Slashdot Mirror
Are Skimpy Raises the New Normal?
Lam1969 writes "Computerworld just released their latest salary survey, and it finds that IT worker bees have once again only received small raises. The article notes, "IT raises still lagged slightly behind the average of about 3.2% for all U.S. workers as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. While the majority of respondents (69%) said their 2004 base salary increased from one year ago, 31% experienced either no change in salary or had their pay cut." It goes on to quote LAN specialist Stephen Noisseau as saying, "I guess that's the way the cookie crumbles ... I'll take 4% over nothing. We're getting basically cost-of-living raises.""
w00tw00tw00t
We're getting basically cost-of-living raises.
Welcome to the way the rest of the universe works. Be glad you even got that. Most poeple have to find new jobs to get a raise at all.
Don't worry, I'm sure another bubble will be along to get you a 100% raise every 6 months like the good ol days.
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
Took a 30% pay cut two years ago, as nothing was available but a job 40 miles from home. Only one pay increase in two years, 1.15% which has more than been eaten by the rise in petrol cost.
It's simple Supply-Demand (Keynesian economic theory), when workers with a particular skill set are not in demand or supply excedes demand, there's not much rationale to give workers higher pay. Of course some increase is a sign of goodwill and encourages workers, but tell the beancounters.
Oh, and the execs got about 6% pay increase this year. Can't have that lot starving, can we?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I often wonder about these surveys... who is an "average"? Who is an "average" slashdot poster? A bot?!
I haven't had a raise in years. Not even a cost-of-living raise.
Is it really a valid expectation to automatically get a salary increase? What happened to earning it? I feel pretty confident in saying that 69% of all workers didn't perform above average, so why should they be expecting a reward?
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
The only way I can see increasing my pay is to leave this job for another. And this is NOT a good market now to do that.
Would LOVE a 2% or 3% raise once a year or so...
Yes.
With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
And keep in mind that a 0% raise is actually a pay cut, due to inflation. If you're not averaging about a 2% raise every year, your income in terms of buying power is declining.
I'd like to see how the raises compare in North America versus countries where a lot of the outsourcing jobs are popping up...
But I guess 10% increase in those countries would still be a steal for the labour they are receiving in return.
~jennifer.k~
IT does not generate revenue for a company, unless that company is of course an outsourcing firm. Get into a revenue generating line of work and then you'll make some bucks.
That's so 1999. Haven't got a pay raise since last century.
Well it is a situation where we are recouping from a huge bubble. We had the end of Y2k in 2000, then 9/11 that scared the chicken investors, Out Sourcing in 2002, By Late 2003 we became so disenfranchised that we were willing to work a large fraction of our pay, 2004 got a little better when they started to see the outsourcing isn't as much a value as they thought. So now most companies are still careful on their IT spending, and with a good supply of IT workers they are willing to save on their budgets as long as possible. So Raises will be COLAs for a while until we get more scares or there is a large business need for some new technology (Like the Web in the late 90s) But right now we are humbled back to the average income job. As it probably should be.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Yes.
With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
How many of your employers use a good bonus year as an excuse to skimp on raises? Sure, bonuses are great and all, but they come and they go... I personally think it's ill advised. When base salaries fall behind the market as soon as the bonuses dry up, it seems like a mass exodous is likely. What do I know, I just need the extra money to pay for gas (most of which is used for my commute)
And while I may whine about the fact that most of the time I have to jump jobs to get a raise, if I hung around those places, i'd probably be likely to get the 3-4% every year or so, and I don't really have a problem with that.
What I do have a problem with is when I only get a 3-4% raise, yet, executives can give themselves 50% raises, 4 million dollar bonuses, etc. There is nothing a CEO can produce that warrants that level of compensation. PERIOD.
I say we find somebody crazy enough in congress to propose a salary cap for CEO's bill. Then tell everyone in the public about it, and see how many people really support something like that. Especially when the workers outnumber the C-level's probably 100 to 1.
"See, we plan ahead! That way, we never have to do anything now."
Thats why I always aim for a decent base package before I sign up. I take the approach that I will only work for an amount I am happy with for that position, any raises, bonuses etc are then just icing on the cake as I dont really need them and dont really care. Also stops me from overworking and chasing the pay rise / promotion that never comes (hint: if you want career progression and better pay you have a far greater chance getting it faster by changing jobs than just sitting back and waiting your turn)
I'll post anonymous, as I don't know what my coworkers got, but I received: 17.8% in 2004 and 22.1% in 2005. Living in south Orange County, CA
When other, more important professions have long been underpaid (teachers), somebody's gotta bite the bullet so we can get raises up to the level of where we should be paid. If that means companies have to scale back raises so they can give price breaks to school systems so the systems can pay their teachers more, then I'm in favor of that situation!
High five, my friend! Capitalism rocks... and being your own man rocks too!
I'll say once again:
Blue Collar = Organized Labor
White Collar = Disorganized Labor
Democracy is about working together to be treated fairly. Why should corporate profits leap by huge percentages while employee salaries do not?
Abstinence is a government conspiracy. www.SafeSexZone.co
Too many people are out of work these days due to plant closings and businesses outsorcing everyting, including the kitchen sink.
Be glad you get a paycheck. After having to live thru 2 bankrupt companies, I am..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
The way the market is going for Sys Admins I don't get pay raises... at my current job they are just paying me for more of the hours I work... but right now I am caped out so I might try and take a day off here in the next year or so..
I don't expect more money than I agreed to... if it isn't enough money for me to work there I don't - I feel that when you agree to a pay rate that is what you get.. If you prove to go above and beyond and make it worth it for them to give you more money then so be it, but be happy with what you have... all I know is I make twice what my wife does and she is a school teacher, they expect her to go above and beyond for nothing, in fact less than cost of living increases.. And you know that 1,500 they are supposed to get from good old "W" for doing good with the no child left behind... she saw less than 600 of that due to "special" taxes.. That in my mind is someone agreeing (forcibly) to something and getting shafted.
So as far as I am concerned... if you can feed your family and keep a roof over your head and set a little back for rainy days you are doing well. Else find a new job.
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
Working for a Large Western Canada ISP, we usually get raises of 0-3%, the cost of living in Calgary goes up by 5-7% yearly.. It is the funniest thing I ever expirienced, although I am getting a raise, it always feels like a paycut...
"The same thing we do every night, try to take over the world" -The Brain (Pinky&the Brian)
... I hear that the US Army is hiring!
http://www.goarmy.com/
Some geeks might even be able to swing an enlistment bouns...8)
After 2 years of unhappiness and general lack of hope in my current job, my group has a 30% turnover.
I remember hearing over and over that raises where only 2% for the last couple years. In fact, due to cost cutting they stopped collecting the trash cans on a daily basis. Now, instead of individual trash cans in our cubes, we have communal trash cans in the hallways, which are emptied once a week. BTW, we keep having record quarters.
So, when my boss's boss threatened to give me a bad review and no raise, I shrugged my shoulders and informed him that "My annual 2% raise is close enough to 0% that it didn't matter." I then proceeded to tell him that he had a structural problem. The lack of raises provided him with no "stick" and the lack of advancement opportunities provided him with no "carrot."
I have already decided to leave as soon as the first of the year comes around (and I quality for the End-of-Year bonus).
The funny thing. I honestly believe I got a 2% raise last year. That is what everyone says the raises were. I was doing some record keeping this weekend and noticed that I actually got a 8.25% raise last year.
Sometimes perception and reality don't match.
I am still leaving though.
It used to be that companies were loyal to employees, and vica-versa. Companies treated employees well, and employees did well staying at the same place. Now, changing companies is the standard way to get a raise. Companies had no loyalty to employees, so employees lost loyalty to companies. Now, companies have no real way to build up employee loyalty, since it is basically nonexistant no matter what they do, so they cut back on expenses they used to have that helped loyalty (now, apparently, including raises).
In a few cases, companies that use forced retention simply don't have to do as much to retain employees, since they count on lawsuits to deter employees from leaving.
I give my Chinese sweatshop kids a raise now and again, usually about a cent a month extra, sometimes a dollar bonus if they've been churning out consistently good shoes. It keeps moral up and gives them the belief that they might one day make enough money to break free of their shackles. I would warn bosses against so called 'perk raises' for example taking the number of tardiness lashings down might seem like a good idea but I've had problems when the workers start boasting about it and eventually UNICEF or someone finds out that we actually _are_ lashing them. That was a pretty costly lawsuit. In all I would say treat em mean and keep em keen. Its far better to threaten a wage reduction for poor work than to offer a raise for good work, instead just tell them that you're only paying the Pakistani kids half the price and that will get them feeling pretty good.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
My wages are the same as they were in 2001 ... however my 'rank' has moved from developer to lead developer. Woo. Different companies however, the first one went bust a year after I left whilst I was living on nothing trying to run a business. In that respect, getting back into the market (despite having less up-to-date experience) at my previous rate is good. It isn't as if inflation is 15% ...
... mmm, beer.
Would I trade jobs now? No, i'm still absorbing a lot of new technologies. In two years time - maybe, if the wages were significantly higher and it wasn't a really dull job that made me cry tears of boredom.
Oh, I work right next to two pubs too
"Senior management says, 'If you don't like the work, we'll get somebody in India to do it.' The computer people are seen more as part of the technology rather than part of the human resource,"
Translation:
Beggers can't be choosers.
Until the econ gets rolling, we have a new paradigm shift, or all compitition stops, we will recieve small raises. Once there is a new way to reduce business costs via IT, and it starts to get implemented, then and only then will we go back to large raises.
Compitition is a good thing.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Salaries in India to go up by 11.4 percent, possibly the highest in the whole world.
As a small mobile software developer in India currently looking for fresh business and perhaps adding employees other than myself to the business, this news makes me have second thoughts!
...or at least it should be. No reason why you, the internet security guru, shouldn't get paid as much as Bob over in sales if you equally contribute to the company's bottom line.
Now I am pissed!
What always gets me every time we have a discussion about raises is that any call for pay increases to the rank and file is met with fierce opposition by those who claim it will obliterate the economy via inflation and will rob shareholders of their rightful gains while sending corporations reeling into bankruptcy.
So, I must pose the question, why is it perfectly fine for managers (especially those in the upper echelons) hand out massive raises to themselves and their cronies that are often the equivalent of several times the average salary of their subordinates? The typical CEO makes 450 times as much as the average person they employ. Even when business is bad, layoffs are rampant and wages stagnant, the raises for the managers continue - because according to them, poor performance is always the fault of the lower rungs, while good quarters are always thanks to their expert stewardship.
The auto parts company Delphi is asking for their non-management staff to accept 50-69% pay cuts, (these workers were described as being basically worthless in a speech the CEO gave two weeks ago) while the managers that have presided over the company sliding into bankruptcy are going to get massive raises.
Please explain who spending tons of money to compensate workers who are being asked to produce more per hour, work more hours and accept fewer fringe benefits like comprehensive healthcare coverage is some evil, evil thing that shall destroy every company and drive them into bankruptcy, while distributing the same amount of money to the higher ups is no problem whatsoever?
Ask your prospective employer if they offer superior raises to overperforming employees, and what kind of range such a raise might be in.
I always ask this question, and as a result, i've never had a raise less than 9%.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
CEO, 500k base, got 60k "market adjustment" in June. Got 250k bonus for waiving his right to block a move of the corporate office (which move HE initiated).
We've been trying to get our staff some token increases just to show we care - they haven't seen an increase in 2 years.
IT has become "overhead" in most traditional businesses. Another expense to be cut.
I quit today.
You have a job?
You get raises?!
Shut the hell up, already.
Shut up. ;-D ... just kidding, but I do think unions are crap.
Large companies may take advantage of workers, but that doesnt negate the fact that unions often represent overpaid laziness.
Im not here now... Im out KILLING pepperoni
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And this year, I'm expecting something significant to go along with my promotion. Don't know how much it will be, but I'm thinking 10%-ish is in the right ballpark.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
It looks like IT is now part of the mainstream workforce again, and is now treated as such. Which basically means it stinks. Not because I think everyone should be treated better, but because of the widening gap between CEOs and their "employees".
The average salary of CEOs is now 431 times the salary of his or her respective company's employees. I'm no business expert, but something seems out of whack. If CEOs were held to the same kind of raises based on the performance of their companies (pick your favorite yardstick) I suspect it highly unlikely they would be compensated this way.
Meanwhile, IT folks are perceived to be expendable, and, on paper, it seems to make sense to the people determining salaries they can now play the competitive market against IT workers. I guess that's just the nature of business.
Ahhh, the effects of a good ol' republican administration are finally coming to fruition. People, this is how the conservatives like their labor -- cheap.
Im on my 7th year as a Java QA Engineer without any raise. Thats what happens when you are part of a startup company who barely has the money to pay its employees. I made 60K 7 years ago and I still do. I now make $10K a year as a part time musician and so that helps, but only a little. Im on the verge of quitting and finding a new job in order to get a raise.
"Oh, and the execs got about 6% pay increase this year. Can't have that lot starving, can we?"
Of course not. They make for good eating.
I'm genuinely confused, if you're not doing more work, or a harder job, or a more advanced job, then why do you deserve a raise all of a sudden?
It's a serious question. I know here in Australia raises aren't just handed out because it's "that time of year", we're lucky if there's any cost of living increases.
So why is it just expected in the US of A? Is it just tech workers that expect more for the same work or do other industries suffer from the same self serving crap?
If it could be explained, that'd be peachy.
IP lawyer
I got a 3.5 percent raise this year! That makes me above average. IN YOUR FACE, SLASHDOTTERS! Oh, wait. It was .35 percent. Nevermind.
Computerworld is for geeks. They should know better.
nt
This will change when upper management looks around and says:
"I see the problem. It's me!"
I'm sure that will happen any day now.
Cost centers are the first thing CEOs/CFOs look at for impacting the bottom line and showing that their 6+ figure salary is worth something. Hence the lack of raises.
Direct revenue generation, by the way, is rather sparse:
Sales
Delivery/Manufacturing
The second two will depend on service vs product. And trust me, you don't make squat in manufacturing until Veep level. VP of Materials Management perhaps. Senior planners and commodity managers make precisely jack and shit. . . . unless your firm recognizes SCM as a core competency, in which case you might do a little better. But perhaps not; lots of companies with Supply Chain competencies got there because of IT. Think Wal-mart. Please don't dispute that, just do some research on Wal-mart SCM)
Coming back to the main point: IT is not getting raises because in the classic corporate mindset it is a commodity. Not all IT, but a fair amount. And they're right. MCSEs are a dime a dozen. Good ones are harder to find, certainly. But finding one isn't an onus on HR. Like most fields, the cream rises to the top and will receive the significant rewards. The rest. . . will suck lemons for a bit. They'll get better, get better jobs, or get out.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
I think the subject of raises when it comes to internal promotions deserves some attention too. The last time I quit my job in favour of a higher paying one, it was due to the fact that even a year after moving up into NOC, I was still on tech support salary. This was sadly the norm for most of my colleagues that moved up the same ladder.
When the yearly salary reviews were done and all that was given out was a small cost of living increase, I decided it was time to exercise my other options.
From previous experience this unfortunatley seems to be the norm at more than a few places. I'd imagine that this happens in many more places than IT also which is not really good - doesn't really encourage staff to work towards forward movement.
"Would LOVE a 2% or 3% raise once a year or so."
Sleep with the boss occassionaly.
More time at the company = more experience = more value = you should get a raise every year. Not to mention the fact that your cost of living increases every year due to inflation, so no raise is actually a pay CUT as others have pointed out.
One of Australias banks ANZ just reported a record AU$3billion net profit for the year to date. They layed off 2000 staff this year. So a raise would be nice but how confident can you be in even keeping your job when your company is reporting record profits and laying off record numbers of staff at the same time. IT MAKES ME SICK!
serenity now!
The fact that people feel they're entitled to large raises every year indicates some people still haven't got over the completely unrealistic idea of how the economy works they picked up in the 90's. Over the long term, pay increases are necessarily going to average inflation + productivity increase. If that weren't the case, labor costs would quickly eat up all of the company's money and it would go bankrupt.
And very few people manage to significantly increase their productivity every year.
I always go for a pay raise when switching jobs.. Why else would you switch jobs? ... Oh.. You mean getting a raise and staying at the same job?
hmm.. I seem to remember a friend of a friend saying that used to happen.
I'm sure it's an urban legend though. Similar to pension plans and bigfoot.
I know I'm working for the pay I got in 2000 (minus promised bonuses of course).
At least until I start my new job in December.
-Jerry
I worked for MGM MIRAGE (large Las Vegas hotel/casino corporation) for the better part of 5yrs and let me tell you it is definitely the normal there. This is really sad not only because they don't value skilled employees enough to properly compensate them, but it's taken to extremes. There were people there who were around alot longer than myself who had received NO raises... EVER. MGM MIRAGE considers a 2.x% annual cost of living raise an actual "raise" when in reality it doesn't even keep up with skyrocketing housing costs, gas prices, etc etc etc. Considering they amount of net profit this company pulls in every hour there is absolutely no excuse. Not only are they paid pitifully for the hard work they do, IS management treats the employs with utter contempt. As long as they get their bonuses and inflated salaries it's all good. F*ck the people who's shoulders you're standing on. The moment you mention anything about the situation you're labeled "combative". I can't tell you how many times I attempted to stand up for my fellow co-workers to attempt to get a better work environment and at least a little respect but it was always met with a blank stare and a "current salary surveys say we're right in line with blah blah blah blah". It's pretty sick I tell you. I finally grew tired of their BS and moved to a company who knows how to not only properly compensate their valued employees but to also treat them with respect. Until corporate monkeys (like those controlling computer engineering at MGM MIRAGE) can learn that their employees will actually respect them more if they grew a spinal column like all the other primates out there and stood up for their workers... rather than sitting on their fat controlling asses sucking up all the extra cash they can while their co-workers are scraping together money to keep food on the table for their families.
/end rant
Sorry for the rant but this is a topic that really pisses me off after I saw how they treated their employees and then brag about record profits every year... I will say this last thing: there are companies out there who do value their people and still compensate them properly. I am a happy employee of just that type of company now and jumping from MGM MIRAGE was the best move I ever made. Others have followed in my wake and more will follow them until mgmt realizes how idiotic they really have been... when it's too late.
Linux with kernel panic...
MadPenguin.org
How about no raises for four years, but enjoying your job anyways. Considered asking for one, but really if I want to make more dough, I can always do so on the side. I figure if I'm a good enough employee then they should offer it, otherwise maybe I fit better into another environment.
My former employer (*cough* National City Bank *cough*) actually builds in a 3% raise into EVERY department's annual budget that can only be used on annual raises. Now, that doesn't mean everyone will get a 3% raise. Better still, the chance you will recieve a raise is tied to an annual evaluation where each department is graded on a bell-curve. It's official policy that is kept hush-hush (small print in the Employee Handbook).
Most departments do not use the portion of their budget for raises, despite being reserved for raises. If raises are given, its usually given as a cost-of-living raise. Unless you're a manager, then you get a big raise.
Can't spell slaughter without laughter!
It's funny how companies want you to be loyal to them while they screw you over. Then when you leave you are a traitor. Screw'em. Learn as much as you can, get certifications etc. Then get a job that is willing to pay you more.
Every time I hear the "in the 90's, people stumbled all over themselves to pay you I.T. guys to do practically nothing" line, it makes me cringe. See, like a lot of people I knew, we stayed here in the midwest during the .com explosion, figuring "Hey, all those modern-era gold-rush people will come back soon enough with their tails between their legs anyway." Instead, we worked hard for our below-average salaries, confident that our commitment to the job and dedication would win out in the long run. Then, many of us got laid off while the scammers and cons came back with millions from stock options, or hundreds of thousands for providing practically useless services to failing businesses. Some thanks we got for "doing the right thing", huh?
Best job I could find after that was a couple years of working in a guy's unheated garage scrapping together used computers for resale cheap to daycare centers and preschools - for less than half of my former, below-average salary. I'm *still* trying to find something that might at least pay close to what I made in '99-2000!
I agree that smart businesses are clued in more to things like "people skills" and "work ethics" nowdays, but from what I've been running into around here - the single most impotant thing you can have is an inside connection. Almost everyone I know in this market who has a good-paying job in I.T. got there because they had a friend in management. They need a decent resume too - but you're just another piece of paper in H.R.'s resume pile unless you have connections who get someone to "pull your resume" and seriously consider it....
yes.
Don't worry, everyone is runnning from the IT world. It'll be competitive again soon.
COBOL pays well.
My experience for the last few years has been for take home pay to decrease even though salary increases average around 3 to 4 percent. This is due to inflation and the fact that every year, the company passes a greater portion of health care costs off to the employees.
