|
Eric the Mauve posted:Big time.
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2018 22:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:50 |
|
|
Interesting developments afoot! Backstory: I've been at my job for about 7 months. It's a fin-tech company, still very much in the start-up zone. The company is successful and doing well. It has a handful of different development groups, each working on a different part of the system/different products. I have a friend/mentor on the team that neighbors my own, and I've been meeting with him a few times a week to talk shop and philosophy and whatnot. Earlier I expressed some interest in the possibility of joining his team because I knew it could be an option. When I first started getting mentored by him, I talked with my boss about the mentoring arrangement, and my boss made it clear that if I ended up wanting to move to my mentor's team someday that it wouldn't be a problem. I should add that my mentor recently got promoted to management. Well, my mentor went ahead and spoke to both my boss and his boss recently and got the green light from them to trade one of his current guys he's not happy with for me. We would just need a thumbs up from one other higher manager who probably couldn't give less of a poo poo about the trade. I'm thinking I can negotiate for higher pay from this trade by moving up one pay grade. Despite how short it might seem like I've been with the company, almost everybody I work with is new-ish too. I discovered recently of the about 25 people between my group and the new group, I'm one of only 3-4 people in the lowest pay band, with a lot of people one step above me. This doesn't exactly line up with responsibilities or capabilities. It also doesn't line up with how long people have been with the company. I'm not underpaid compared to market rate, but this company is doing extremely well and the elements of the system that I'm working on contribute to that. I make $100k now and I expect moving up to the next band could go as high as getting $110k or more. I also just looked it up on the org chart and the guy who I'd be getting traded with is the pay band I'm trying to move up to, so I feel like there's an argument there that the position is worth the increase. Question: Am I in a position through this move to negotiate a pay increase by bumping up to the next pay grade? If so, what's my best bet for going about it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2018 02:12
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:Interesting developments afoot! On the one hand your responsibilities are changing, so your compensation should be changed to reflect that. On the other hand, you're getting a move that you asked for, which is its own form of being given something, at least insofar as your employer is concerned. I bet you're smart enough to know the question that I will ask that answers your own question: what leverage do you have if you ask for a raise and they say no?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2018 13:52
|
|
|
Dwight Eisenhower posted:On the one hand your responsibilities are changing, so your compensation should be changed to reflect that. Bummer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2018 15:50
|
|
|
As always, the only reliable way to meaningfully increase your salary is to seek a new employer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:I didn't ask for this directly, but you're right that I have no leverage in this really. Also, my mentor sent me a message saying, "You won't get a raise/promotion for this. Sorry." Time for a new job.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
Yeah, no, that is not the situation I'm in. I'm well-paid for market rate and I love my job and the benefits. I sorely do need to move to a new team though and after coming in to work today I'm finding out that that is definitely happening. I was just curious if this was a position I could leverage for any amount of pay increase. It'll most likely happen in 6 months after I've demonstrated myself in this new environment. I'm not worried about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Update: I majorly screwed up.  The owner is giving me additional duties to start training me for what my new role will be if I were to stay long term with the company. I gave him the understanding that I would stay on through my graduation but wasn't able to get anything in return. I should have pushed back immediately when he said I wouldn't be getting anything in return. No new title or raise. He said we would have a review in 90 days as to my progress and assess a raise at that point. He said he didn't want everybody else threatening to quit or asking for raises. I'm taking on things that I think are transferable and will help me advance but won't be working additional hours to take on the extra load. I don't have a concrete BATNA right now but will be finishing my MBA up in August and taking CFA level 1 in December.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Why are you not already looking for a better job?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
You were never going to meaningfully go up in salary by staying at the same company - please don't work at any company for 8 years especially now that you have an MBA. Start interviewing now. You are not beholden to staying through August because you said you would - they would fire you the very minute it became profitable to do so and you should treat them the same way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2018 20:09
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Why are you not already looking for a better job? Not emptyquoting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
Like it's good that you didn't get any raise or promotion because that'd be all your complacent brain needed to rationalize being paid half of what you should be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
Right. I can do this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
