May 23, 2011 at 12:04 pm
I certainly agree that you try Andy's suggestions first. But also that you be (very) prepared for somebody to give you a thousand reasons why, regardless of your performance, it just won't happen. I just am concerened aboutthe overall tenor of the article as it gets everyone so focused on such incremental gains...I mean really...C'mon...Think bigger, do better.
May 23, 2011 at 12:51 pm
PhilDaniels (5/23/2011)
I certainly agree that you try Andy's suggestions first. But also that you be (very) prepared for somebody to give you a thousand reasons why, regardless of your performance, it just won't happen. I just am concerened aboutthe overall tenor of the article as it gets everyone so focused on such incremental gains...I mean really...C'mon...Think bigger, do better.
Your viewpoint has merit only to a certain set of circumstances Phil. Here we have to strongly disagree. Yes, big leaps for ME (and apparently you) was the goal. It's also frought with risk. I was out of work for over 13 months at one point. Imagine having kids to feed and doing that.
The incremental gain is common in FTE positions, and is more stable. I'm not saying you shouldn't try for more, but the 2-5% routine is very common for long term positions. Getting it on the other hand can be something you have to work rather hard at.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
May 23, 2011 at 1:12 pm
To my point, 2%-5% is not a raise, it isn't even a cost-of-living adjustment. Let's say you are an $80K/year employee. Your take-home is about 65% of that ($52K), after taxes. A 5% raise translates to $2,600/yr or $216/mo or $108/paycheck. Now, you can quibble with the tax-rate, or my math (:-)), but it's hard to see how that 'raise' is anything but incremental.
And I have a wife and kids, too...so let's leave all that aside, thank you.
May 23, 2011 at 1:32 pm
PhilDaniels (5/23/2011)
To my point, 2%-5% is not a raise, it isn't even a cost-of-living adjustment. Let's say you are an $80K/year employee. Your take-home is about 65% of that ($52K), after taxes. A 5% raise translates to $2,600/yr or $216/mo or $108/paycheck. Now, you can quibble with the tax-rate, or my math (:-)), but it's hard to see how that 'raise' is anything but incremental.
True enough, but let's take a job shift example. Unless you're upgrading positions because your original employer didn't have space ( say going from a SQL II to a SQL III), you're usually not going to negotiate much higher of a raise anyway.
Let's take your average II round these parts, which is about 55-60k/yr. There's a few employers around here who will pay top dollar for a II, mostly because they will abuse their employees. That's around 65k/yr. All prices local, I realize it depends on where you are.
So, from 55k/yr to 65k/yr, you've gotten yourself a 18% raise. You've tossed yourself into a new environment, lost any seniority or build up on your vacation/sick time, and possibly 401k matching and vestment. You also shouldn't expect a raise for the next year or two, and you've hit top of the market, there's nowhere to go without doing an expertise jump.
Yet over those next two years, lets say you were getting your 5%, so you've gotten about 11% of a raise (compounding), you've kept your 'extras' and possibly gained more, and are still comfortable. It's a tradeoff.
And I have a wife and kids, too...so let's leave all that aside, thank you.
I'll set it aside with one additional comment. You're right that it can be made to work, but not everyone has that level of confidence and will eat a lot of crow for the security.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
May 23, 2011 at 1:56 pm
Yours are all good points...no question about. I have chosen to live in an area (I-95 corridor on East Coast) where I can mitigate some of the risks you mention and pretty quickly went from SQL DBA/Developer type into the DW/BI arena. I've been fortunate, thus far, and do not take it for granted.
The DBA skill sets of problem-solving by working backwards, playing "what's different here?", and being proactive about monitoring are all skills that serve one very well in DW and BI. I realize, this isn't for everyone, but the top-end is much higher and it allows you to stretch a bit more.
My two cents...
May 23, 2011 at 1:57 pm
Personally, I would love to be making enough money where an extra couple hundred dollars a month doesn't mean anything. I do agree that 2% is more of a cost of living adjustment but it's rare that inflation is high enough, at least in the US, that a 5% raise isn't more than cost of living. I'm not sure I really thing that across the board regular raises higher than that are sustainable on a yearly basis. At 80k a 10% raise would have you making over 128k in five years. Almost 50,000 more in just five years? At 5% it's still over 102k which is a comfortable amount more.
May 23, 2011 at 2:28 pm
Craig Farrell (5/23/2011)
Steve, I agree with you it's not a tactic you should use often, but if you dealt with that every 3 to 5 years and the person wasn't getting any raises otherwise, would you still feel it was someone to cut loose? Yes, every 6 months is a bit much.
It would depend. Is business down? You might not get a raise in 3-5 years, but if no one else is, that may be life. If you owned the business and business was down, you wouldn't be getting a raise either.
We can debate different situations, but the way to do about this is to talk first. Talk about wanting a raise, giving reasons why you deserve it, and moving forward on an equal footing. Most managers I've know, and know, relate to that. They can't always do something about it, but they aren't offended by the conversation. However going to find a job and then using that as leverage is a bit offensive, and to me, a little rude.