I was curious as to how rich a programmer would feel in India vs the U.S. That is a comparison of wages programmers receive in the Us vs India divided by the average wage for those countries which dictates the cost of living in general. Perhaps somebody could put together a global index for various professions?
The International Herald Tribune says that the average wage for an experienced programmer in India is $11,423 a year. The average wage for an experienced programmer in the U.S is $83,000 a year. However the average per capita income in India is $3,100 and in the U.S it is $40,100. Per capita income is a good indicator of the relative cost level for people living in a particular country.
So the programmer vs average salary ratio in India is 3.684 while in the U.S it is 2.069. To feel as rich as an experienced Indian programmer an American Programmer would have to make $147,728.
Origional article + links to references, etc over at my blog
Or start your own company and give yourself a 2% yearly increase.
The headline should be "The New Norm." I wouldn't bother to say this, but Taco's always hooting about how he's a "journalist" now. Journalists know English grammar, and have editors, to boot.
I, for one, welcome our new Antichrist overlord.
I've always felt that if I was around to receive a 3% pay raise that it meant that I was expected to do the same job I had done the year before. That meant I had plateaued, and my employer didn't expect anything more from me.
These are not "good things".
I always strive to learn new things, and to extend myself. If this isn't reflected in salary ($, stock or benefits), I move on.
I remember surprising an HR person by saying that in my 10 years since university, I have never received an annual pay raise smaller than 10% (10% being 6 months after I joined!), and averaged 20%. He was absolutely shocked.
People need to separate themselves from their jobs. The job they are doing may only be worth 3% more, but they, themselves, should be worth a larger pay increase than that.
The trick is to manage your own career, and find the opportunities.
I got about 3% each year for the last two years, however my take home pay has actually decreased due to increased costs of benefits, in particular healthcare. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well have kept their pay increase and just kept the cost of benefits the same too. Now it sounds like they'll be hiking things up again in another year and a half so anything I get this year around will get eaten up by that.
It is just a token to try to make people feel better. I'm sure if my base salary was high enough I'd be getting more than the increase in my benefits counters, but there are some people who do much worse than I do too. I could get a 10% raise, but if it doesn't increase my take home salary, then I don't care.
I found it interesting at my last "Performance Review" (I am a Sr SW engineer at a major silicon company with 20 years experience) that my boss told me that I was not well paid for my experience and position, but that the skimpy (5%) raise he gave me was the most he could offer due to the corporate guidelines, and that I had one of the highest increases offered to engineers. "However," he said, "we will be offering much larger incentive bonuses this year."
Given that inflation rate in the U.S. since September has risen to 4.7%, a pay raise of 3.2% this year would be tantamount to a pay cut. A subject of further worry should be the price of diesel, which has lately risen to ~$3.20, a price increase that has yet to trickle down and fully effect the cost of consumer goods. If this price increase reflects a permanent change, expect core inflation to rise even further.
Maybe other areas aren't so good but here in the DFW area jobs are picking up. I've already gotten a raise this year (about 25%, yes thats 25, not 2.5) and I'm soon to getting a promotion and a raise along with that.
Work for smaller (but growing) companies. Work hard. There are rewards out there. And as someone else has said: its not the 90s anymore, knowing HTML is not enough.
The Anti-Blog
I know lots of people not getting COLA's that already make below average wages. Nothing like working for less money next year than you made this year in real cashflow.
It is called *Capitalism* If you don't like it, go to Russia.
-ccm
Too much Law; not enough Order.
Graduated in 2003.
3 job offers from first 11 resumes.
40 hours a week.
Rarely work OT, usually paid bonus if I do.
Decent boss.
7.5% raise in 2004.
12% raise last month.
I love my job.
FYI, the CPI doesn't really include things like food and the price of gas. Also if your car has a new type of computer that raises the price 10%, that's also not counted in inflation because its value has gone up 10%. There are all sorts of hedonic adjustments for technology. Not to menaion that your housing is calculated in a way that is WAY underpriced.
In sum if your pay, your bank account, or any of your investments make under 6% you are getting screwed and will eventually be nickled and dimed to death.
Also, I hate to tell you this but it will not get better. Between federal, state, corporate, housing, and credit cards, there is over 400K of debt for every worker in the USA and that doesn't even include things like public education that must be funded anyhow. They can not pay it back without a default, or printing up money and screwing you over.
Unfortunately, now our creditors from other countries arround the world are starting to catch on - if they do, credit will dry up and they will panic out of the dollar as the world's defacto currency causing the US dollar to collapse and cease to exist as a currency. Watch out, it seems in the markets that all freakin hell is about to break loose!
I'm anti-union in the tech field for a simple reason: new skills mean more than seniority.
Regardless of which type of technology you work with, the last thing you want is the guy down the hall who was with the company for it's NT4 server roll out being constantly ahead of you simply because he was hired first. You can bust yourself up trying to get ahead but at the end of the day he's still there because the union dictates he should have "holy seniority."
You're not putting cogs in holes, its a changing field. And that's another reason to keep the lawmakers away, too.
"Thanks to the oldest employees dying (sorry) the system can be stationary :-)"
*taps elgatozorbas on the shoulder*
I'll be up in the tower with the scope. You coming?
We'll just have to let THEM pull up the average, all my their lonesomes.
But if you spend your working career taking at least 20% of your $83,000 and investing it wisely, you can retire and live like a king in India. The Indian workers won't be able to do the same in America.
4% is more than the consumer price index, even including energy, rose in 2004. A 4% raise is more than a cost-of-living raise. It's not much more, especially this year with gas prices skyrocketing, but inflation has been very low recently. That translates into smaller raises. Compare it with the real numbers.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
First, if you feel you're horribly undercompensated then it's time to:
1. Change Jobs
2. Leave the field
3. Find alternative means of income generation (investments, rental properties, etc).
A solid mutual fund will return 7-12% a year. Give up the unnecessary expenses, carpool, stop drinking starbucks. Stash a few grand away and suddenly your investments will be making triple inflation.
Second, considering that most people I run into in IT are barely competant enough to keep their jobs I don't see where the whole we all deserve raises comes in. Are you creating value for your company? If so, do they know about it? You should be blowing a trumpet when your new application saves 500 hours in productivity. That's a bottom line that can be MEASURED. IT is hard to measure, you have to show your bosses the things you do add value.
Third, be a team player. Help your coworkers, share ideas with your manager. Be enthusiastic about your job. Lack of passion is rampant in the field.
Yeah yeah, it's easier to bitch and moan, but I'm always the first through the door with new ideas. I went back to school to add a business background to my IT skills so I can speak the executive language better, and when my pay isn't up to par, I move.
The result? Average raises of 6-8% from 1999-Present. Yes folks, even during the IT "Crash" I was getting good raises. I've changed jobs 3 times for a net raise of 20% each time. I've also accumulated almost $10,000 in bonuses in the last 3 years simply from pointing out productivity improvements from my work and how much money the company is saving since I did the work.
My main point is that no one is going to "give" you anything. If you want it you have to justify it with performance and let people know how valuable you are. Most managers have so much on their mind they aren't looking at every little thing you do.
...is the norm in my company in addition to teeny raises. At my last performance review, I scored what, based on the managers handbook (which I guess is supposed to be a big secret) should have netted me a minimum of 5% raise in addition to a market adjustment that my position received this year. I was told that I was one of 2 people in my region to receive this kind of raise. After I received my statement of compensation, which is supposed to outline how much the marketing adjustment was, and how much my performance increase was, I learned I had been lied to, and my statement of compensation had been altered. I got the exact same pay increase everyone else in my group got; enough to keep me at the bottom of my newly adjusted pay scale. Yes, I'm a fine, valued, skilled employee with and outstanding performance record, and I make the same that somebody new coming in off the street with no experience would, and I've been doing this job for 3 years. I've decided to be patient and wait and see what happens with next year's performance review, but I have learned that it doesn't pay to be exceptional at my job. It pays to be barely adequate. This is the lesson burnt-out, over-worked, under-paid corporate servants have learned over the last few decades. Don't be exceptional, just be barely good enough to not get fired.
I don't know about you, but my servers run on the power of cotton candy and happy thoughts. -Anonymous Coward
Unfortunately, there's too many saps out there who complain about shit raises, but won't go out and do something about it. Don't like your raise? Get a new job, and then when you leave, tell them exactly why. If more people did that, raises would be higher for everyone.
The cake is a pie
The problem here is that most people are basically overhead to their companies, and corporations love to cut overhead.
For example, if you work at Macy's, how do they make money? By selling products with a huge profit margins. Besides cosmetics, the products sell themselves and the people who work there are not needed to generate the profit. Thus the people who work at Macy's are overhead. They are needed, but only in the sense that, at best, they might save the company money, but they certainly don't make money.
If you write code for EA, you are needed to churn out games, but EA makes it money off profit margins of selling games. Although the new Madden might not exist without you, EA wants to get you as cheap as possible.
Contrast that with a lawyer at a large law firm. The lawyer, by billing clients, is a revenue producer. The law firm wants to do everything they can to make sure that lawyer bills a lot. They will give the lawyer a ton of work (= tons of billable hours) and give good compensation or else they might lose a good revenue producer. Now partners at these firms do make money off the backs of associates, but since it is actually the work of the associate that lines the partners pockets (unlike the sales figures that lines of the pockets of Macy's people), they do more to keep associates happy money-wise.
If you can find a job where you directly generate revenue (unforunately this might mean direct sales, but it could also mean lawyer, etc, etc,) that's the way to go and you can (but not always) get paid good.
I love these salary discussions on slashdot. I'm everything this subculture seems to hate here -- an engineer that moved from a technical discipline to a managerial discipline after getting an MBA. Ever since I got the MBA, my salary has gone up AT LEAST 20% per annum. Excuse me, one year it did not and so I changed my job (read: put my money where my mouth was) and got a 35% increase.
It is my belief that those people that stay technical simply can't deal with the demands of more abstract, ambiguous, and more people-oriented (read: communication) responsibilities.
Want to make more? Earn it by solving real problems -- problems involving the management of people.
This is what I don't understand. If you feel that a pay-cut is unfair, why do you stay with the company? I mean, if you think your time is worth more, why are you pissing it away working for less than you are worth? The fact of the matter is that companies can't be loyal to their employees and remain competitive. If your employer is not going to be loyal to you, you should not be loyal to him.
The whole principle of a free-market economy is fair exchange where both parties feel that they are getting back an equal or greater amount of value than what they put in. If you're not getting that out of an exchange, you shouldn't be participating in it.