Sleepytime posted:He said he didn't want everybody else threatening to quit or asking for raises.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2018 16:07
|
|
|
The funny thing is that after you finally leave, he'll pay more for your replacement than it would have taken to satisfy you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2018 17:45
|
|
|
Given the "moving is the only reliable modern way to get significant pay increases" perspective here, how long are folks feeling is appropriate to stay in a new position before casting about?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
I'm gonna assume the job is at least tolerable. I'd say it's a function of how pleasant you job is and how likely it is that you will benefit from more years there, and also how easy it would actually be offered a better position. I don't think it's ever too early to turn down an amazing offer but I'm not exactly going and interviewing every moment myself. I think I'd wait at minimum a full bonus cycle, assuming the company has one. If the job is miserable, it goes without saying you should find something else asap. You can have a story to tell if it ever comes up in an interview. Jeffrey of YOSPOS fucked around with this message at 06:55 on Mar 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 06:53
|
|
|
El Mero Mero posted:Given the "moving is the only reliable modern way to get significant pay increases" perspective here, how long are folks feeling is appropriate to stay in a new position before casting about? My feeling is that a company would drop me the day it became profitable for them to do so, so I'm going to extend them the same courtesy. I don't think there's any obligation to stay for any particular length of time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 12:08
|
|
|
There's a dimension of hiring managers not accepting the reality of the market yet. If I see a resume where someone bounces around, I don't give a poo poo because I don't extend loyalty to employers. However one of my peers who is only a few years older remarks on it when we're reviewing resumes. That doesn't mean it'll actually haunt you, but it does mean you might get some opportunities that would involve a generational gap closed off to you. All that is to say you can bounce around, and sometimes there will be a consequence, but it won't make you a pariah.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 13:10
|
|
|
We had an applicant for a position managing project managers who oversee multi-year projects and he had worked for 11 companies over a 19 year career. He might have been the greatest guy in the world but when it takes 6 months to find and hire the right person, that's a tough sell. Of course, a competent company wouldn't take 6 months to hire someone in a vital role so maybe he's lucky not to have gotten an offer after all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 13:28
|
|
|
Dwight Eisenhower posted:There's a dimension of hiring managers not accepting the reality of the market yet. If I see a resume where someone bounces around, I don't give a poo poo because I don't extend loyalty to employers. However one of my peers who is only a few years older remarks on it when we're reviewing resumes. When I'm looking to hire non-entry level, I want someone who doesn't bounce around. I don't want to go through the effort of hiring someone every 6 months when they decide to move again for a better offer, and I'm willing to make it work for everyone involved. Of course, we also do more than 2% annual raises. I'm low 30s, so it's not like I'm a Boomer. I read a book recently about the concept of approaching work in 3 year phases. If you're only spending a year at a company, you're not going to be very effective. 3 years gives you the time to make a difference before moving on - to a new role or a new company. Thinking about it that way is good for both parties - you can think about your next professional goal (eg title, responsibility, etc) and set a plan to achieve it; and you're working there long enough to demonstrate success - good for both parties.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 13:53
|
|
|
My own two cents is you should pretty much always at least have your antennae up for a better job. Maybe not Always Be Job Hunting but definitely Always Be Networking, and if an opportunity to increase your salary and responsibility elsewhere comes up, absolutely take that interview even if you just started your current job last week. IMO. Plus interviewing is like any other skill--you'll gain both adeptness and comfort with it the more you exercise it. Zauper posted:I read a book recently about the concept of approaching work in 3 year phases. If you're only spending a year at a company, you're not going to be very effective. 3 years gives you the time to make a difference before moving on - to a new role or a new company. Thinking about it that way is good for both parties - you can think about your next professional goal (eg title, responsibility, etc) and set a plan to achieve it; and you're working there long enough to demonstrate success - good for both parties. I'm skeptical of such a rigid plan because life doesn't often cooperate with tidy plans. It might be a helpful way to structure your thoughts, as long as you also have flexibility and don't pass up good opportunities because they don't fit into your Plan. Also if I WAS going to do something like that I'd make it 2 years at a time, maybe 18 months. Eric the Mauve fucked around with this message at 13:57 on Mar 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 13:54
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:
If I'm hiring a product manager and someone has 10 years experience but never more than 18 months at a job, I'm going to be skeptical of their ability to manage the life cycle of a product over time, with all of the P&L implications. When I'm hiring someone to manage member growth for us, there's no world in which we weren't hiring someone who has achieved viral growth before and sustained it for a period of time, since we would be looking for a proven track record of success. Someone like the example above is unlikely to get an interview as a result.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 14:06
|
|
|
Zauper posted:Agreed. I didn't mean to make it sound like you're signing a three year contract or something. You should always be open to new opportunities, but you also need to recognize that it takes to, generally, to demonstrate value and if you never do that, your ceiling will be functionally capped. I’m assuming they know that people bounce around because they want more pay, but does it go without saying that when asked why you moved from company to company every three years, you shouldn’t tell a hiring manager it’s because the companies offered lovely pay increases each year?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
I mean, if you manage to find a significant pay jump at your current company, then it's fine to stay there. I'm coming up on 3 years here and I've increased my comp by.... 17% since I started, and I'm still thinking I'll be looking soon, provided a title change and 10% paybump don't come in soon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
Cacafuego posted:I’m assuming they know that people bounce around because they want more pay, but does it go without saying that when asked why you moved from company to company every three years, you shouldn’t tell a hiring manager it’s because the companies offered lovely pay increases each year? "I accomplished a lot there but I foresee a lot more challenge and opportunity for personal growth at your company," etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 19:16
|
|
|
Cacafuego posted:I’m assuming they know that people bounce around because they want more pay, but does it go without saying that when asked why you moved from company to company every three years, you shouldn’t tell a hiring manager it’s because the companies offered lovely pay increases each year?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
Cacafuego posted:I’m assuming they know that people bounce around because they want more pay, but does it go without saying that when asked why you moved from company to company every three years, you shouldn’t tell a hiring manager it’s because the companies offered lovely pay increases each year? Generally speaking, you don't want to tell a hiring manager you're changing jobs to get paid (or even work life balance, I feel -- fine to ask about work life balance and express it as a priority, probably less fine to say that's why you're looking for a job unless it was truly horrific and you follow up with that example -- e.g. 'well, i want a better work life balance' is bad. 'I am really attracted to not being on call 2 weeks a month' is good). Essentially, you want to focus on the positive and the new role, not talk bad about your current job. Looking for more challenge, a different focus area, whatever it is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
I received an offer letter today and while the salary is good and I plan on taking the job for a whole bunch of non-compensation-related reasons, it's still a bit short of where I'd have ideally liked it to be. As in, $1500 short. I plan to counter, and it seems like the prevailing wisdom is to aim higher than that so there's room for both sides to make concessions - is that accurate?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
I know the thread likes success stories so: Accepted an offer for a job only about 2 miles from home with an 80k salary - middle of my acceptable range but 5k over their first offer. I also got them to grant me PTO accrual backdated to 1/1 so I'm not starting with less than i had at my old job. And can carry over a ton every year. Plus It's 9 to 5 with flexible hours depending on when I take calls. It's for an Applications engineer role working with electric motors, mostly technical work with a dash of sales (though the sales manager seemed keen on using me there). It's also a foot in the door of the automotive industry and gets me out of heavy equipment. I have a lot of studying to do to get up to speed though. Thanks thread for all the tips, it was nice to know that negotiating is good and normal. I'm super excited to start.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
A second offer came in after I had accepted the first. It was slightly lower in pay but offering retirement and a better drive led me to taking it. Was still able to counter for more money to make up the gap. I felt bad backing out of the first position but it was an easy conversation and the manager understood and wished me well. It’s amazing how much this thread has helped over the years and negotiating and job dealing really is a head game you just need to get over.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
I found this thread too late but still would like some input on my situation. First some bits about me: First of all I'm from Switzerland, so I realise that maybe not everything in this thread is applicable to my country but I guess negotiating is an universal thing, right? I've been working as an engineer for 10 years, but I'm not actually an engineer on paper. 4 years ago I started following courses to get a Bachelor degree and actually become an engineer for real. In 3 months I'm getting my bachelor degree. A few weeks ago I sent a resume to a small company (50 people) which I'd really like to work for because they have nice modern technology, are young and seem highly skilled and honestly after 10 years in my current company I've had it over here. I got an interview which I think went really well, I got 2h30 of technical questions with the head of software and they seemed quite happy with my skill level and flat out said they wanted me for a senior embedded software engineer position. My postulation was made through a recruiter, the actual salary range was written on their website as 70K-90K CHF. I discussed with the guy before my interview and told him I wanted at least 95K, because I've 10 years of experience and using a salary calculator for my region I know even that is quite on the low range for my position but I mean I still technically not have my degree right now. During the interview with the HR person, she asked me what salary I wanted, and not having found out about this thread, I said I wanted between 95K - 100K CHF. After the interview I got a call from the recruiter, who discussed with the company, and he said they were very happy how my interview went and that the CEO would call me to give me an offer and discuss salary. And I'm currently waiting for his call, probably tomorrow I guess. Now I realise I played my hand badly but I keep thinking about how I will handle the call with the CEO. My question now is, obviously I'd be happy with 100K, and 95K would be okay (it still would be a 10% increase from my current job), but what kind of arguments could I use to stir him towards 100K? I guess any sane person will start by offering 95K or even maybe lower, which would suck honestly. Any advice appreciated on how to handle this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
Well ya already done hosed up (as you are aware) by providing a range. You can try to anchor based on salary benchmarks - you know that 100K CHF is on the low end for someone of your seniority, so if you say hey I know market rate for 10 years experience and a bachelors is 130K CHF, you might be able to negotiate to the high end of the range you provided. You almost certainly are not going to get more than 100K CHF no matter what you do, and since you already provided 95K and your BATNA is weak you probably shouldn't push overly hard. You can ask, but expect them to sit at 95K and tell you to take it or leave it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 14:48
|
|
|
Negotiate for x now and build a clause for more when you get your degree?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 17:23
|
|
|
SEKCobra posted:Negotiate for x now and build a clause for more when you get your degree? Dunno if it's the same for Switzerland, but there have been multiple times where I've seen people I worked with be promised a higher salary when they complete [x] undergrad/grad degree and then it mysteriously "not being able to happen" or "bad timing" when they actually complete their program.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
m0therfux0r posted:Dunno if it's the same for Switzerland, but there have been multiple times where I've seen people I worked with be promised a higher salary when they complete [x] undergrad/grad degree and then it mysteriously "not being able to happen" or "bad timing" when they actually complete their program. Then you don't want to work there anyway, and usually this doesn't happen if you are the one building that clause. You can also put it in the contract.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
m0therfux0r posted:Dunno if it's the same for Switzerland, but there have been multiple times where I've seen people I worked with be promised a higher salary when they complete [x] undergrad/grad degree and then it mysteriously "not being able to happen" or "bad timing" when they actually complete their program. Get the review clause in the contract, not just a verbal promise. It still doesn't guarantee that anything will come of it, but it gives you hard evidence to force the issue at least. If it's a job you want to take despite the potentially below-market salary, it sets up a timeline for a) the company to give you the raise/promotion and/or b) you to look for other alternatives with your new credentials. It really doesn't hurt anything and any reasonable company should be okay with it IMO. Worst case is that nothing happens, which is what will happen without the review anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 18:51
|
|
|
m0therfux0r posted:Dunno if it's the same for Switzerland, but there have been multiple times where I've seen people I worked with be promised a higher salary when they complete [x] undergrad/grad degree and then it mysteriously "not being able to happen" or "bad timing" when they actually complete their program. In most developed countries (US seems to be the primary exception), all job contracts are on paper. Even for McJobs you sign quite a bit of paperwork. This would be part of the paperwork and not left to goodwill.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
Submitted my counter offer on this new position a few grand higher than where I wanted to be, plus asked for two additional PTO days. They gave me my asking salary and five additional PTO days. I did give up having an immediate extra 5 days of PTO for the first year (that would not renew in subsequent years), but it seems like a better deal to get five extra days per year for as long as I'm with the company.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:50 |
|
|
I'm not sure this is the correct thread for this question so point me in the right direction if it isn't. I have been approached to do some moonlighting/freelance work for a company located in another state. It isn't the same work as my current career but I have 8 years experience in it's field. If the schedule/hours/delivery date is tenable, with maybe 2-3 hours a night and 8-10 hours on the weekend, I would consider taking it. Is there a rule of thumb for negotiating freelance work in contrast to full time with benefits? Back when I was doing that type of work I made $25-$27 an hour full time with benefits. In my new career I make more, but it isn't the same field. Should I base my rate on a percentage of my old rate or should I value my time based on my new salary? Also, are they're any red flags I should be looking out for when doing contract work for someone outside the state? (ie: if something goes south I can't walk in the front door) As you can tell this is new territory for me, but apparently now my skills are valuable. (who knew?) This is the second inquiry this week.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2018 15:04
|
|