• dkc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    134
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I made the mistake of becoming a manager about 4 years ago. This is one of the most frustrating parts of the job. If you have a good relationship with your team they’ll usually tell you something like “I’ve been getting contacted about other offers, here’s what they’re offering.”

    It’s usually about a 20% bump. I’ve not once been able to convince the company I’m at to match it. Usually the best I’m allowed to do is something like a 5-6% raise in the next salary increase cycle.

    I’ll usually know for 2-3 months a team member is leaving before it actually happens because of this. Of course, if I’m allowed to hire a replacement they’ll let me pay market value.

    Job hopping is definitely the best way to get a pay increase.

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      111
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I just dont understand that logic

      “Oh god, this guy wants a raise? Fuck him, he wont get anything… but when he quits, hire his replacement at what he was asking for, or higher”

      and they wonder why loyalty isnt a thing anymore

      • HeyJoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        59
        ·
        6 months ago

        And even if that guy they hire is really good, there is still a large period of time where that person has to learn the ropes and is most likely less useful than the person who already knew the ins and outs. Also, most of the time, they are never as good…

        • henfredemars@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          6 months ago

          Penny wise and pound foolish. They can’t resist the opportunity to exploit, even if it costs the company in the long run.

          • njm1314@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 months ago

            Everyday the idea of an AI CEO sounds less like a joke and more like a great fucking idea.

            • Logi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 months ago

              At this point it would be most likely to be an LLM which just emulates what it has seen CEOs do in its training data and would do the same sort of thing.

              • evranch@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                Hard to see how it could perform any worse, and the wage savings could be allocated to the people actually doing the work.

                Yeah sure… The savings would go to buybacks or dividends, of course.

                And that’s still a better use of funds than wasting them on an overcompensated CEO.

                • Fubber Nuckin'@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Well the goal of an ideal CEO is to pull more money into the company and give as little out as possible. If we saw more AI CEOs we would just have further wealth disparity in our society and workers at those companies would be paid less as the AI would optimize their pay for maximum company profits. It would be everything we hate about capitalism but amplified, and the person who owned the AI would get paid even more for doing even less.

        • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Not just less useful. They have negative productivity starting out because training them takes away productive time from the more experienced staff.

      • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        We cope by saying they hire a replacement who asked for more. The reality is they generally don’t. They either offload the work to the rest of the dept and go “oh look at that we didn’t need them!” as the group drowns OR they find a wide eyed, younger professional who will take a crap - or at least lower - salary.

        This varies from industry to industry but it’s very common.

        • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          We cope by saying they hire a replacement who asked for more. The reality is they generally don’t. They either offload the work to the rest of the dept and go “oh look at that we didn’t need them!” as the group drowns OR they find a wide eyed, younger professional who will take a crap - or at least lower - salary.

          Which doesnt seem to be common, seeing how you have shit like the report that OP posted that job hopping massively increases income.

        • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          6 months ago

          Remember that Star Trek where they go to the evil mirror universe and the baddies come to the Enterprise? The bad versions get caught because it’s hard for someone with no empathy to fake it.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        I keep waiting for someone to lay it out and explain how the companies are actually benefiting in some subtle way from this arrangement. As far as I can tell, no, this is just what they decided to do.

        • howrar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Maybe an advantage of this setup is that you ensure that your bus factor is high and you’re constantly testing it to make sure it stays high? Kind of like how Netflix uses ChaosMonkey.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        It all makes “business” sense for those who see employees as “commodities”, i.e. all kinda equivalent and hence easilly replaceable with nothing lost when they’re switched.

        It’s basically the MBA thinking of employees as just another “raw material” or “supplier”.

        The reality, more so in complex domains, is that employees have an adaptation and learning period when they arrive (unlike engineered devices, companies aren’t standardized machines using standardized parts, so you a new “part” won’t just seamlessly fit and start delivering full performance) and often never written institutional knowledge that goes with them when they leave.

        However as those things are not easilly quantified and measurable, MBA types - being unable to add it to their spreadsheets - will simply ignore them rather than trying to balance such costs against salary costs: giving a decent salary increase (a guaranteed cost) will always look like a worse option in an accounting spreadsheet if its only counter is a sub-100% possibility that they might lose that employee (and, remember, since they don’t count adaption and loss of institutional knowledge costs, that’s listed there as costing nothing) and replace it with somebody else who might even be possible to get with a less “decent” salary (so, more than the current employees but less that a fair salary for the current employee).

        Such approach works well if all companies are doing it and the probability that people will leave if they don’t get a decent salary is low enough (which it probably is, since the majority of human beings favour stability over change).