Managers can do whatever the hell they want, a company run by morons is going to go bankrupt in short order, and it's the shareholders who will pay for their stupidity. That's one of the risks of investment, and it is also why many shareholders keep a close eye on what is happening with their investment. If you feel like your boss/the leadership of a company you've invested in is making stupid decisions, for god sake get out now or they'll take you down with them.
Sadly, I think we're at that point now. A pay raise of cost of living is better than no pay raise. No pay raise is better than no job. Welcome to the modern economy.
Advice for my fellow geeks: before seeking out that threesome you dream of, you might see what a TWOsome is like first.
a near half billion dollars was spent last year, to get ONE GUY, instead of another guy, a 400,000 dollar a year job.
do you think the people who spend that money don't expect a return on their investment?
(and no, it doesn't matter if we are talking ebay or the electoral donators)
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
More like when the shareholders look around and say:
"I see the problem, it's our dumb-ass CEO"
Remember, ultimately the person putting up the capital is the boss, upper management is just management.
working class has a low self-image
wisdom and fearlessness..
You know the phrase "let them eat cake!" Well it came from someone about as out-of-touch as you are. You know Siddartha(sp?) was the son of a king right? Didn't have to worry about money. Could wander around and ponder life's mysteries without having to worry about food or shelter.
Your comments suggest you have no grasp of what it might be like to have no money. How about turning down a first-tier University because you can't afford the tuition. Or want to live in an area with lower crime rates but can't afford the rent in that area.
Please volunteer in programs trying to get runaway teenagers off the street. Please volunteer in the worst-performing schools in your area. There are so many homeless families these days there's got to be a non-profit that helps in your area.
It's not all self-actualization and feel-good phrases. Please, stop it and get involved.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
Someone mod the parent up
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
is to change employers. After several years of 0% or paltry raises, I am leaving my current employer this week and going elsewhere, with a larger raise (percentage wise) than I have seen outside of getting a promotion at my current job.
Raises are tied to performance, but performance appraisals have to fit a bell curve so even if you did great, your rating becomes mediocre. Raises are also keyed to where you are in the current salary range for your job. I went from bottom quarter up to bottom third, but was expecting far more after the very successful project I spent the first half of last year on.
Don't forget to take inflation in to consideration.
Cost of living my ass. Depending on where you live, 4% isn't enough to cover the cost of living. More importantly, the cost of fuel and housing (especially housing).
I had to threaten to quit if I didn't get more money. I did get more money. A 15% raise, but when I feel that I'm underpaid as it is. It really wasn't much. Let's just say that I still can't afford to buy a house in Southern California.
Where I live, a small 2 bedroom house is like 350K. I need at least 3 bedrooms which puts it at an easy 500-600K or more. This isn't a rich neighborhood either. Next to my mom's house, there's a new house that's going for 1.3 million. It's ridiculous. Time to get out of California I guess.
I bet I would make more money in construction than I.T. *sigh* I do everything from backups, to help-desk, to fixing ASP bugs in our website, to laying out network cable, to installing PC's, to trouble shooting network problems, and a whole lot more. Basically, you're I.T. handy-man. If there's a problem, I fix it.
"You want a five percent raise? Then you have to be 5% more productive, it's as simple as that. Seems intuitive, but this simple fact escapes the majority of people."
-Larry Smith
This is of course ignoring inflation.
I pity the foo that isn't metasyntactic
...got a 4.1% COLA this year.
Advice: on VPS providers
Hasn't everybody here learned this lesson by now? Just like a ballplayer, a profesional can never really know his true value until free agency. I've changed jobs, voluntarily, 5 times in the last 7 years. One of those changes was back to the orginal employer. But the point is that each time I was able to revalue my services far beyond what any "raise" or promotion could have done. Stay with the same employer and you run the risk of stagnating in comparison to new hires. Loyalty is for suckers.
As much as I would love to embrace that line of logic, it simply doesn't make sense. It has the central assumption that the standard quality of living is equal in the two countries. The assumption is false, and the whole argument falls apart. The average life in America is somewhat cushier than the average life in India.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
...why not ask to be outsourced from the US to India at the same salary? Hell, you could live like a king in Bangalore.
That's a 93% drop in stock, which can mean many things. I don't know the details of the situation but it could be anything from restating earnings to honest levels, to focusing on long term results instead of killing the company to inflate stock performance, to corrections of irrational behavior on the part of the investors, to the implied incompetence.
The point is, the stock price is not always the complete objective value of the company. In fact, it never is. Why do you think great investors can make so much money?
Dude I was getting 2% raises back in 1998. These days I work for a union shop and I get a raise every 6 months + COLA.
Perhaps you should work your way towards being a CEO instead of just bitching about it, then?
subject says it all. Guess I enjoy getting modded down.
Don't believe anything I say. I crash test crack pipes for a living.
It's certainly possible for everyone in the economy to receive a raise greater than inflation -- in fact, it's something we expect to see in tight labor markets. If this weren't the case, then living standards would at best remain steady. Since 1900 the average wage has increased at a much greater rate than inflation. In fact, wages can rise at the same rate as productivity without causing inflation.
Only when wages go up faster than productivity will prices have to adjust to reduce demand. Think about it: if everyone became 5% more productive, but received a wage increase of 10%, the entire country would be trying to consume more than it produced. Prices would increase until there was no longer any excess demand. That's inflation.
FWIW, productivity has risen much more rapidly than wages in recent years. This is probably a bad thing.
I'm very good at my current job, but my manager wants me to learn more about my job. What's the point? I know my job better than anyone else including him. I have no drive or motivation to do so either. My last raise was 2.75% which may seem like a lot to some, but I waited 18 months for it. Here's a nice slap with a cluestick:
1) Gas prices have gone up a LOT more than 2.75% in the last 18 months.
2) Natural gas (Consumer's Energy) has gone up a LOT more than 2.75% in the last 18 months.
3) Our health "benefit" premiums have gone up WAY more than 2.75% in the last 18 months.
4) Tuituion at school has gone up more than 2.75% in the last 18 months.
5) Day care has gone up more than 2.75% in the last 18 months.
6) School lunches have gone up more than 2.75% in the last 18 months.
7) Grocery and clothing prices have gone up more than 2.75% in the last 18 months.
8) Car and home insurance rates have gone up more than 2.75% in the last 18 months.
9) Hell, the cost of a McDonald's extra value meal has gone up more than 2.75% in the last 18 months.
and the biggest slap with the cluestick goes to (drum roll):
10) The company's profits have gone up a HELL OF A LOT more than 2.75% in the last 18 months (I know, I work in a financial area of the company).
So what the hell? Your profits aren't down, business has been up, volume has way more than recovered since 9/11 (which was the original blame for all business' woes whether it really was or not). The scapegoat of a poor economy and a poor job market are no longer valid. The company isn't "hurting" any more. So why shit on your employees?
Here's why - because they're a large corporation who could really give a flying fuck about their employees. Seriously. They'll put on the politically correct speeches about "we're for family" and "our employees mean a lot to us" garbage, but they never put their money where their mouth is. Our "health benefits" are absolute crap. After paying the high premiums, I can't afford to go to the hospital because of the outrageous co-pays. My theory behind the horrible insurance is the fact that our company is Canadian-based. In Canada, they don't have to worry about paying for health care premiums because their health care system is integrated into the government and paid for by taxes. This way EVERYONE gets health care. If they are to stay competitive in the United States, they HAVE to offer health benefits, but they don't have to offer GOOD benefits...just enough to keep someone there. It makes perfect business sense, but you're pissing off your employees. Is it worth the hassle of creating employees that resent you for your greedy business tactics? I would think not.
Content Management System: A pretentious way of saying "text editor."
Economics 101 a pay raise without a productivity increase is inflationary, more money chasing fewer goods which raises prices. No one profits from inflation except government and their toadies the banks. IT is getting paid less because it is worth less. They .com days made turned the indsutry on its' head and is no returning to normal. IT is a commodity now, not a speciality so it is worthless. Sorry.
What is this "raise" thing?
... I'll take 4% over nothing. We're getting basically cost-of-living raises.
WTF?!?!? What do you think you are, a C*O or something!
Slaves these days don't appreciate what they have!
Also, I hate to tell you this but it will not get better. Between federal, state, corporate, housing, and credit cards, there is over 400K of debt for every worker in the USA and that doesn't even include things like public education that must be funded anyhow. They can not pay it back without a default, or printing up money and screwing you over.
Not that I disagree with your post, but can you cite sources for this? The numbers I've seen are closer to 40K. I would guess that a disproportionate amount of that number is in morgages. Shouldn't morgage debt count separatley, as an investment, being secured by a tangible property which can be resold and which usually accrues value (unless there are too many speculators)? The difference between that and credit card (or federal) debt is pretty significant.
Isn't a lot of that debt also to ourselves? I owe rent to the owner, my roommate owes rent to me, her company owes her salary to her, etc. A more realistic example would be a car company who owes money to it's creditors, but who also is owed money by the people who buy cars from it. Isn't that debt being counted twice?
I'm not convinced that zero debt is the overall goal. All investments are debt to someone. If I invest 1,000 dollars in a local company so that they can re-tool their factory, that's 1,000 dollars in debt that basically guarantees a return to society much larger than the expense. Corporate debt is how the buying power of money is shifted from institutions that have it, to upstarts that need it. Sure, Sony may go a half-billion dollars in debt to create a new fab plant for the Cell chip that powers the Playstation 3, but they'll make it back.
If not all debts are necessarily bad, we have to figure what kinds are bad and what kinds aren't. Student Loans are as annoying as hell, but the benefit to society (and a single worker's earning potential) greatly outweighs the cost of being in debt. Credit card debts are always bad, and are basically the work of the devil. Sometimes you need to go into a little debt to buy a used car to get to work on time... That's much better than not working. But buying a 25k new SUV is a bad investment.
Of course, I do agree that we're all screwed, and that the "company store" of debt plays a large part in that. But I'm not convinced that exactly how we're screwed is as you are portraying it.
The ______ Agenda
I've been in many different atmospheres over the past few years. However, one thing has been constant across all of them. The people that stay get screwed.
You know the guy. There's always someone who's been with the company for years, making less than everyone else around him and working more hours. He might claim to be looking for a new job, but you know that either he isn't looking, or that the length of time he's in the same environment has seriously tarnished his resume.
Given an opportunity, a company will gladly take advantage of these loyal resources, and therefore, they get screwed. Is this the company's fault? No. These people were born to be screwed over. You're only worth what you can convince someone to pay you. So complaining that you're not being paid what you're worth is a lie unless you've gotten someone to pay you more.
Optimal time to stay with a company? I think 1-2 years for me. I usually find that I'm bored of the environment by that time anyway.
'how come i didn't get a raise' - i heard the same when i was a waiter; i heard the same when i was a bike courier; i heard the same when i worked a loading dock; and i feel the same way now.... huh?
People who do nothing different shouldn't get raises. (if you get faster/more efficient at what you do, and perform more in less time, then you're like the parent poster, which is spot on: "...overperforming employees..." ergo you're worth more).
maybe it's because i was fully self-employeed for 6 years, and now, still, about 30% of my gross is from contracting... but play me a small violin.
'cost of living' is fair for a normal gig, but i'm not gonna get it for one of my jobs... and that's okay ---i was a consultant, and went on staff at a high hourly rate; (and most importantly, my scope hasn't changed) and i've taken on no new work, so i'm not even upset if i stay at my current rate.
for my other jobs, i let them know that as i took on more responsibility, i wanted more pay, plain and simple. if i exceeded expectations on jobs assigned, i wanted higher than the 'average' employee was given. plain and simple.
managing expectations. learn what it is, and how to do it.
most importantly:
c'mon as geeks, when we get better at what we do (automation, scripting, etc) we can do more. to me that doesn't mean more time for surfing, but rather a longer list of job responsibilities. i gladly take on more work, but i still have the 'business owner's mindset'; often, i put a matrix together showing the business case for us to do xyz as an org. on the 'last page' i put together what it could cost us to outsource it. i offer to do it for a smaller value (usually). When i can't realistically do a better job for less, i vote with what's best for the company, with the best outsourced route (ie: specialized tasks, where i can't get economy of scale on the 18 servers i manage personally)
i've averaged double-digit pay raises (including if you average the one that hasn't grown in 2.5 years) SINCE a true startup i was part of imploded in 2001 (we launched "sept 15, 2001" - yes, 4 days after 9/11) lost my life savings in the pre-angel stage. oh well. time to start over.
so, stop whining and start planning. be proactive, think like a business owner, or be 'average' and get paid average or lower.
Following the Vancouver teacher's strike, there was a letter printed in the Georgia Straight where some teacher was complaining about his $70,000/9 months salary. I hope he's happy with the 15%(!) he got (apparently class sizes weren't that important after all). The tax and cost-of-living increase that's going to lead to should offset any raise I get quite nicely thank you.
I remeber thinking that now, just now, people that do the work have the right tocommand what they earn.
Now, 3 years later, things have digressed. Why?
Because the economy collapsed? Because the corporations now have the upper hand? Or because Bush and Co. (tm) have decreed it so?
Fuck 'em. Just fuck 'em! Start your own business. Screw corporate America. Let 'em drown in their own waste. There are markets. There are opportunities. And they aren't something that the corporate monsters are aware or even able to take advantage of.
It's time for a new revolution... and it is in areas that corporate doesn't even recognize.
There is a good amount of opportunities out there. However the opportunities are very difficult, very demanding and some just borderline impossible. There is also this cultural problem in the US where everyone wants to be a manager. It almost pays to stay in the trenches and be wanted.
OTOH, I know different people in different sectors of IT. Quite a number of big companies are on the verge of collapsing from what I hear. They just can't holdup with their current staff. And they know it. Expect more hirings in mid 2006.
Companies also realized that outsourcing is a dead end. Besides saving costs, you can't do a whole lot more with an IT force in another country. The grade-A Indian workers IMHO are already in the U.S. No, I am not Indian, but this is from my years of observations.
I work at a large for-profit educational company that advertises a lot via web banners (no, not Phoenix University... and with that, you should be able figure out who we are) and we've been told that raises are capped for the forseeable future at two percent for "super-duper-amazing" levels of performance, wheras it used to be five percent. I don't know of anybody in the IT department who has gotten above a point and a half. Supposedly our management is under the same cap, but we all know they get fat bonuses as compensation so raises mean nothing to them.
You might find this depressing, but it gets worse -- two percent is the cap, unless you're a lucky dog like me in which case you have your review and are told "Well, HR still hasn't approved your raise, so we'll let you know sometime in the future what percentage you can expect." Being presumptuous enough to ask for an actual date when you might know what your raise is (if any) results in lots of vague assurances that "the Company will take care of you." Sure, and Travis "took care" of Old Yeller, too. Lest you dismiss this as sour grapes, keep in mind I'm a senior network engineer with almost ten years in the company who has been promoted repeatedly and given bonuses numerous times for performance and cost-saving initiatives.
Is it any wonder I'm considering quitting the tech field to become a goat farmer?
I'm pimpin' like David Koresh!
"Unfortunately, there's too many saps out there who complain about shit raises, but won't go out and do something about it. Don't like your raise? Get a new job, and then when you leave, tell them exactly why. If more people did that, raises would be higher for everyone."
Unfortunately, there's too many saps out there who complain about the RIAA/MPAA, but won't stop buying or downloading. Don't like the content providers? Don't buy or download, and then when they are wondering what's happenning, tell them exactly why. If more people did that, quality would be higher for everyone.
I dont know about getting raises, but right now starting salaries for a bachelor in Computer Science from a good(top 50, but not top 10) college are $40-60K, and every CS bachelor that I now with a decent GPA is earning one of those salaries now, and large companies like my own are scrambling to find more of us. While this may indeed be because we're being used to replace more experienced and expensive employees, I dont particularly mind, yet. I'm gonna give it 5 years. ;)
I love being in an industry where we ask questions like "Are Skimpy Raises the New Normal?". Really, I do. Like, guys that work at McDonalds or whatever, they have to worry about feeding their families... but us IT guys worry about how small our raises are compared to last year's...
But honestly, I could be doing better. $35/hr as a consultant is... well it's okay... but I want to make more. Dammit, why can't it be 1995 again?
Why not go into business for yourself? That's the joy of capitalism. Find a need, fill it better than anyone else. There IS money out there if you look hard enough. It's not easy, though.
Land of opportunity?
The other side of the coin is unionizing, or agressive worker protection laws. Right now the coin is free-market side up. When in rome..
..don't panic
So after 6 months they wanted to keep me as I had done a good job and they valued my work, at which point I bypassed my boss all together and negotiated with the VP of IT for 2 days for a total of 5 hours, explaining why I was worth way more than what he was offering and debunking every reason he had to pay me like the other employees. And yes, I did plan a lot before that meeting - many hours! I did get the spcheal about how the company paid fairly and according to market research I was worth X amount of dollars, but I played it cool, mentioned that I had other prospects on the side (which was true) willing to offer me close to 60% more than what he offered me, I mentioned I had worked internationally and one of the jobs even offered me partial company ownership, but most importantly I said, hey, look I don't consider myself an average employee, so if you are interested in hiring average employees I understand that but if you read my resume (which I knew he didn't read it as I had been hired by another manager), you will know very well that I'm hardly an average employee and I take on work that very few people have the skills to take on.
Even though I didn't get the huge $ I was asking for (which was a 6 figure close to what he was making), I did get the highest tier of pay he was allowed to give me (he even got out all the pay charts and showed me what all the other employees made). 2 years later, I still make about 5% higher than my boss who has been working there for like 7 years!
So, hey... It was mental stress-hell for a week there getting ready to prepare to negotiate and getting through the negotiation itself, but 2 years later I could care less that I haven't been given even 1% raise as I am very happy with what I am earning and have no intentions of stressing myself over any raises for at least another 2 or 3 years.
Do your research, prepare like hell, know his negotiation abilities, strengthen yours and be VERY creative in your game. During negotiations, as he was saying no to my request, I said stuff like:
1)
well fine then how about you re-hire me as a contractor, or
2)
let me look at your Hierarchy and pay-scale to find me a job description I am capable of doing that meets my salary expectations (which he did show me),
3)
I brought into the negotiations print outs from monster.com and other places that showed that people with my job title made way more than what he was offering (what I showed, was of course the extremes),
4)
I suggested that the company was growing in a new direction and fast and that perhaps it was time to create a new job title that did not fit into the existing pay scales & descriptions,
5)
I explained that in my last job I made 50% more than what he was paying me as a contractor, and that I took the job because I liked the company and the technology was very leading edge at the time (VoIP) but that now (2003) my skills are high in demand (and he knew that),
6)
next I said, ok well what about stock options to make up the difference?
7)
Or what about training commitments worth $X per year,
8)
or forget the salary and if you are not convinced, let me work for you for free and you pay me 10% of what I save the company money on (I could have trippled my salary easily if he had said yes).
9)
I threw the question/problem back into his lap saying... Ok so listen, you know that I am not your average employee and am worth more than your regular pay scales, so how do you sugge
No trees were killed in the making of this post; however, many trillions of electrons were horribly inconvenienced.
"If money is all you love, then that's what you'll receive." Yes ma'am!
Nice to see I'm still making significantly lower than average pay.
At least with my 3% raise, it'll only be 18 years till I'm around average.
And they wonder why I'm not motivated. Sigh.
I work for a publicly traded company part-time as a student. I haven't received a pay raise in two-years. Its unusual given that the company's sales and profit has increased (they cut-out quarterly bonuses for everyone). Being part time might be understandable rationale, but there are equally as many hard-working full-time staff that are in a similar situation (including many who've worked long time for the company).
The executive salaries are not disclosed publicly. The success of the company not only relies on the executives though. The sales staff and marketing is highly resistive to change and adapting to new technology. Its hurting everyone in the pocket book. I'd like to know, if given that the company is publicly traded, is there any obligation to reveal these salaries and if so, where can I find the info? I'm not going to HR with it to demand a raise. I'm just curious if my instincts about them giving themselves inflated raises is true.
Maybe I work for a not-so-good company. I'm planning on leaving soon anyways. I've had raises from other companies, better pay and added incentives - reason enough to go elsewhere.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/18/C 01-352397.htm
Also read the other posts here about how the benefits packages of the Delphi employees are unreasonably large.
But hey, keep that sense of displaced anger going.
GM cut $3B of benefits to their employees PER YEAR with just some small concessions from the UAW. You say they give out that much money to the execs. I dare ask, do you think the high ups at GM make $3B/year, let alone the big loaf of bread this small slick of savings was cut from? Imagine how much concession they would have gotten if they actually went up against the union, like the NHL did.
I grew up in Flint, Michigan. Most families got their money from GM, many of them line workers. The pay scales were completely disproportionate to the actual job skills of the workers.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Last year's raise was 12%, the years before that were about the same. The tech boom took a lot of potential chemical, mechanical, and civil engineers out of the labour pool. There are serious scarcity of labour and problems retaining employees in these fields. Better benefits and piles of cash seem to be the most common way of making sure you have enough people. I'm coming up on 10 years in the business, and I am at triple the salary I started at. That is averaging over 10% for a decade. And there is no end in sight.
Keep enjoying your SUV's.
Laugh while you can, monkey boy!
"Ever since I got the MBA, my salary has gone up AT LEAST 20% per annum"
When you start at $12K/year, that's not very impressive.
I got a 4% raise this year, but as I earn $110K, it was actually a few bucks.
My wife is better looking than yours, I'm smarter than you, my kids are smarter than yours, I have a nicer house, in a nicer neighborhood, I'm well respected in the community and I earn more than you, and yet you're the one who's bragging.
Someone who makes $12K a year should not be bragging.
it is precisely circumstances like these that led to the development of labor unions (well, plus a few deaths-by-locked-door-in-a-fire)
it's alarming how many modern workers buy the company line about unions and how they're only in it for the dues. why is it ingrained in modern companies that teamwork is the solution to problems, but then teamwork is lambasted as a strategy to improve conditions?
i had a discussion with my sister once in which she railed against the organized workers at her job because they didn't have to work as much and got paid more. ? why is that bad? it's in the power of every worker! (except those working for the tsa, thanks to mr. bush.)
the communications workers is the first place to look if you're looking to get started. you have nothing to lose but your lousy schedule and crappy raise percentages. and your chains, but that's more metaphorical.
go get it
By definition, half the drivers are "better than average" and the other half are "worse than average".
Only if you do not know what average means. Average means you take a set of values and divide it by the number of elements in the set. So the average of 1,8,9,10 and 10 is 38/5 or 7.6. 80% of the numbers in that set are above the average.
Applying the same math to drivers, if 1/3 of drivers have had 2 accidents and 2/3 have only had one accident than the average number of accidents is 4/3 per driver. 66% of drivers would have a better than average driving record.
The term you are confusing with average is median. By definition half of the drivers are better than the median and half are worse. In the 1,8,9,10 and 10 sample above the median would be 9.
The median is often a better comparison value because extreme values on either fringe can affect the average disproportionately to the number of values. This is why housing prices for an area are quoted based on the median house price rather than the average.
Applying these statistics back to the question at hand.
I feel pretty confident in saying that 69% of all workers didn't perform above average, so why should they be expecting a reward?
It is easy to be an above average worker in any company productivity-wise, because you always have management pulling down the average. In many cases they actually throw negative values of productivity into the mix. If 69% of your company are actually performing below average then either you have too much management, or you are a company that supplies project management services.
A troll. Gee, ask an easier question whydontcha?
First of all, let me say that I am not in this field of work. However, let me say this.
Hypothetically, I would probably be okay as long as my salary were to be kept up with inflation, so I don't earn any less than before relative to the cost of living. Additionally, I would think healthcare, not only for me, but any family I have (spouse and children), would be very important.
If a company were to assign more responsibilities to me, then I would expect an overall pay raise. If they require me to work more hours in addition to a 40 hour workweek, I would definitely want overtime. Well, maybe instead of overtime, I would ask for (paid) vacation time to relieve any stress from 40+ hour weeks I may work.
I would say I've seen both from both in terms of people I've met - very well-off liberals with old money, and also conservatives with same. Poor people both conservative and not. My whole family is a mix of very conservitive to very liberal, with everything in-between - we did not have riches or any inheritance at all to help us along that path.
I will tip a little your way though and say the parts of my family who have had things easier money-wise are more liberal than the ones who had less when they were young. Growing up the more conservative ones do seem to be doing somewhat better in terms of money earned, though all are youngish (ranging into middle age) and who knows what may happen in the future.
Sorry everyone to throw a resoned response in the middle of the flamewar. Carry on.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If you run the IT department, you need to market the IT department. Things like What We've Done For You Lately; Ways We're Making The Company More Profitable; etc... If you come from the frame of mind that IT should be invisible until there's a crisis, then when things get tough, the Finance guys are going to look at that big department that spends a ton of money and say, "Just what exactly do these guys do?"
If you market the IT department and prove its value to the company, raises are much easier to come by. Been there, done that, a number of times.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Oh Waaaaahhhhh!!!!!!!!!! I'll have to eat prime rib instead of porterhouse. I'll have to drive around in a one year old Land Rover instead of a 2006 Lexus. Waaaaaahhhhh! Boo Hoooo Hooooooooo!!!!!!
Puhleeze.
For every one of us whining about how our salaries aren't increasing at the rates that please us, there are thousands more with our skill levels or more who go to bed on a stomach full of rice or air.
These same people share 400 square foot rooms with their entire families and when their kids catch colds and die, they cry, bury them, and go work some more to feed the remainder of the family.
Too many people in this country (the U.S.), can't grasp the concept that we have it pretty damned easy. It's deservedly so (thanks to God and a stable government), but that doesn't mean we shouldn't appreciate it.
If you're able to pay your bills and put good food on the table, stop bitching. If you find that difficult to do, use your frequent flier miles and paid vacation to go to the Philippines, Bangladesh, Mexico, etc., so that you can witness real hardship being suffered by people every bit as (or more) intelligent than you who were simply born into a cultural or political system inferior to ours.
I bet when you come back, your job will seem pretty damned comfy, and your pay level will suit you a little better, and a drive on a crowded L.A. freeway will feel like a drive through the country (the voice of experience talking).
...and think about this (and be honest)....do you really deserve more?
I left a job earlier this year. Money wasn't the main reason I left, there were several more important issues that led me to even considering an offer in the first place, but by taking a job elsewhere I got a better than 20% raise. The iteration before that my salary stayed about the same but I got myself moved to a much better area of the country. The iteration before that I got out of a literally dead-end area and got a 30% raise in the process.
I think we're just going through an adjustment. For much of the 20th century you got raises by staying with one company a long time. As people got used to stability companies started to adjust by offering smaller and smaller raises, counting on unwillingness to risk the instability of a job hunt to keep workers from leaving. Workers have to adjust by accepting that raises now will come by shifting jobs, either to a radically different position within the company or more likely to a different company altogether. If you recognize that, you can get an advantage by looking for your next job while still employed. That's the playing field the companies seem to want, so the only real question is are you going to look for the most advantageous strategy for yourself or not?
Of course, in a couple of decades when workers have come to consider job-hopping the status quo, companies will begin to offer large raises and other benefits to try and keep employees around long-term and cut turnover costs. Or maybe they'll find some other strategy. The critical thing isn't what'll happen, but to be able to spot the trend early and follow it instead of lagging it.
Cheap-labor lobbyists bribed Congress to increase the H-1B tech visa limit recently. Lobbyists keep saying there is a "shortage" of techies, but there is no objective evidence to back them. Tech unemployment is still high by historical and population relative standards, and salaries have been flat. Why don't they pick on lawyers for a change? Why, because lawyers have (or use) power, we don't.
If we don't collectively apply political pressure, they will do to our field what they have done to agricultural workers.
Table-ized A.I.
I would never laugh in their face, or do something so short sighted.
Be reasonable: Tell them exactly how much it wil cost them to keep you.
If they are willing to pay it, then tell the new company you were going to go to
about it, and tell them how much it would cost to still hire you.
There is no point in throwing away perfectly good leverage.
It used to be that everyone admired and respected the IT guy because they were smart and knew how to make the computers work. Now we're treated like bus boys, janitors, and anyone wearing a paper hat. Data Janitors.
"Hey--I spilled my bits. Come sweep them up--and hurry."
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
Step 1) Cut your cost of living by 50%.
Step 2) INVEST THE DIFFERENCE IN YOUR COMPANY'S STOCK
Step 3) Profit!
"Or they (Like my company) will replace these people..."
Meager wage increases (if you get them at all) are now the norm rather than the exception. The change to labor laws under George W. Bush were not an anomally -- your employer now expects you to work longer hours for less pay and benefits. Consider yourself lucky if your job hasn't already been offshore outsourced, or not in the planning stages. Your 401K overseas investments are growing fastest because you are helping to finance your company's globalization. But do not expect to gain enough from these investments to make up for when your job finally disappears overseas -- it won't.
The government's job is no longer to be of any particular benefit to you -- only to your employer. The tax cuts, tax loopholes, and outright federal grants were never intended for you, but for your employers. There was never any possibility that your political campaign contributions would ever provide the politicians with either an evenhanded or even populist world view -- you cannot compete with your employers when it comes to buying those politicians because they do not come cheap.
Expect that the time will come when your job will disappear overseas, or that your employer will replace you with cheaper imported (L1-A or H1-B) labor. And do not expect that you can fall back on the experience from those summer construction jobs you took while a student -- those jobs are now taken by the hundreds of thousands of illegal alien laborers that have continued to pour across our borders. This is no accident, but a concerted effort by the George W. Bush administration to force all wages down for his corporate sponsers. Between open borders, the INS "catch and release" policies, and zero enforcement against employers hiring illegal aliens, the plan is to do for domestic skilled blue collar jobs what has been done to the shoe, textile, steel, and IT white collar jobs.
The only substantial wage and benefit increases are destined for the pockets of upper management and the executive board room, and especially for those companies who not only cater to government contracting but also make the largest campaign contributions. And by the way, don't make too much noise when you protest the current status quo, because the term "terrorist" is largely undefined in the latest and greatest version of the US Patriot Act.
Welcome to "1984", and be certain to take your daily dose of "soma". Not taking your meds could provide you with an extended stay at Club Med - Gitmo.
What is this word "raise" that you speak of? I know not your foreign language.
Our greatest enemy is neither a single man, nor is it a nation, it is, as it has always been, our own greed.
"Here's a hint. You are disposable. You aren't worth shit to your employer."
No... YOU aren't worth shit to YOUR employer. I'm in the fortunate position of being worth something to my employer. I've been with them for 7 years, and I've had raises of 4 to 6 percent every year. Last year my annual bonus was about $10,000, thanks to a great performance evaluation.
Pro-union folks would have you believe... well, as you put it...
"You aren't worth shit to your employer. Think you have a lot of in house knowledge or specialised skills that you've built up over many years? Doesn't mean shit. Management will crap all over you given half the chance and replace you with two workers each being paid half your wage. And then they'll get paid a bonus for doing it."
That kind of blanket statement is ridiculous, overblown... and exactly what I expect from unions - the same people who vilify workers with family and mortgages who cross during extended strike disputes, likening them to soul-less leeches, claiming that their "union family" should somehow supercede the feeding of their "blood family". I've seen more stupidity and shortsightedness from unions than I have EVER seen from management.
