Job Security - What is it worth?

[Terminal_Boy]

The only way to have any job security is to be in a very narrow field where your skills and experience are difficult to replace quickly.

It doesn't make you unsackable though.

 

[jon86]

... half the people in our company are on 'at will' contracts meaning they can be told at the end of the day not to come in tomorrow, or ever
...

That's the case for everyone in my US team, and possibly even every other American non-C-level employee.

 

[Rroff]

Rroff was referring to how companies deliberately let go of employees before the end of their two year contract so they don't have to keep them on as permanent employees, and how that might be seen as 'morally wrong'.

Unfortunately, in this day and age, you're only as good as your company thinks you are. I believe most companies have lost all sense of loyalty. They're not loyal to you, and you shouldn't necessarily be particularly loyal to them (anymore). Gone are the days of 'a job for life'*.

Went a bit deeper than that but the way the whole economy is run and the way companies operate more so than ever has no concern as to the individual.

Its not even about 2 year contracts - lots of places have changed how they deal with hiring staff so that the people they can't get rid of easily is kept to a minimum, i.e. the industry I work in typically filling a post was done with a 3 months fixed term contract as a trial with many people transitioning naturally from that to a permanent position over time, now no one gets close to enough time to have any real rights before they are gone, once they get close to a couple of years they are out the door and someone new brought in, repeat.

 

[pitchfork]

I'm also in the civil service, I have a job now but I don't doubt I could be axed same as anyone. If my project is suddenly not deemed cost effective or conducive to the strategy of the organization I could be out on my arse very soon.

Lots of people are on fixed term contracts and to be honest it's just crap for morale, most of them don't have their entire head in the job and they're always looking to leave and find open ended.

It is getting crap now, I like what we do for society but the fact is we're being expected to stretch an already small budget even further, stretch peoples working capacities without giving a payrise, screwing over pension funds and basically treating workers like crap.

I think the 11% payrise for politicians is still leaving a bitter taste with the 1% pay cap, strictly speaking everyone in the civil service has had a 25% pay cut in real terms.

The perceived laziness is nonsense, the people round here work just as hard if not harder than people I've encountered in private and third sector positions.

To me job security is very important, you don't work, you don't get money, you lose your hard earned savings, can't pay your bills and eventually go bankrupt. Job for life culture is dying in this country and it shouldn't be.

 

[lordrobs]

I've got the opposite problem, my employer won't let me leave despite giving my required notice period of 3 months because they are under the misconception that they can keep me to a specific date!

For many years I worked in positions that were purely reliant on the next pot of funding, real low point there was when the boss bailed for fear of funds drying up so I took up the gauntlet and squeezed another 5 years out of the organisation. During that time I was acutely aware of the lack of security of my job and it was a big factor at the time.

Now I'm in a sector where, in reality, people don't get sacked even if they are deemed inadequate at what they do. Job security is probably as high as you can expect today and guess what... I hate the job. What is very clear to me is that while job security is important job satisfaction is a far more important factor.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

It is getting crap now, I like what we do for society but the fact is we're being expected to stretch an already small budget even further, stretch peoples working capacities without giving a payrise, screwing over pension funds and basically treating workers like crap.

The perceived laziness is nonsense, the people round here work just as hard if not harder than people I've encountered in private and third sector positions.

I also work in the Civil Service, we are certainly being asked to deliver more, but there is an element of people not keeping there skills relevant.

As far as security goes, the direction changes with every election and could deemed surplus or privatised every 4 years which is something to ponder.

 

[Gornall]

I've always seen the idea of job security as a bit of an illusion as in reality there isn't much stopping a company getting rid of you when things turn sour. Those years of loyal service may mean a bigger redundancy payout but some places will happily take the hit to get some younger (cheaper) blood in the company.

My work is based on a client accepting an annually renewed contract so I'm a bit more at risk than others but a lot of people I know have moved to being a contractor or self employed after the recession cost them their jobs.

And should the company go into administration your 'security' is capped heavily so truthfully...you're only as secure as you are now. Tomorrow it can all change.

 

[FortuitousFluke]

I work in the public sector, I was hired 3.5 years ago as an admin assistant on £15k, currently on £19.5k and they're tripping over themselves to bump me up to £24.5k before I can jump ship to another employer. They seem very keen to retain me, I'm good at what I do and even at £24.5k they know they're getting me cheap but I still feel very fortunate to be in this position given the current climate and the cuts I've seen occur recently.

I put myself out to agencies a while back, just to tes the water. I was being offered £20k for bog standard admin work, that about 1/3 more than I was originally paid for that job in the public sector. Having said that my pension is still pretty good (no longer final salary but still competitive).