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s a bit messy for the employer. You can’t just hand out 20% raises every time someone threatens to leave. Then everyone would be threatening to leave. And that’s a hefty cost to add to what’s likely your largest operating expense. Also, that’s not just 20% in the employee’s pocket, there are additional costs like unemployment insurance and the like.

        OTOH, unless your employee plain sucks or the job is simple, it’s almost always better to keep them than train a replacement. Tribal knowledge is valuable knowledge.

        And no, only very small-time employers expect loyalty. They understand the game, and we should as well.

        Funny that lemmy whines and moans about capitalism all day, without realizing they can play as well. Jumping jobs over the last 11 years got me $14 > $22 > $39. Been at this place 5-years, thinking about jumping ship again. Probably put me over $100K with a little luck. Oh, and I’ve never had such fat benefits or worked less. From home to boot.

        Related: When we first moved here, a friend started at an oil change place, well below his skill set and previous pay. Kept job hopping and stacking his resume, now he’s the top service manager at the largest auto dealer group. He quit moving, guess he’s fat and happy. Sure drags in the $.

        • KidnappedByKitties@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          6 months ago

          How is it messy for the employer to keep wages at market prices?

          You don’t have to match anything or contend with mass quitting if you just pay the going rate to start with.

          • shalafi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Do you think employers are stone ignorant of market rates? Who said anything about mass quitting? The people not moving on are the people who can’t. Hell, that’s where I’m at. Pretty sure I’ve attained the Peter Principle for now.

  • hobovision@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    Clickbait.

    Article is nearly 10 years old.

    Article contains no studies or surveys showing this result.

    The 50% figure is calculated by assuming a paltry annual raise and consistent large pay bumps by switching companies.

    • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      That being said, word is that in the tech industry at least, hiring budgets are clearly higher than promotion budgets and that moving every 2 years or so is clearly the best strategy for career advancement.

      Just one industry, of course, but the pattern certainly seems to have settled in there, and it may not be a stretch to speculate it will spread to other industries perhaps under the shitty influence of AI.

      • Copernican@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        How does this work out with all in value when it comes to stock options or other vesting based non salary compensation? Aren’t you leaving a lot on the table if you switch every 2 years? Does salary alone make up for that?

        • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months 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.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months 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 and any new employee is automatically assumed to be as intelligent and skilled as a dead cockroach.

        • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months 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”.

      • Hagdos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months 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.

        • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months 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.

            • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months 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?

              • markstos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                Some of the companies that pay the most are the same ones doing the layoffs, like Google.

                Trading up for money could add extra risk exposure to layoffs.

                But if every job change is seen as a pay raise opportunity, I guess layoffs are speeding the process along for you.

                • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  AFAICT, lay-offs are pretty widespread. Sometimes the bigger employers just give the smaller ones “permission” first.

    • Venator@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      That said, it would interesting to see what the actual numbers are, although I’m sure it will vary a lot between industries and jobs and other factors. Anecdotally it sounds correct but that could just be true for some trait of my social circle, or some other bias about mentioning pay or something. Or just that people tend to be more likely to change jobs when they are underpaid, so the pay jumps from changing jobs seem bigger since the job they’re changing to will be closer to the market, whereas well paid employees will stick around and maybe not notice the gradual pay increases as much.

    • Venator@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’m glad forbes put the date in the URL otherwise I probably wouldn’t have noticed and come back to the comments.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Well, it does match my own experience and observations (in Software Development in a couple of countries in Europe) going back to the 90s.

      The shift to “no loyalty to employees and hence for employees being loyal is a net negative” was around the point when companies started refering to employees as “human resources” and IMHO, resulted from the increased use of MBAs in Management, which in Tech happenned aound the early to mid-90s (though it dependend on country and the actual Industry making heavy use of IT).

      Mind you, at least in IT and even all the way back then, it was already a good idea to move places at least once in one’s career because people who worked all their life in one place don’t really know any other way of working than the one of their place, which is limiting for one’s professional growth (though plenty of people did manage to just keep ticking up on salary purelly on age-seniority even well after they stopped improving as professionals) because no one company has “the right processes” for everything.

      Personally I actually think it’s healthy to move companies at least a few times in one’s career, but my point here is more about one’s career and income growth stalling (and pretty early on, too) if you don’t move companies.

      That said, I’m talking about expert and in high demand career tracks: I don’t really know if in the kind of jobs were the bean counters basically see employees as commodities there is any significant benefit from job-hopping, unless it’s job-hopping into a different kind of job.

  • juice702@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    6 months ago

    I used to be one of the “loyal” ones but around covid time I decided to see where I could get by doing this. Since then, and three jobs later, my salary went from around 66k to now 105k. Current gig seems cool and a cake walk, so may stick around a bit.

    • Cyborganism@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 months ago

      Same! There was a shortage in IT for a little while and I took advantage of it and got a $30k increase! With same benefits and paid vacation.

      Now even a 2% pay raise is significant on the salary I make. I feel like I’m finally being appreciated and paid what I’m really worth after a decade of struggling.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Preach. You gotta move to get paid. I have no idea why people would think their current employer would just throw them a gigantic increase.

      • juice702@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s funny when I put in my notice in my last job and why, they magically had money to counter. Like where was this cash when I was closing difficult tickets and completing projects?

      • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        47
        ·
        6 months ago

        My wife and I skyrocketed in our careers. How? Between 1997 and 2008 we did exactly the opposite of what our parents recommended and kept hopping jobs. My longest stint at any one place was 18 months and hers was two years. When we realized that our skill sets were too expensive and rare to waste at a single project, we started our own consulting firm and continue to cycle through projects regularly.

        Remember, whether you are self-employed or employed by someone else, you ultimately work for yourself. Act accordingly and guard your self-interests.

        • stufkes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          6 months ago

          But it’s also in one’s self interest to have a stable relationship with colleagues, being used to an environment, not changing things drastically so frequently.

          There is a big, non-monetary cost to job hopping. If life outside of work is not stable, than changing the one constant is suddenly not appealing, even if more money is the reward.

          • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I found that to be the opposite. All of our clients have come to us via word of mouth and all of our initial clients were referrals from past colleagues. Because we jumped around so much we ended up with a very large network of ex colleagues that came to us for help once they knew we were available. As. those colleagues also switched jobs they knew to call us if they needed our help in their new place of employment.

            They key is not to stay at one place for a long time but to make an impact during the time you spend there.

              • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                It’s your Rolodex/LinkedIn, not the company’s. Also, the relationship between company and employee doesn’t have to be adversarial. A lot of people, and companies forget that.

            • stufkes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I appreciate that it worked for you. I don’t want to invalidate your experience. I just want to say that there is a good reason such a large gap exists between the evidence that job hopping is beneficial, and people actually doing it.

              I want to point out that a) you have a skillset and job area that is conducive to freelancing and b) that building a network requires networking, which again is something that costs energy and social and communication skills.

              These are not a given and should not be treated as a no-cost activity. Especially your last sentence implies a required focus on impact- again, your reward is more money, but there is a cost to doing this at work.

    • herrcaptain@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah, I did a double-take when I got to the part about expected wage increases for 2014. I suspect it’s much worse now, and was interested to see what Forbes was printing about that as at least these days they’re notorious for posting stuff with an anti-labour focus. I can’t imagine they’d post an article like this these days.

      That said, I’m sure this article is more relevant than ever now and it’s a damn travesty that this is what the labour market has come to since the 70s/80s.

      I’m on the executive team for a small business that my family bought almost two years ago. Many of us had worked there for years beforehand and absolutely weren’t paid what we were worth. As soon as we took over, we started to raise wages across the board (other than sales, who are our own little 1% due to the structure we inherited). Wages are still far from where we’d like them to be, but we’re trying our best with the resources at hand while we navigate these first few years of ownership. Shit’s not easy for a lot of small businesses and I get that many small business owners are outright taking advantage of their staff. We actively try not to (granted, in the Marxist sense we inherently are) but I realize that most of our staff deserve more than we can currently afford to pay them.

  • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    6 months ago

    This sucks for the general public. You’re always either going to be dealing with a] a disgruntled employee who knows he deserves a raise or b] an under trained new guy. You never get the one who knows the job really well.

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Unless you have a union job, then you’re making the same thing as anyone else with the same experience as you and you’ve got benefits and probably job security 👍

  • edric@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    6 months ago

    Old article, but it’s certainly true in my industry. Having said that, I’m a bit conflicted with this at least for my own personal situation.

    I’ve been with my current employer for a decade. I’m sure I can get a significant pay bump if I switch, but I’m in a comfortable position where I think the trade off is worth it. I earn enough to support myself and my wife on a single income. Work from home, unlimited PTO, and the job itself is not super stressful that I get good work/life balance. My manager and teammates are awesome. The company has great benefits and lots of perks.

    I’m at a point in my life where I no longer want to be “challenged” with work. Meaning, I just want to clock in, do work, clock out. I don’t yearn for promotions, new challenges, and moving up. I just want to get paid for work I’m familiar with and good at, and focus my energy on my personal life. And my current job allows me to do that plus all the perks mentioned. So the question is, will I be willing to potentially sacrifice all the comfort I currently enjoy to get paid more? Sure, there’s a chance I could get a better paying job AND all the same perks, but that’s not a guarantee and I will never know until I’m working that new job. Also take into account all the effort required to learn everything on the new job and having to “perform” to impress as a new hire.

    But who knows, it might come to a point where my current pay is no longer enough. Only time will tell.

    • Dave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      But how did you get there?

      I think job-hopping helps people who still need to climb the ladder until they land some “senior” position into which they can settle in, safe in the knowledge that they can always find another job elsewhere with their experience.

  • pdxfed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    6 months ago

    Or, as my omniscient relatives and neighbors who have on countless occasions provided unsolicited commentary on my career would say, “a nice stable job, why don’t you ever stay in one place?”

    This has been well documented for at least a decade.

    Meanwhile, employers feign concern over turnover but know it’s a better bottom line and their bonus to let employees with standards leave than to do the right thing.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Article is old but I have often heard this anecdotally. I have known a number of people over the years who changed jobs every 1-2 years, because they said it’s the only way to get ahead salary-wise. I suspect it’s a lot harder to pull it off now, tough. There’s a lot of fake job postings. Not to mention running the gauntlet of submitting your resume 300 times to get auto-rejected 299 times by some dumbass AI where a clueless HR person typed in the criteria prompt. “A young person with at least 30 years of experience who knows ALL the latest technology but will work for less than a landscaper per hour thanks bye”.

    P.S. I’m not shitting on landscapers. They do real work, unlike most office drones like me.

    • huquad@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      The job hunt is much less annoying when you’re already employed though. No real rush, and you can be very picky.

  • RalphFurley@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    6 months ago

    Before covid I switched jobs. Got about $12k more. Months go by, COVID hits and I can’t do my job (didn’t have the flexibility and daycare was shut down). So I get my old job back but said I’d do it for $X where X was another $10k above from the new job.

    Switching jobs definitely works. It sucks giving up a sure thing and the comfort zone though

    • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      It sucks giving up a sure thing and the comfort zone though

      Very much. It’s also kind of a privilege to be able to do that. Often this requires mobility - which you don’t have if your spouse is also working (could not find a job in the same place) or if you have kids (school, friends etc). I think in the USA it is very common to constantly move, but here people usually avoid moving too often. Taking a risk when it’s not just you on the line is also a bit harder.

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Except I can’t switch cause the tech sector crashed and nobody hits me back.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Data engineering, pipeline stuff, cloud dev to support the pipeline… with enough cs chops to pass software engineer interviews rust/TS/python. Obv SQL too. Docker, terraform and similar like cloud formation. Conversational enough to interface with PMs and external clients.

          Enough architecture experience to build out medium scale data applications

          Something like 6th year

          What I should have said:

          Data structures and algorithms bro

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Total comp?

              Let’s just say I’m very comfortable and own a home near Denver.

          • Sanctus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yeah I’m just a 5 year IT guy. That’s probably why. I have taken data structures and algorithms classes in college though maybe I could look at that.

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Any interest in DevOps? Might be a good extension from it

              • Sanctus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                It sounds cool, tbh. I’d be willing to look a lot of places in tech for something new. My current place is just verifiably insane. They had no help desk tickets when I got here.

                • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Yikes.

                  Maybe browse some AWS certifications. You could rack several up in a few weeks or months and have a few more feathers in the cap

  • ChocoboRocket@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Don’t worry if you’re Canadian - wages don’t go up here unless you’re in a good good union, or crack upper management.

    There may be a few industries where job hopping is worthwhile, but there’s a kilometers thick crust of nepotism to crack if you don’t have connections

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    6 months ago

    Negotiating with your current boss is significantly more difficult than negotiating with a future prospective firm, because your future prospective firm doesn’t have the power to fire you.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s 10000x better in the blue collar world because right off the bat you’re assumed to be as useless as a person can possibly be so you either do the futile argue for a raise (which never matches what you should get) or you take a huge pay cut when finding a new job…

      I’ve been stuck in the same cycle for 15 years now… Get shitty raises for 5 years, get burned out and bail, take massive pay cut, prove my worth to get back to shitty wage I left for but am now burned out again, find a new job and take another massive pay cut etc etc… adjusted for inflation I make as much now as I did 10 years ago…

      These articles are always about white collar work. :(

        • Asafum@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          My job doesn’t like to give titles so no one can determine their value, but I’m something like a supervisor/manager/QC in a factory that makes luxury products for the ultra wealthy and the military.

            • Asafum@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              It’s a separate part of the company. The parts are similar but not made to be luxurious and some are just completely different things that aren’t luxury at all. I wrote the initial comment without the military part added, but I edited it to add that so I guess it kinda reads a little odd now.

              I don’t think there are many companies at all that do what we do so I’m being kinda vague lol

              • binomialchicken@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                6 months ago

                Too late for you to back out now. You are now and forever known as that one guy that makes luxury military equipment.