I work in the oil pipeline industry. Of course, I'm in the IT division. Our company - one of the largest in the world - is not unionized, and yet somehow we are still treated extremely well.
Really, it seems like unions exist primarily to keep the marginal or substandard workers from being fired.
Take my advice. Find a good financial company and go work for the man. After coding for a couple more years, become a manager like I did. I believe that there will be more out sourcing in the future, and the coders here won't be paid much more then the ones outsourced. The up and coming 'outsource' is local(or not far) outsourcing that is just a bit cheaper and expendable(we just hire contractors to code, then let them go when we don't need them anymore). I get a decent salary, and up to 40% yearly bonus(plus around a 10% salary increase). When I want to code, I do it at home.
"I do not begrudge effective, honest and successful CEOs their salaries. If they earn it, they earn it."
And whom exactly is going to go looking for these except-ional individuals?
"Are all CEO's inept, devoid of skill and undeserving of large salaries? Absolutely not. Only a silly extremist would make such a claim."
You obviously haven't been reading any of the posts to this story then. Note they don't outright say "all". They just neglect to mention in their rants that there are exceptions. Good thing none of us are impressionable.
"However. I find it inexcusable to tell the employees that there isn't enough money for raises (or even adequate equipment) then siphon off several times the profit for one overpaid and underworked twit who just isn't bringing any value to the organization."
Become a shareholder (the larger, the better) and vote.*
*And yes, make certain the stock you're holding is the voting variety.
It would be nice for tech workers to know how screwed they are relative to everyone else. I don't know why I haven't seen a website sort of like fuckedcompany but lets tech worker share salary information with the world (as opposed to reporting how screwed their company is). A while ago, I started a website like this entitled Am I Getting Screwed but no luck so far.
Um, I think 4% is pretty standard for anyone across any industry that is considered a worker that gets their work done in a timely fashion and in good order. If you want that 10% raise, you better be implementing procedures to save the company millions of dollars and make sure your management knows about it. The only justification you could make for a higher raise while "just doing your job" would be for a smaller company where the earnings are more transparent to the workers. If there's only 30 people at the company and profits rise 30% over the year due to everyone "just doing their job", then yeah, a higher raise is arguable. But all that fancy stuff you do as a server admin for a large company, managing server space, making backups, handling software licensing schemes, that's all your job. You're expected to do it and do it reasonably well, that's why you were hired. And in return, you can expect a cost-of-living raise plus a small service incentive increase. The average raise at my company this year will be about 3.5% and I'll be content with that. Mainly because I'm still learning some of the processes and I don't know how everyone else will review my performance thus far. While I think I've done a great job on everything I've worked on, I figure that's what is expected of me. But if I end up patenting some new technologies in the coming year that I believe will help the company, I may feel different. If you can backup your claim for a higher raise, then by all means go for it. But don't sit there and whine that you only get 4% for just doing your job.
Besides, hasn't anyone ever told you? You don't get rich working for someone else.
You'd think this mentality would apply to IT outsourcing firms. Afterall, their only product is IT consulting, so the geeks working for them are, in effect, raw material and finished product. However, most IT outsourcers will only pay for actual hours worked, and even then try to screw you on how many hours you get. Why this is, I don't get. But it's the main reason I left IT behind and am now agressively pursuing a career in commissioned sales. After all, when you make your money based on how much you sell of a given thing, you have no worries about inflation, since your pay will go up along with inflation (as your product goes up in value, and your percentage commission stays the same).
Can just anyone work in sales? Nope, it definitely takes a certain personality type. But for those of you who are outgoing, friendly, and can present yourselves in a professional manner, I highly recommend making the switch. Start with selling cars if you have to, if only to learn how to sell. Once you've mastered that, all kinds of doors will be open to you.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Well, the problem is that the extra money in India will feel like a king only as long as one purchases domestic goods and services (food, housing, clothing). But people in India pay the same as Americans (i.e. a higher percentage of their income) for imported goods by Mercedes, LV, or Microsoft. Since material luxury is often judged by high-end goods, people in India are still not necessarily better off given the higher ratio of programmer vs average salary.
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
"Please explain who spending tons of money to compensate workers who are being asked to produce more per hour, work more hours and accept fewer fringe benefits like comprehensive healthcare coverage is some evil, evil thing that shall destroy every company and drive them into bankruptcy, while distributing the same amount of money to the higher ups is no problem whatsoever?"
The paragraph directly equates ("the same amount") the amount of money withheld from the rank & file with the amount given to the higher ups.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
It seems that stagnating IT salaries aren't a U.S. phenomenon at all. Here over in Germany they have been nearly stuck for the last few years. Living costs have gone up by 15 percent (if you look into your shopping baskets instead of government statistics) over 5 years, when IT salaries only rose by close to two percent and year. If you focus on IT companies it looks even worse, as the average is pushed upwards by IT jobs in companies in other operational fields that are bound by collective agreements. I'm tempted to state that things can only go upwards, but then there's this old saying: From the darkness there was a voice: "smile and be happy, it could go worse." And I smiled and was happy, and it went worse... To be honest, I don't think things will change too quickly, with all that globalization going on around, companies outsourcing a lot of work to countries with lower labour costs, mass layoffs at the so-called "global players" and people still flocking into IT studies like lemmings. For most of us this will mean "watch the market, specialise, be patient", and not the "have an idea in the morning, push it over lunch, get wealthy in the evening" that seemed so easy to accomplish just years ago.
I live two easy miles from work in a 4,500 square foot sub-$200,000 house inside the limits of a nice city. My gas prices went up as much yours, but that's a drop in the cost-of-living bucket. No, you've chosen to live someplace that's more expensive than you can afford. You have every right to that decision, but you can't complain about its direct consequences.
By the way, a coughing kid shouldn't be in an ER. Do your part to keep healthcare costs down and take him to a pediatrician or family practice doctor where he belongs. You'll get better treatment and won't be clogging up the emergency response system with non-emergency illnesses.
Save your harsh words for the realtors, man. All I'm trying to do is scrape by and take care of my family.
Look, I understand. I'm not trying to be a jerk. But if you want to really take care of your family, maybe you need to re-evaluate whether you're in the best place to do it. It sounds like you could maybe do better elsewhere.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I'm a non-managing tech worker just like most of the other people here, so I'm not saying that for personal benefit. I just can't quite believe how quick people are to ask for new laws - just as long as the only affect other people.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
How do you know what your job title should be? I work in a small company where everyone who programs or admins anything is "in IT", but we don't really have specific titles. I dug around a bit on the ACM's site but didn't find anything. Pointers, anyone?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I've worked in the aerospace industry and we've been lucky to get 4%. One year the management threatened to give us bonuses instead of raises (think about it - means a smaller salary for next year's raise).
I've gotten large raises only twice. Once when I switched jobs, a second time after my first year at work. It's been 3-5% all the other years.
Maybe it's my industry, but if you folk think that a 10% raise is normal, I don't know what you're talking about.
Sh*t. This makes me regret going into a technical field even more.
Time for law school.
You sir, should receive mod points.
You should never accept a counter offer - the company you WERE going to has almost certainly already notified all the other candidates, so won't think much of you abandoning them. The company you currently work for now knows where your priorities lie. You may well be the first to go if they have a round of layoffs.
You'll have broken the trust of TWO companies, "closing doors" if you will.
I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
I'm in India, getting paid $16K USD. I feel pretty damn rich. I've been in the US and I've been paid $16K (as a TA/RA) and I felt pretty damn poor.
:-). The food's great, weather is decent in Bangalore, life rocks!!
The only issues arise when I need to buy, say, an Ipod or some other electronics - the price is more here, due to taxes and duties.
Oh, I got a 44% hike last year (but it was off a low base), and I'm expecting something similar this year
It is not uncommon for wages to go up slightly and then benefits to be cut accordingly (therefore no real raise) in any "higher level" job. After 10 to 12 years, expect to find employment in another field--you are disposable and too expensive. Sorry, that's life in the US now and the way it has been for years. The President and CEO get large raises, you the disposable person, don't. Eventually you will become one of the "information poor". Therefore unemployable unless you make President or CEO.
That would be "Norm", not "Normal?"
/. deserve no raise at all.
Obviously, the people predtending to be editors at
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
I am a CPA. In my industry (internal audit), unless you get promoted or get a bonus or some sort of performance-based incentive, cost-of-living (or COA+1%) raises are pretty normal. For public auditors, large raises are common, because it is hard to keep people in that environment (high stress, high travel).
How is it news that 'most' people don't get huge raises? Did you add so much value that you deserve a 31% raise?
4% would be considered a clear signal that not only you indepensible but you are probably being groomed for bigger and better things. My whole department, for the last 3 years has given out ZERO increases ZERO bonuses to all but the 'top' 15% of the staff based on ratings but more realistically, based on who actually works in physical proximity to the boss, given we're a spread out, 'virtual' organization.
And if the noises we hear about the strategizing the paradigm and upselling the modality to shape the customer solutionality are any indication our reviews for 2006 will come out the same.
And this is a MAJOR IT corporation you see commercials for, every day on television.
And this is in one of the areas commonly touted as a hot area; commercial security.
So in real terms as our compensation FALLS at least 3%/year for 3-4 years I have to say your complaints of only getting 2.8% - 4% fall on deaf ears.
Over the last 3 years, I've gotten a 4% raise, a 0% raise, and a 3.6% raise (in that order).
But when I started here 3 years ago, it was a salaried + OT position (where they paid OT for everything over 40 hours a week). Better still, my group had (and still has) so much extra work that we were encourages to work as many hours as we wanted (I usually hovered around 43-48 hours a week, making some decent OT).
The problem, is right around the year where I got the 0% raise, they changed the OT policy so that the first 10 hours (per two weeks) of OT was unpaid. Yup, free (to them at least).
What is the managerial translation of this? That now we're getting paid our salary for 45 hours a week instead of 40.
In other words, an 8% decrease in pay (assuming I was working the 45s before).
So if you look at my three "raises" of 4%, 0%, and 3.6%, there's no conceivable way to add that up to even EQUAL the 8% increase in expected work hours.
In other words, it was a stealth pay cut.
3-4 % is not even a cost of living raise when:
We see gas prices spiking periodically (200-300% increase in last 10 years..anyone remember 98 cent gas? How about 78-87 cent gas?)
Health insurance rates have been increasing for most(in US) at double digit increments....anywhere from 15-35 percent!
They only thing that has suprisingly stayed low has been food costs.
3-4% is CRAP when you have these kinds of increases. Copst of licing in my book should have given me a 10-15% raise.
Gorkman
I'm in an exempt role as are all of my peers and we're expected to bill internally - to allocated buckets, 15% OT for which of course no one is paid. So the increases are zero, the work week stretches 15%.
Did I mention that training budget was eliminated years ago and if you want to come to the (almost) mandatory once a year all hands meeting you have to figure out how to pay for thatyourself?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
to not work for other people. Start your own company and make your own W2. It's one of the best things I've ever done!
-- I am. Therefore, I think!
I got a 10% this year as well. Last year they handed out 4%. The 5 years before that there was nothing at all. Heck, they didn't even do performance reviews. And I'd bet the only reason they gave out relatively nice raises this year was that a few key engineers left for greener pastures very recently, and they're afraid of losing more of those worth keeping.
But just because one gets a 10% single raise doesn't mean he's ahead of inflation in the long run. 14% raise over 6 or 7 years? I'm still a ways behind inflation...
On the one hand, I'm currently making 30% more at my current job than when I started working here straight out of college over 2 years ago. On the other hand my pay is still at least 20% below average for my area.
Oops, it appears that the math gods are not with me today. Figured I'd correct myself before someone else does. ;)
Going from 45 hours (worked and paid) a week to paid for 40 while still working 45 is actually a 12% decrease in pay, not 8%.
Q. Shit, how come I get a 3% raise when the CEO gets 25% and a $30,000,000 bonus?
A. 'cos the CEOs job won't be getting done for $2 a day in Delhi if he doesn't stop asking questions and get back to work.
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
This September I had finally thrown in the towel, and decided that my loyalty and dedication to my job had been taken for granted. Having served a year in Iraq with the Marines I had established a reputation as the "go-to" guy doing all that the customer requested. In fact I was to be there only 6 months, but stayed a year due to my replacements threatening to quit if forced to relieve me. I managed to save one co-worker from making that decision by "volunteering" to stay an additional 6 months. Truth be told, I would have had to stay anyways or quit myself.
They will compensate me accordingly for my service.
That's what I told myself to get me through another 6 months. Upon my return raises were coming down the pipe. As it stood I took a salary on at undermarker value for the San Diego area ($53,000) where rent is about $1200/month and every other aspect of living through the roof. I did this with the mentality that I would be rewarded based upon merit. Do a good job, expect a good raise. I was just trying to get the foot in the door in Defense Contracting.
Well, I manged to get a 3.82% raise... just like everyone else. You see, I would have been okay with that raise if I was just like everyone else. Fact of the matter is, is that I did what everyone else was unwilling to do. For the co-worker that remained behind due to my generosity, she was awarded the same as me. I felt insulted.
This having been the straw that broke the camel's back I searched elsewhere for employment. Thankfully for me, my reputation preceeded me and was sent a slew of offers as soon as I told other agencies I was looking to leave. Upon doing my exit interview with the company I had outlined several issues that lead to my decision. In the end however, as an employer don't provide blanket raises. This will only infuriate those that do the majority of the work or perform exemplary. As I told my boss's boss, this all would have been avoided if they had done raises based upon merit.
I'm sitting here mid career waiting for them to tell me some bullshit and have a nice early retirement. In the last 9 years in this company the average tenure, that is, the average length of service has dropped from 12 years to 3. Basically they don't want anyone to stay more than 3 years and hopefully at the beginning of their careers so it doesn't cost them that much. Moreover if they treat everyone like shit for that time they never have to worry about giving them increases or bothering with retention since the plan is to get rid of them anyhow. All they have to do is keep recruiting. And since this is the outsourcing business a piece of the headcount comes from your own customers who shift their own employees off on to the outsourcer. They're already beaten down and demoralized so it's not hard to treat them like shit as well.
I just got a raise of a whole buck. Wow. Houston has got to be the worst when it comes to IT jobs. Since this is a two-cow, oil town, no one knows what a computer is and most lack the brain power to understand what one is, how it works, and what it takes to implement it! Problem is, most employers down here skimp on expenses so much that it actually hurts the company. Unfortunately, this is true of it's workers too. The employers pay crap wages, offer crap benefits that change every six months, and usually treat you like crap too since they can't relate to someone of your stature. Let's just say, if INS were here in Houston, they'd have a field day!
-- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!
It's been my observation, that we're caught in a bit of a cycle. Currently, we're in the part of the cycle that dictates that IT is a cost-center and not a profit-center.
What's most unfortunate about it, is that this is very much a preception driven cycle. "Powers that be" look at numbers, and suddenly realize that most IT services in a company are just costing money, but not showing any direct profit. Therefore, why should I increase my costs by increasing salaries?
The flip side is that you have to consider how much success and profit comes because IT does it's job. When the "powers that be" make the connection, IT is no longer really a cost-center, but rather a department from which the root of various profit-centers draw their ability to make good money.
So, hopefully, as time goes by, the CEO/CFO/CIO take a bump to the head and wake up realizing that IT, while not a direct profit-center, is often the source from which many other departments draw their ability to make profit for the company. (And thus why the company continues to show profit as a whole.)
Just my $0.02 on the whole deal.
Awk! Pieces of eight. Pieces of eight. Pieces of seven... ERROR: General Protection Fault. [Paroty Error.]
I'm surprised no one has brought up the fact that many I.T. professionals are still living off of fatter salaries than most non-I.T. workers. Many of us have learned to live beyond our means because of bloated salary. Suddenly, we were thrown into reality.
I was laid off a couple years ago so I went back to consulting. I just took a permanent position again with a company. I took a salary cut of over 30% and I was told that raises are usually cost-of-living and that is it.
However, in return, the company covers our insurance 100%, gives us prepaid gas cards every month and pays for us to attend classes, purchase books, etc.
By the way, we are a transportation company and due to fuel costs going up we are making a return of less than 2%
Point being that if you aren't happy where you are at, there are PLENTY of companies out there that are willing to appreciate their employees but with the current economy (still improving) it can't always be in monetary terms.
My salary is more than enough for me to live off of very happily. More importantly, I have a feeling of worth at my company rather than feeling like a overpaid assembly line developer.
The satisfaction I get more than makes up for the difference in income.
* Si hoc legere scis numium eruditionis habes *
Is it any wonder I'm considering quitting the tech field to become a goat farmer?
Are you taking resumes for assistants yet?
"which studied the compensation and bonuses of 14,253 IT workers"
Where were these workers located? Do they all work for the same company? Are they outsourced workers? Perhaps the people responding to this are paid less because they have so much free time they can fill out this stupid survey by request.
Be sure to remember the Programmers Prayer
You have the same feeling I got(higher-ups screw workers, sometimes), and you outlined how to react.
Thanks.
You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
Add to this that many of the people working there are at the highest allowed salaries for their positions and you can imagine the happiness. No one is allowed to be promoted before January either, so what incentive is there to stay? THe people who stick it out are the one who only have a 10 minute commute and don't want to drive farther.
Genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration, which is why engineers sometimes smell really bad.
If you feel that you can get a better work environment including compensation package elsewhere, then you should go. Or you could try making the case to your boss that this is what you are really worth. That's what I did many years ago. My company felt that I was worth X while working a ton of unpaid overtime. I thought that I was worth 3X with no unpaid overtime. I left. Turns out I was right and they were wrong. Ain't capitalism grand?
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
You can't compare salaries based on percapita income. you should compare it based on cost of life. And yes, there are some measurements of cost of life out there, but I don't have any link.
Rethinking email
The vast majority of my family owns their own business or works for one of the members who does. As someone with experience on both ends of the spectrum... company ownership and working for "The Man"(tm)... I can say for certain that the primary reason most people are offered 2% (or whatever) raises, is because the boss or bosses are fairly certain they can get away with it. Sometimes this backfires. In a company with highly skilled and specialized folks, this can often mean you lose some of your best employees. Either way it's all a calculated risk. Questions that are asked:
Is the cost of the additional salary more or less than the cost of replacing the potential loss of personel?
What percentage of those who find other jobs can be lured back in with an offer for a bit more?
Is the product produced by the employee worth the money being paid?
Can an employee that costs less create the same quality of product in the same amount of time?
In the end, if you truely believe you're worth more than you make, and the company you work for seems unwilling to compensate you in this manner, everyone is better off if you find that job. In reality, your true market value is only what the highest bidder will pay. And, in our current job market, there are typically at least a dozen people willing to do what you do for the same or less... supply and demand at its best.
Wish I had mod points. Informative posts like this sometimes drown in the FUD surrounding them.
and has been for many years. Health care costs have gone up between 10% and 15% per year for over a decade. Costs of higher education have gone up between 8% and 20% per year for even longer. Energy costs (home heating oil, natural gas, and transportation) have gone up 200% in the past 20 years. Housing costs have doubled in the past decade. Prescription medicine costs have also far outpaced "inflation".
The government has been fudging exactly how the CPI is calculated because they can, and in doing so effects government costs. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, government worker pay raises, and even state welfare benefits are all part of the "entitlements programs" that impact the governments budgets. Someone smart once said that "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."
The current regime in power is attempting to roll back all of the federal government's entitlement programs, in order to divert funds to their corporate sponsers. War in Iraq, war on "terrorism", war on "drugs", war on "porn" are all mechanisms to bleed off the money and credit of the US Treasury and Federal Reserve. The neo(Con)artist term is "Draining the swamp." The government will be forced to choose between funding the unending war in Iraq and increasing Social Security benefits. George W. Bush's "Social Security Realization" program to give SS benefits to illegal aliens doesn't make much sense if Social Security is really at risk, except within the parameters of "draining the swamp".
taking a counteroffer, after you have already shown to be disloyal, offers problems. Even if you stay, don't count on anything because they know you can be bought for a few percent, and it just buys them time to find your replacement or marginalize you. As well as telling the other company - they don't like to be gamed...
It's a rigged number that doesn't include energy, housing or food. If your telling me that these things (the most common everyday purchases) have indeed tracked with inflation, then I'd guess that you haven't driven, owned a house or bought food in the past couple of years. Don't forget that even during the gloom and doom of the 70s, it was still possible to raise a family of four on a meager salary.
Technology and the people who implement it are always becoming obsolete. The technology business has been going out of business for most of its history. Only during an extreme recession in Asia and a cold war did that change momentarily.
it must be some kind of psychological safety mechanism that reduces stress from the realization that one is getting financially raped by the company they keep.