May 19, 2011 at 1:01 pm
Craig Farrell (5/19/2011)
Interesting discussion.There are really only three reasons to work. To get paid, to volunteer to those less fortunate or educated, or to try to better yourself or your surrounds. Anything else as a reason for working is simply to help find enjoyment or satisfaction while you're there. We work to gain, or to assuage our guilt that we've gained and another hasn't.
I work for money. I don't work because it's fun, it makes me happy, or that I derive a sense of satisfaction from my completed project. It's to get *paid*. Nothing more. Now, if the other options come into play, even better.
+1
May 19, 2011 at 3:34 pm
GSquared (5/19/2011)
Can your boss arbitrarily sell you to a different employer,
thats a pretty good description of outsourcing someone (or a department) 🙂
and you will be hunted down and killed if you refuse to go along with it?
No, but you will be considered to have voluntarily resigned.
Note - I am not agreeing with the slavery comparison here!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
May 19, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Ive only skimmed the comments but as far as I can see no one has mentioned inflation. Inflation typically runs at around 2.5% in a healthy economy (that is the generally accepted target of central banks, treasuries everywhere). This means that is you get a 2.5% pay rise you are no better off than you were the year before. In fact you are probably slightly worse off in terms of actual spending power because CPI calculations tend to underestimate the actual cost of living. So a 2.5% increase is what you should expect as a matter of course, unless you are underperforming.
As for the wage slave debate I would like to point out that there are two ways to conceive of freedom: negative freedom - in which you are free of constraints, this is the usual way of understanding freedom, and positive freedom - in which you have the capability and power to carry out your wishes.
People who feel like 'wage slaves' feel constrained in the second sense. They are certainly not owned by theie employer, but are often prevented from moving to better employment by things like lack of time for self improvement, low wages, or the difficulty of moving a family from one place to another. Employers often use these constraints, or even select people who they know will be constrained, to keep wages lower than they would be in a truly free market.
May 20, 2011 at 3:30 am
mtucker-732014 (5/19/2011)
...People who feel like 'wage slaves' feel constrained in the second sense. They are certainly not owned by theie employer, but are often prevented from moving to better employment by things like lack of time for self improvement, low wages, or the difficulty of moving a family from one place to another. Employers often use these constraints, or even select people who they know will be constrained, to keep wages lower than they would be in a truly free market...
...and of course employees never abuse a situation to their own advantage at the company's expense, do they.
A little flippant, I know, but a contract between employer and employee is no more one-sided than most other contracts. Both parties want something and both parties want to maximise the net gain from the relationship. Sometimes one or both sides will try morally questionable tactics, sometimes not. If one side is afraid of rocking the boat for fear of losing what they have, that's not slavery; it's just a recognition that there is still considerable benefit from the partnership. What's more, unlike slavery, when the costs for one side outweigh the benefits, they'll terminate that contract. It might not be an easy choice, but it's a choice nonetheless.
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
May 20, 2011 at 8:18 am
and some companies know some people are not motivated by a %3 increase, but can be motivated by more intimate incentives.
May 20, 2011 at 8:23 am
majorbloodnock (5/19/2011)
Without making it complicated by compounding the raises...
...except that that's the important bit. The incentives in the short term are fairly small, but the compounding really starts to kick in later on. After 5 years, if you can maintain your "top dog" raises, your salary will be just 15% greater than the bench-warmer's, and after 10 years it'll be about a third greater. However, at 14 years you're earning a full 50% more than them, and at 25 years you've doubled your salary compared with them.
Sounds good in theory......except I've never seen or heard of anywhere that would allow this scenario, as everyone has a salary cap that would hit before getting that 3% for 10years let alone 25. In theory this hard worker would get a position promotion with a higher salary and the comparison would no longer apply. Then again we all know that promotions aren't always based on performance.
Bottom line - don't work for the highest $$. My highest paying jobs have been the worst. I don't think that's coincidental, I think they know the job stinks so they pay more. I decided to go for a better job fit that also provides me opportunity to grow professionally (ie learn/improve skill sets). I'm not sure I'm in the perfect position for me yet, but I am happier than with past jobs.
May 20, 2011 at 8:48 am
jmadsen 98862 (5/20/2011)
Bottom line - don't work for the highest $$. My highest paying jobs have been the worst. I don't think that's coincidental, I think they know the job stinks so they pay more. I decided to go for a better job fit that also provides me opportunity to grow professionally (ie learn/improve skill sets). I'm not sure I'm in the perfect position for me yet, but I am happier than with past jobs.
Here, here. My highest paying job, over 100K in the 90s, was my worst job. The high pay seemed to make management think that abuse was OK in terms of expectations and hours.
Better to trim your budget, live on 10% less and have a job that suits you more.
May 20, 2011 at 9:26 am
jmadsen 98862 (5/20/2011)
majorbloodnock (5/19/2011)
Without making it complicated by compounding the raises...
...except that that's the important bit. The incentives in the short term are fairly small, but the compounding really starts to kick in later on. After 5 years, if you can maintain your "top dog" raises, your salary will be just 15% greater than the bench-warmer's, and after 10 years it'll be about a third greater. However, at 14 years you're earning a full 50% more than them, and at 25 years you've doubled your salary compared with them.
Sounds good in theory......except I've never seen or heard of anywhere that would allow this scenario, as everyone has a salary cap that would hit before getting that 3% for 10years let alone 25. In theory this hard worker would get a position promotion with a higher salary and the comparison would no longer apply.
