June 5, 2015 at 2:58 pm
I saw this the other day and thought it was kind of funny.
Man Celebrates Raise Company Will Eventually Use To Justify Firing Him
http://www.theonion.com/article/man-celebrates-raise-company-will-eventually-use-j-50485
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 7, 2015 at 2:18 pm
HR = Human Resources. If I am going to buy (hire) a resource then both I as a manager and the future employee both have an acceptable range in mind. I am not going to tell anyone what that range is and I don't want existing employees giving the game away. It weakens my negotiating position.
I can think of three occasions where revealing the salary has caused immense damage. In two cases under performing individuals were being paid more than the highest performing individual in their respective fields. Good staff left when that came to light.
In another cases a high performing individual found out that they were paid far less than their peers and in some cases the people they were paid to manage. No one likes to be played for a mug and especially when they have their nose publicly rubbed in it by broadcasting salaries.
You could argue that the imbalance should never have existed but life isn't fair, get over it.
June 8, 2015 at 3:15 am
My thoughts on the issue of salary:
If salaries are to be revealed for one, they are to be revealed for all. As with others who work in public services, the salary bands are public. They don't seem to have a problem with this public info. However, introducing this openness where a culture of secrecy had existed beforehand is not easy.
Secondly, the whole situation at work as well as the spending power has to be taken into consideration. There comes a point where one can live quite comfortably, so long as you don't have any expensive hobbies. I work for a very agreeable company. We get a 5-day training course per year. I have an electric bike at my disposal. My colleagues at work are friendly, supportive and interesting. The company is very understanding of family commitments — sick children, injured children and so on. If my wife wants to attend a symposium, then it is usually no problem for me take time off to mind the children in her absence. She works part-time too. Indeed, when I was looking for a job in the first place, they had no problem with me working part-time so that I may spend time at home with the children. Sure, I could find a higher salary elsewhere, but I'm not sure if I would be better off.
June 8, 2015 at 7:29 am
Alan.B (6/4/2015)
I had boss once, a VP, who was not all that bright and he would share his Outlook calendar; nothing wrong with that - we all shared our calendars (and kept some meetings private). The problem was that he would sometimes meet with other VPs and attach documents to those appointments that he intended to discuss. On a couple occasions he attached a spreadsheet with people's salaries (including his own). Once word got out pretty much everyone looked at it and It was a disaster, a complete disaster. It completely changed the dynamic in the office. Any animosity that existed between co-workers was magnified 10-fold.I have always been against sharing salary information and this experience confirmed why it's a terrible idea.
Posting the salaries of public employees is fine because we, as tax payers, pay those salaries. Private company salary information should be always be private and employees should be discouraged from disclosing this info. I support that fully. It's nobody's business.
Edit: fixed errors, android auto-fix screwed me again.
I totally agree.
June 8, 2015 at 7:34 am
Sean Redmond (6/8/2015)
Secondly, the whole situation at work as well as the spending power has to be taken into consideration. There comes a point where one can live quite comfortably, so long as you don't have any expensive hobbies. I work for a very agreeable company. We get a 5-day training course per year. I have an electric bike at my disposal. My colleagues at work are friendly, supportive and interesting. The company is very understanding of family commitments — sick children, injured children and so on. If my wife wants to attend a symposium, then it is usually no problem for me take time off to mind the children in her absence. She works part-time too. Indeed, when I was looking for a job in the first place, they had no problem with me working part-time so that I may spend time at home with the children. Sure, I could find a higher salary elsewhere, but I'm not sure if I would be better off.
Well said. I'm in a similar situation in that my boss is very flexible. If you have something you need to get done, they're flexible with time off and working hours and let you work from home, albeit limited, if needed. This is one of those intangible benefits that is so very nice to have and I would certainly miss it if it were gone.
June 8, 2015 at 7:34 am
Sean Redmond (6/8/2015)
If salaries are to be revealed for one, they are to be revealed for all.