It's difficult to put a price on job security, I feel secure at the moment, but equally my earning potential in private sector would allow for a better quality of life. It's my job satisfaction keeping me here at the mo.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

I put myself out to agencies a while back, just to tes the water. I was being offered £20k for bog standard admin work, that about 1/3 more than I was originally paid for that job in the public sector. Having said that my pension is still pretty good (no longer final salary but still competitive).

Just done some Googling and some of the positions that I have done in the past that are all the same grade (and pay) seems to vary widely in private sector pay at both ends of the scale. It really depends on what you actually do.

 

[RedvGreen]

I'm also in the civil service, I have a job now but I don't doubt I could be axed same as anyone. If my project is suddenly not deemed cost effective or conducive to the strategy of the organization I could be out on my arse very soon.

Lots of people are on fixed term contracts and to be honest it's just crap for morale, most of them don't have their entire head in the job and they're always looking to leave and find open ended.

It is getting crap now, I like what we do for society but the fact is we're being expected to stretch an already small budget even further, stretch peoples working capacities without giving a payrise, screwing over pension funds and basically treating workers like crap.

I think the 11% payrise for politicians is still leaving a bitter taste with the 1% pay cap, strictly speaking everyone in the civil service has had a 25% pay cut in real terms.

The perceived laziness is nonsense, the people round here work just as hard if not harder than people I've encountered in private and third sector positions.

To me job security is very important, you don't work, you don't get money, you lose your hard earned savings, can't pay your bills and eventually go bankrupt. Job for life culture is dying in this country and it shouldn't be.

Sadly you're right and wrong on most points.

We (my team) have a mixed bag of 14 persons. Only 5 of them actually pull their weight whilst the others barely do the output of 20-30% of any of the others. The difficulty is that management didn't do anything, and worship the 9 who do very little.
As such, we have been judged on the overall output, so despite 5 of us breaking our backs, our individual attainments are diluted by the under-performance of the others.

We did receive modern and trend-setting experience and training, however that stopped after about 9 months. Since then, we've been told that our budget has been axed and we are lucky to retain staff, so just put up and shut up. Meanwhile, our management team have received 7% pay rise every year (inclusive of performance progression).

We do operate in a highly specialist engineering field of which there must be only about 5000-7000 people within our area internationally, so you'd confidently say that we should have security based on that. However our CEO adamantly refuses to acknowledge this (battle of wills), and treats us like plebians who are lucky to have a job, and he has the sword of Damocles above our necks. Meanwhile, in our teams, he recruits senior administrators on the same salary, if not higher than us, with no experience.

Blows to morale came in the changes to our contracts (from 4yr to 6month); the recruiting of trainees on the same salary that we are on (yet we were recruited as already masters of our profession); and the lack of respect shown to us by pretty much everyone.

 

[pitchfork]

We (my team) have a mixed bag of 14 persons. Only 5 of them actually pull their weight whilst the others barely do the output of 20-30% of any of the others. The difficulty is that management didn't do anything, and worship the 9 who do very little.
As such, we have been judged on the overall output, so despite 5 of us breaking our backs, our individual attainments are diluted by the under-performance of the others.

We did receive modern and trend-setting experience and training, however that stopped after about 9 months. Since then, we've been told that our budget has been axed and we are lucky to retain staff, so just put up and shut up. Meanwhile, our management team have received 7% pay rise every year (inclusive of performance progression).

Yeah but you get that anywhere, it's managements fault. Give the low output staff more work combined with appropriate training and they'll pull their weight or leave.

We do operate in a highly specialist engineering field of which there must be only about 5000-7000 people within our area internationally, so you'd confidently say that we should have security based on that. However our CEO adamantly refuses to acknowledge this (battle of wills), and treats us like plebians who are lucky to have a job, and he has the sword of Damocles above our necks. Meanwhile, in our teams, he recruits senior administrators on the same salary, if not higher than us, with no experience.

Blows to morale came in the changes to our contracts (from 4yr to 6month); the recruiting of trainees on the same salary that we are on (yet we were recruited as already masters of our profession); and the lack of respect shown to us by pretty much everyone.

There is a lot of useless management about it has to be said.

At least they recruit in your place, in here they often don't bother replacing staff once they're gone. It really annoys me because I know some of the places where they **** away the budget but they're all dead set in their ways and "We can't change that because we agreed with X we'd use the same system as them"

They could afford to do it anyway most of the time it's just laziness or tight fistedness.

 

[Judgeneo]

The public sector still has more job security than the private, even with the contract changes you guys are talking about.
The threat of loosing your job has increased, but the level of incompetence/productivity needed to lose your job still remains lower than most places in the private sector imo.

I consult/contract into a couple of large private sector bodies, and in one of them our team was told that we are working too many hours. I've been doing around 48 hours a week, which is admittedly a bit excessive, but it is less than what I was doing occasionally working for private sector/foreign governments, who didn't bat an eyelid at the working hours.

 

[Schlong&Stable]

I think the 11% payrise for politicians is still leaving a bitter taste with the 1% pay cap, strictly speaking everyone in the civil service has had a 25% pay cut in real terms.

In fairness to the politicians, I think most (including the government) wanted to axe the pay-rise. Cameron was quite outspoken on the issue. But, they handed the decision making over to an independent authority and cannot easily go back on that as some MP's who are not independently wealthy are unhappy with their salary. Which, for a London based worker is not actually that high.

 

[pitchfork]

In fairness to the politicians, I think most (including the government) wanted to axe the pay-rise. Cameron was quite outspoken on the issue. But, they handed the decision making over to an independent authority and cannot easily go back on that as some MP's who are not independently wealthy are unhappy with their salary. Which, for a London based worker is not actually that high.

Them being against it was just PR rubbish, they were all rubbing their hands together at heart.

And the few who aren't wealthy, so what? My wages are absolutely garbage compared to what I was on in the private sector.

I chose to join the civil service because I give a damn about the cause. Just as politicians should be politicians because they give a damn about the people in this country - not because they want to get a big old pay packet, a free house on expenses and a cushy job doing sod all in Europe after a few years.

If they were so against it why aren't they giving the 11% back to the government or to charity?

 

[D.P.]

That isn't what redundancy is for - you're supposed to make a role redundant not a person. If you're paying someone too much then your HR dept has screwed up and you'll just have to suck it up by limiting future pay increases. You're not supposed to be able to make a role redundant and then employ someone in the same role again... you either need that role or you don't - if you want to get rid of the specific employee occupying that role because they're bad at it then redundancy isn't designed for that... performance reviews etc.. then eventually sacking them is the process to take.

It is illegal but companies do it all the time. The main thing they do is change job titles but hire someone to do the same stuff.

 

[D.P.]

Not supposed to be able to do it but companies do.

I've seen it happen a few times, last one was to get rid of a guy who wasn't performing as expected. They then created a new role with a different name but same duties.

I'm sure some companies do take care of their employees but the majority seem happy to screw you over.

Yeah, thuis us the most common reason in the UK. Underperforming staff and fear of litigation for unfair dismissal. You bypass that by makings he role redundant and hiring g a replacement with a different title.

 

[D.P.]

Working in the US, 'lol job security' is the name of the day, half the people in our company are on 'at will' contracts meaning they can be told at the end of the day not to come in tomorrow, or ever

On the other hand, I have on a number of occasions seen the flipside where employees have got new jobs and said 'hey today is my last day btw see ya!' and enjoyed watching the chaos unfold

Yeah, it goes both ways but it is funny how the employers never seem to think people will just walk out.

I have a 24hr contractual notice period.

 

[R4z0r]

We do operate in a highly specialist engineering field of which there must be only about 5000-7000 people within our area internationally, so you'd confidently say that we should have security based on that. However our CEO adamantly refuses to acknowledge this (battle of wills), and treats us like plebians who are lucky to have a job, and he has the sword of Damocles above our necks. Meanwhile, in our teams, he recruits senior administrators on the same salary, if not higher than us, with no experience.

Is it possible to move jobs? because if not, it unfortunately doesn't really matter how rare your skill set is if nobody needs it ...

 

[HangTime]

I think job security is generally overrated unless you actually NEED it i.e:
-Limited savings to fall back on
-Tied to an area with poor local jobs market within your field of expertise
-Currently overpaid relative to your skills and/or job (i.e. 'punching above your weight')
-Current job comes with very good benefits package
-Economy is in a particularly bad state with lots of competition for jobs
-Generally lacking in skills/experience/qualifications etc (so probably more important for young people who may have potential but cannot prove it)

My attitude has always been to view losing my job as an opportunity i.e. go out there and find something better, taking advantage of time off for interviews etc while under threat of redundancy, and pocketing any cash that comes your way.

 

[Puzzled]

While your young job security isn't too much of a concern, as you say see it as an opportunity and get something better.

However as you get older that becomes harder and harder to do, over 50's have a hell of a hard time finding employment at the minute.