Since I mentioned in my earlier post that the comparison would be between your current situation and where you would otherwise have been, I'd say the comparison is still valid. In gauging where their effort has taken them, people will often look at how many rungs they've moved up the ladder as well as how much their salary has gone up. The important point is that a fairly small change at the end of one year may seem insignificant, but if you maintain it, it's a different rate of acceleration. Of course other things change in that time, but even if the fiscal benefit is obscured, it'll have all sorts of other knock-on benefits like, as you say, knocking on the promotion door earlier than might otherwise have been the case.
Then again we all know that promotions aren't always based on performance.
Agreed, but good performance is far less likely to damage your promotion prospects than bad.
Bottom line - don't work for the highest $$. My highest paying jobs have been the worst. I don't think that's coincidental, I think they know the job stinks so they pay more. I decided to go for a better job fit that also provides me opportunity to grow professionally (ie learn/improve skill sets). I'm not sure I'm in the perfect position for me yet, but I am happier than with past jobs.
Someone once told me that after you've got to the point where you're earning enough to cover the necessities, any more is just a way of keeping the score. Personally, I'm not materialistic enough to chase money for the hell of it, and certainly not competitive enough to compare my performance with other peoples. However, I do like to ensure I'm fairly recognised for any benefit I can provide.
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
May 20, 2011 at 9:27 am
I do feel your pain. That's how employers lose the true valued employees.
On the flip side, I would say, all your efforts will be paid, sooner or later, there or somewhere. And the process is fun if you really like what you do daily.
Work for your satisfactions not the number. And eventually the number will come to you.
May 20, 2011 at 10:08 am
aaron-403220 (5/19/2011)
The compounding of the incentives sounds really great but most companies will have an upper limit to a salary so you might have a difficult time achieving the 'full 50% more' than your colleague even if the company raises the upper limit on a regular basis.
I know many IT professionals making over $200,000 a year. Sure they are in the top tier but they are NOT the very smartest people I know. They work hard, they get tons of education and certs and continuously go after new technology. They run hard all the time and reap the benefits. They engage in social media, blog, vlog, attend tech events and get into what they are doing.
If you see a limit where you are and hit the limit, it is probably time to find the next company/position. I interviewed for 4 positions well into the lower $100K's, all of them Senior SQL DBA positions and I am pretty sure many people on this forum have more experience than me. I first touched SQL about 11 years ago and my full time experience on SQL is about 6 years. I would be hard pressed to be awesome in the first 3-6 months if I took one of these positions, but I would step up my game and rise to the occasion as I always do. One thing some people are afraid of is to step in over their head. I do this all the time, struggle for the first 6 months, get a handle and then shine. Push yourself because you CAN do it if you will take the chance. Worst thing that happens is that you fail and have to go back to the previous level. Sure that sucks but why not try? At least you will know what it takes to get to the next level.
And I won't even address the slavery comments directly... no comparison whatsoever. Give up your entitlement mentality, pull yourself up by the bootstraps and create your destiny. Get a mentor. Start with me if necessary. Find someone who is working where you want to be and see if they will help you do a roadmap. That is how I am doing my MCM track. I know someone who made it through MCM and I know 2 more people who have been accepted to the program and are going this rotation. (All three work in my company btw, I am surrounded by excellence, a great place to excel). I have mentored dozens of people through MCSA, MCSE and MCITP tracks, including plotting their ongoing career path and making employment options.
GET A MENTOR 😀 and succeed, regardless of your line of work.
(edit) but don't forget that no money is worth a job you hate. Make sure you are chasing something that inspires you. For me, it has been SQL recently, but Lync is starting to look fun, too...
Peter Trast
Microsoft Certified ...(insert many literal strings here)
Microsoft Design Architect with Alexander Open Systems
May 20, 2011 at 10:10 am
Craig Farrell (5/19/2011)
Interesting discussion....I have to go get it.
Hear, Hear! Well said.
Peter Trast
Microsoft Certified ...(insert many literal strings here)
Microsoft Design Architect with Alexander Open Systems
May 20, 2011 at 2:51 pm
3% difference? Getting a 5% annual raise would be fantastic. Haven't seen too many of those. 1% is typically the cap at places I have worked.
The last place had no cost of living or performance raise for anybody - and they were doing quite well.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
May 20, 2011 at 6:44 pm
SQLRNNR (5/20/2011)
3% difference? Getting a 5% annual raise would be fantastic. Haven't seen too many of those. 1% is typically the cap at places I have worked.The last place had no cost of living or performance raise for anybody - and they were doing quite well.
Counting my bonuses this year, I have averaged almost 15% a year over the last 9 years (yes I started fairly low but higher than the national average yearly income), and I expect that trend to continue and start to plateau over the next 2 or 3 years. Sounds crazy I know but I have had 3 people I personally know do even better than this. I realize this is unusual but half of that is very possible for anyone who really wants it and makes the effort and difficult choices. It is almost impossible to do staying in one place so you must be willing to trade job security for taking chances and hope to find a place you want to stay when you hit those better numbers. Most people probably cannot or will not take the stress.
You must choose. Get a mentor 🙂
Peter Trast
Microsoft Certified ...(insert many literal strings here)
Microsoft Design Architect with Alexander Open Systems
May 26, 2011 at 8:24 am
Ha ha ha Lehman brothers secured everyone at my organisation in the uk a 0.1% pay rise and our funding body (governement run) advised a 0% rise for all staff.
May 26, 2011 at 3:17 pm
david.murden (5/26/2011)
Ha ha ha Lehman brothers secured everyone at my organisation in the uk a 0.1% pay rise and our funding body (governement run) advised a 0% rise for all staff.
Lucky you...:blink:
Peter Trast
Microsoft Certified ...(insert many literal strings here)
Microsoft Design Architect with Alexander Open Systems
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 44 (of 44 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply