Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ask Slashdot: Who Should Pay Costs To Attend Conferences?

Posted by samzenpus on from the conference-or-else dept.

An anonymous reader writes I wanted to get your opinion on who should pay the costs associated with attending conferences. In the past, I've covered costs associated with attending some local (in town) conferences, but despite claims to be willing to cover some costs associated with conferences, training, and certifications, my requests have been denied. The short version is I would like to attend a national conference, hosted in Las Vegas, and that while specific to a technology, it is what 90% of my day is related to so its directly work related. My employer has declined to pay some of the costs associated with the conference, but has said if I pay my way, they will pay for the training associated with it. Since this is a pretty hot technology, I'm very interested in getting certified and appreciate their offer.

I should add that I work for a public entity and due to some fairly public issues, we have enjoyed record levels of funding the past couple of years. We know that they cannot afford to continue so we're about to start a multi-year decrease in our budget. My current thoughts are: First, I was working for a company where we faced potential layoffs, getting as close as to within 24 hours of one. Even just having some job security is extremely appreciated. Second, I work in a WONDERFUL environment. They aren't clock punchers, its about getting the job done. We're not micromanaged and have freedom to try new things. For the public sector, I know those are rare things and I appreciate them. Third, I work on a very talented team. I am probably the weakest member, so for me its a perfect learning/growth opportunity. Finally, its not my employer saying the conference isn't important, its looking at the bottom line and that we are a public entity so its not like we can easily raise more money. Tough decisions must be made.

For this particular conference, I decided to try and save up my own money. Unfortunately, my personal life has gotten in the way, so I've resorted to begging. My problem with this is I hate begging, but what am I going to do for future conferences? So should I re-think my acceptance of my employers policy and start looking for a new job? Obviously, it is a personal decision, but I don't have a mentor or close friends to act as sounding boards, so I'd love to hear your thoughts.

11 of 182 comments (clear)

  1. Don't bother by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They're mostly a waste of time anyway everyone just strokes their own egos and you spend 2 days digesting information in an archaic inefficient way

    lecture style

    1. Re:Don't bother by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because all information is available in a more modern, interactive source?

      You put up with inefficiencies because it's sometimes available inefficiently or not at all.

    2. Re:Don't bother by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The last sentence is key - OP may be able to go if he makes it contingent on writing a report afterwards detailing what he's learned while he was there. I had an employer do that at the last NetWorld I went to.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  2. Your employer by redmid17 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They should be bearing the cost of the training and conferences. The only time I've shelled out cash for anything was when I didn't prepare enough for a certification test and needed to retake it. That was all on me though. Had I studied a bit more, I'd have passed on the first time.

    Companies that want to retain talent need to shell out for training and conferences, especially if the budget isn't a concern for the time being. It's not as if they squirrel that money away for a rainy day. If the conference is as relevant to your work as you say and isn't insanely expensive, this should be a slam dunk.

    1. Re:Your employer by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Training is one thing, conferences are another. You can get trained without attending a conference. You seem to be replying with "well if you're employer wanted to keep me, this is what they'd have to do!" That's all fine and great... but what are they really obligated to do? They're obligated to pay for things they expect you to attend. If conferences aren't something they value, then they shouldn't have to pay. If you're prissy and demand lots of back scratching to stay in your job, then fine, they might want to pay for such things to keep you happy. But personally I'd prefer a higher wage and leave out the modern over-hyped version of a flee-market we now call a "conference" It's a waste of my time and often costs 10% of my sallary for me to attend. Wouldn't you prefer a 10% raise? ...and I literally tell my management that. I wont waist your money, so don't waste my time. Pay me more and I wont leave.

    2. Re:Your employer by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The IT world is certainly competitive; however, ALL companies should see the internal benefits to training employees and working to ensure they do not leave. Companies with the mindset you laid out above are doing themselves a double disservice by not training their employees and leveraging the benefits and immediate returns provided by investments in their human capital. In some fields and with some resources, professional development is seen as a bigger happiness motivator and retention tool than more salary.

      What you have outlined above is a company which is not interested in its people and only its immediate bottom line and one where it's clear its people should move on regardless of payscale and internal short-term opportunity provided.

    3. Re:Your employer by Jahta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I once worked at a Fortune 500 company in Silicon Valley that didn't want to train employees because they might get certified, leave for a competitor, and make two to three times what they're currently making. Never mind that most employees were training themselves on company time, getting certified on their own time, and leaving for a competitor to make big bucks. Most companies just don't want to pay for training anymore, much less send people off to conferences where they might network and get hired by a competitor.

      CFO asks CEO: "What happens if we invest in developing our people and then they leave us?"

      CEO: "What happens if we don't, and they stay?"

    4. Re:Your employer by Jawnn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      CEO: "What happens if we don't, and they stay?"

      CFO: "We get to keep a productive employee doing the things he's been doing well, without having to pay for his continuing education and a networking opportunity that may wind up drawing him away from us. I.e., we save money both by not paying exorbitant rates for professional conferences (who charge both the attendees and the exhibitors and thus make money from both ends of the candle), and by not having to go through the hiring process for his replacement. He's also easily replaceable and posting online that he's happy here, so the chances of having to find someone new are low and the cost of doing so is also relatively low. We may even be able to replace him with an H1B and pay less overall. "

      This is what's wrong with the tech industry's HR practices - the failure to fully appreciate the value in those "resources" and (very much mistakenly) assuming that they are "easily replaceable". We spend a lot of time and money getting our staff up to speed on all the things they can't learn anywhere but by working here. Some of that is cultural, some of it is technical, all of it is valuable. So spending money on adding to their knowledge is a much better bet that throwing them away and hiring some inexperienced kid with the "skill of the week".

  3. Stay local by ah.clem · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't over think it - you can't afford to go, but they will pay for training. Find the training locally and forget the conference. Conferences are over-rated and while I wouldn't pay for my guys to attend a conference (especially Vegas), I always paid for training (and even exam costs when I had the budget for it - the last few years I could only cover training). If your job is as good as you say it is, you're a bit crazy thinking about leaving over a conference. A whole bunch of IT sucks hard out there, these days. Just my opinion and I hope this helps - it's what I would tell you if you worked for my office and came to me with this issue.

    --
    "Life is not magic." Dr. Ron Weiss - "If we don't play God, who will?" Dr. James Watson
  4. You Don't Go by jchawk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is really pretty simple. If the funding isn't available to send you to a conference in Vegas -- You don't go. Or if you want to go you pick up the tab.

    It seems that you can't afford to go and your employer doesn't see value in sending you.

    Life sucks get a helmet.

  5. depends by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If your employer expects you to go, they should pay. If they don't care, you should. Anything your employer expects you to be doing, they should be paying for. It's as simple as that.

    I, personally, find them worthless marketing scams. At best, all I get out of them is that someone is doing something new that I should google later. Other than that they seem to be sales pitch after sales pitch. I can't stand them and would never pay for an employee to attend. If there's training or something? Cool, I'd pay for that. But lets separate training from conferences. Most real training doesn't happen at conferences anyways.

    That being said... if I were running the company that was doing that marketing scam at the conference... i.e. I wanted you to attend to drum up business, that's entirely different and I'd pay for you to go.