Now if the manager won't talk about raises and doesn't believe you are worth it, perhaps finding another offer makes sense. Be prepared to take it, though.
May 23, 2011 at 2:33 pm
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (5/23/2011)
We can debate different situations, but the way to do about this is to talk first. Talk about wanting a raise, giving reasons why you deserve it, and moving forward on an equal footing. Most managers I've know, and know, relate to that. They can't always do something about it, but they aren't offended by the conversation. However going to find a job and then using that as leverage is a bit offensive, and to me, a little rude.
Fair enough, thanks for the insight.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
May 23, 2011 at 2:38 pm
PhilDaniels (5/23/2011)
To my point, 2%-5% is not a raise, it isn't even a cost-of-living adjustment. Let's say you are an $80K/year employee. Your take-home is about 65% of that ($52K), after taxes. A 5% raise translates to $2,600/yr or $216/mo or $108/paycheck. Now, you can quibble with the tax-rate, or my math (:-)), but it's hard to see how that 'raise' is anything but incremental.
Your math is sound, but your reasoning isn't. A raise is a raise, and $2,600 a year means different things to different people. There are plenty of IT workers out there that like their jobs, and they want to keep them. Getting 5% a year isn't a bad deal for them.
If it's not for you, that's fine, but I wouldn't knock someone else for being perfectly satisfied with 2-5% raises over time.
May 23, 2011 at 3:31 pm
My reasoning is perfectly sound...Core inflation is over 3% and excludes gasoline and food prices. Add those in, and inflation goes to about 7%. So, it is a perfectly reasonable statment that 2%-5% is not a raise...Its barely a COLA. That said, why do you seem so hard-pressed to convince people that it is adequate?
Also, I've clarified a few times that one SHOULD talk first, and use a heavier stick later, but you are insinuating that I've said people should use the stick first. This isn't the case.
I'm simply suggesting that people put themselves in a position to get what they are worth, while you continue to tamp down expectations. That meme sounds like an apologia. Why is that?
May 24, 2011 at 10:56 am
PhilDaniels (5/23/2011)
My reasoning is perfectly sound...Core inflation is over 3% and excludes gasoline and food prices. Add those in, and inflation goes to about 7%. So, it is a perfectly reasonable statment that 2%-5% is not a raise...Its barely a COLA.
I agree with your reasoning... with one qualification: the 5% raise is a joke for a truly competent person who always excels and always shows up for work. Not everyone is competent that way, so perhaps a 2% - 5% raise may be sufficient for them.
I don't understand the meaning of mediocre and always put for forth 110% ... and yes, I'm worth more than 5%.... anytime anywhere.
The probability of survival is inversely proportional to the angle of arrival.
May 24, 2011 at 11:42 am
PhilDaniels (5/23/2011)
My reasoning is perfectly sound...Core inflation is over 3% and excludes gasoline and food prices. Add those in, and inflation goes to about 7%. So, it is a perfectly reasonable statment that 2%-5% is not a raise...Its barely a COLA. That said, why do you seem so hard-pressed to convince people that it is adequate?Also, I've clarified a few times that one SHOULD talk first, and use a heavier stick later, but you are insinuating that I've said people should use the stick first. This isn't the case.
I'm simply suggesting that people put themselves in a position to get what they are worth, while you continue to tamp down expectations. That meme sounds like an apologia. Why is that?
I'm not sure where inflation figures come from or how they're averaged over regions/countries, but using the 'rule of 72' (72/x% annual rate is the number of years to double the principal), I calculate local inflation to be around 10% annually. Over the last 7 years, my non-discretionary expenses have approximately doubled. It doesn't matter whether I look at rent or house prices, cost of shelter has more than doubled, with food and fuel not far behind.
To make matters worse, wages no longer seem to be negotiable. There was a time when I never had any problem getting a few extra percent here or some extra vacation days there. Now it seems that no employer is willing to even talk about those things and some act as though I'm overstepping some boundary just raising the issue.
May 24, 2011 at 1:10 pm
Hey, Ron...Thanks for the response.
For some reason, United States Federal Reserve excludes Food and Oil/Gasoline from its "core inflation" rate. Critics note, as you do, that it is nonsense to exclude those items form the core inflation rate, since everybody needs to eat and (usually) get to work.
May 24, 2011 at 1:19 pm
Oh, and I completely agree with your second point about how the dynamic seems to have changed...That "imaginary boundary" you mention...I tend to think that we have a skewed vision of work-life balance in this country. Some companies are quite good about this. Others; they'll take as much as they can get....
May 24, 2011 at 1:53 pm
PhilDaniels (5/24/2011)
I tend to think that we have a skewed vision of work-life balance in this country. Some companies are quite good about this. Others; they'll take as much as they can get....
I've seen this quite a bit. Both with myself and others at various places.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 32 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply