Comment on Employees Who Stay In Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

• Hagdos@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Backing up “word is” by an article that says “word is” is kinda meager though. There are many things widely believed to be true that are not, or only mildly so our in specific circumstances.

  source

  • maegul@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Backing up “word is” by an article that says “word is” is kinda meager though.

    Well I’m relaying what is basically common knowledge in the industry shared by people in the industry. The thing about promotion/hiring budgets is something I know directly or through people at their companies.

    Sure, it may not be industry wide, of course, but I’ve not seen any hint of a countervailing trend or pattern. What’s more, in the tech industry, it makes sense. There’s a fair amount of pivoting which is often deemed to be done best by hiring (at least some) new staff with the required expertise/experience. And maintaining existing/legacy systems is often de-prioritised such that those who’ve been at the company for a while who understand the existing systems well are not as valued as those who may help the company “grow”. Which is why I bring up the possibility that these patterns may spread to other industries.

    source

    • markstos@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      The countervailing trend in the tech industry is layoffs.

      source

      • maegul@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I’m not sure what you’re saying. The size of the labour force and the way salary “growth” relates to employer movement rate seem to me relatively independent dynamics. Moreover, I’d imagine increased layoffs positively correlate with the advantage that regularly moving employers can provide.

        Am I missing something?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Asafum@feddit.nl ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Every single time I see this type of conversation come up it’s always about the more privileged higher paying white collar work.

  In my shit experience, blue collar work is “get shit raises or take massive pay cuts.” There is no “change job and also make more.” I’ve been stuck in the same cycle for 15 years now… Every time I leave a job I get knocked back to the wage I made when I first started the job I left regardless of the new position.

  But that’s because only white collar workers are seen as people. Us blue collar workers are just meat machines that never deserve more than we were “bought” for. :/

  source

  • eldavi@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Every single time I see this type of conversation come up it’s always about the more privileged higher paying white collar work.

    this is true and i know i because i’m one of those workers while my siblings aren’t and only my pay increases significantly each time while theirs remain stagnant.

    on the other hand recruiters hate “job hoppers” and you’ll end up with more gate keepers to jobs the more often you do it.

    source
  • maegul@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Oh I hear you. I’m in no way celebrating any of these dynamics or the white collar focus of “how to run your career advice”.

    source
• eldavi@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  moving every 2 years or so is clearly the best strategy for career advancement.

  it’s a double edged sword in my experience from to talking to recruiters who seem to have an irrational hatred of “job hoppers” and they’re, anecdotally, a majority.

  however it is still true that you’ll get higher pay as i did; but be sure to spend a LOT of time keeping your connections alive because most recruiters (still anecdotally) will red flag 2 & 3 year tenure-ships; effectively gate keeping you away from many jobs.

  source

  • Thrashy@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’ve averaged about a 4 year tenure at my previous employers – some a bit more, some a bit less – but usually with a competing offer or two in that time period that I’ve used as a lever for a pay raise. Nobody’s complained about me being a job-hopper or short-timer.

    I have noticed that my two last employers, both large national firms, have moved towards a model of career-tracking with a defined pay structure, similar to government work where different positions and experience levels have a pay range attached to them and you’re not able to negotiate out of that range. This has been framed as a protective move against wage inequality suits, but I suspect it’s more about preventing employees from negotiating especially high compensation packages. I haven’t had it cut against me yet – in both cases I got a very minor pay bump when my employers actually went out and compared their pay scales to what the market was demanding – but if enough employers start benchmarking against each other and using that to cap pay, it will functionally become like a wage-fixing cartel similar to what’s happened to rent in the last 5-10 years.

    source
• Copernican@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  How does this work out with all in value when it comes to stock options or other vesting based non salary compensation?

  source

  • eldavi@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    my work experience is almost entirely 2 & 3 year tenures and (anecdotally) companies are making vesting a bigger part of the compensation package and getting rid of pto to counteract people’s attempts at improving their livelihoods.

    if you see a vesting heavy or “unlimited pto” compensation packages on offer; they don’t expect to keep you for very long.

    source

    • Copernican@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      My company gives up to an extra 2 weeks of PTO based on years of service. Stock Options/RSU have like a 3 to 5 year pay out vesting timeline with a % of it vesting every year. but you get new grants every year. So after you’ve been working for 3 or more years, you basically have a “full” grant value vesting every year. throw in 6 percent 401k match at 100 percent match my on paper below market value salary actually returns a pretty good total comp package. I’m not sure if switching every 2 or 3 years would provide me any significant benefit.

      source
  • maegul@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Don’t know! AFAIK, some stock options do partially vest before two years. But this isn’t just salary, it’s career advancement, which means seniority and arguably experience, all of which tend to stay locked in for the rest of your career and lead to more stock options should you arrive somewhere you’re willing to stay longer at.

    source

    • Copernican@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Idk about it being locked in. I have seen people with Sr and Lead titles interviewing for a lower position these days. Those things don’t always stay with you the rest of your life. But titles are cheap. Salary, bonuses, and stock are money.

      source