an ideal way, but if you took this for an indicator of the industry you'd be surprised almost immediately - whether because these claims are often untrue or simply because the people making them are so unrepresentative.
- sokoloff 13y ago
  Other than pathological or sociopathic management tendencies, I can't see any common scenario when it would make sense to counter while planning to fire. Suppose Abel is working for Manny; Abel gets a better offer and tells Manny. Manny decides to counter. In order for it to make sense for Manny to counter and plan-to-fire Abel, he has to be planning to hire Baker to do Abel's job, but wants to keep Abel around a while for stability and to on-board Baker. That's enormously expensive and risky compared to just paying Abel more in the first place or to just counter-and-keep Abel. If the job is that critical, pay Abel. If it's not that critical, just let the job stay open until you hire Baker. Taking on the severance costs to fire Abel later (and pay higher UE insurance) just to "get back at him" is self-defeating more than it could possibly hurt an employee who has just today proven he could get a higher-paying job. So, where's the "win" for any rational Manny?
  - DominikR 13y ago
    Baker will probably be more motivated than Able who apparently started to interview for a new job. That would be a big motivation for me, especially if his job is critical.
  - karmajunkie 13y ago
    There was a pretty well-respected guy (we'll call him Sam) known to almost everyone of note in town here, who had built a great team for a company with a fairly boring and unsexy (though profitable) product, who wanted to leave to be part of the founding team of another company. They made a counter, he accepted, and then they secretly began a search for his replacement, eventually axing him some months later. The epilogue to his story is that most of the team he built worked for Sam, not the company. Within six months the team had disintegrated, with almost all of the senior staff having moved on after seeing the way Sam was treated. Frankly, any management worth their salt would have seen that one coming way before cutting Sam loose. The lesson here is that even though its against their own self-interests, the counter-and-fire thing happens, and probably more frequently than not (though a single vague anecdote does not evidence make, I admit.) I think any engineer who thinks they ought to be making more should ask for it. But they should also be prepared to move on if they don't get what they want, unless they really trust their managers. And never take the counter.