I appreciate the sentiment but someone might use such sentiments for justification to reveal salaries. I maintain that my peers, my subordinates, and even my direct supervisor simply don't need to know my salary and I don't need to know theirs.
--Jeff Moden
June 8, 2015 at 7:55 am
David.Poole (6/7/2015)
HR = Human Resources. If I am going to buy (hire) a resource then both I as a manager and the future employee both have an acceptable range in mind. I am not going to tell anyone what that range is and I don't want existing employees giving the game away. It weakens my negotiating position.I can think of three occasions where revealing the salary has caused immense damage. In two cases under performing individuals were being paid more than the highest performing individual in their respective fields. Good staff left when that came to light.
In another cases a high performing individual found out that they were paid far less than their peers and in some cases the people they were paid to manage. No one likes to be played for a mug and especially when they have their nose publicly rubbed in it by broadcasting salaries.
You could argue that the imbalance should never have existed but life isn't fair, get over it.
If some drama errupts within the workplace because a couple of high performing employees discover they are paid less than a couple of other new or lower performing (in their personal opinion) employees, then I would place the blame primarily on HR, the immediate supervisor, or whomever else was in the performance review and compensation chain of command. Compensation is a strategic executive decision.
It's not just an issue of minimizing the organization's operational expenses and bottom line, but compensation is a tool for use in talent aquisition and retention. If executive management wants to get stingy with salaries and senior level employees walk out the door for more pay, then it's a failure on the part of executive management. To blame the whole thing on break room chat is a lack of ownership and accountability for what's essentially poor executive decision making.
I don't think that the government should regulate the pay scale process, and I don't think that managment is behaving unethically when they pay the same employees different rates. It's their perogative. However, just like any other executive level decision, if it ultimately doesn't work out in the best interests of the organization, then they should be held accountable for making a bad call.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 8, 2015 at 8:01 am
Jeff, would you decline an offer from a company that publishes all salaries?
June 8, 2015 at 8:07 am
Andy Warren (6/8/2015)
Jeff, would you decline an offer from a company that publishes all salaries?
Yes. I haven't had to though because I research the companies that I apply to and avoid those that have such traits.
--Jeff Moden
June 8, 2015 at 8:12 am
Does that mean you wouldn't take a government job either?
412-977-3526 call/text
June 8, 2015 at 8:12 am
Jeff Moden (6/8/2015)
Andy Warren (6/8/2015)
Jeff, would you decline an offer from a company that publishes all salaries?Yes.
Even if the company were financially stable, the IT projects interesting, and the published salaries where 30% higher than what your current employer allows?
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
June 8, 2015 at 8:25 am
Eric M Russell (6/8/2015)
Jeff Moden (6/8/2015)
Andy Warren (6/8/2015)
Jeff, would you decline an offer from a company that publishes all salaries?Yes.
Even if the company were financially stable, the IT projects interesting, and the published salaries where 30% higher than what your current employer allows?
Yes. I've turned down a couple of offers for similar "cultural mistakes".
--Jeff Moden
June 8, 2015 at 8:27 am
robert.sterbal 56890 (6/8/2015)
Does that mean you wouldn't take a government job either?
Yes.
June 8, 2015 at 8:33 am
robert.sterbal 56890 (6/8/2015)
Does that mean you wouldn't take a government job either?
I've been in the military, I've worked for a DOD company, and I've had regular dealings with the military since I got out. I've also had to work with State and Local governments before. Everyone has a breaking point when they're out of a job and down on their luck but I'd rather not work for them as an FTE even if the salaries were treated as classified material.
--Jeff Moden
June 8, 2015 at 8:38 am
Does that mean you wouldn't take a government job either?
There's plenty of other reasons not to take a government job.
There's also a pretty fundamental difference between government jobs which work off fixed pay scales with fixed pay rate increases vs private industry with large pay ranges and merit based increases/bonuses.
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 106 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply