Different pay scales in work.
- Thread starter cu3ed
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,924
Yes, agreed.
Soldato
Having weak ass negotiating skills is also down to the individual. Having bills to pay is a fine motivator, however.
As an employer it’s interesting reading this. We have been bad for doing deals in the past but it is hard when different people have different skills sets, ages, experience and lengths of service.
I’ve got several situations going on that I need to deal with this week and it’s not easy.
1. A guy left after 10 years and us having paid him over 500 times over 10 years without fail (they never ever seem to have any respect for this. Creating one persons wage is difficult never mind 500 times just for one person out of a team). He left because i called him out on his attitude and lack of respect for training and rather than take 4 weeks to improve he left. He was consistently adamant (coming back on topic) that he was as good as a guy who was 25 years his senior and could do more variations on the work we do and should get paid the same. Now he’s left the the guy who worked directly under him is wanting at least what the guy whose left was getting despite him having less experience.
2. A new guy coming in from another company angling for a wage that’s above everyone else’s. He might be exactly what we need but do I offer him what he’s after, take a risk on how good he really is and risk loads of issues with other staff and there pay or offer him less and he goes elsewhere?
One guy above said that you need to come at it from an angle of wanting to take more responsibility and offering more to the business and that’s not something I see a lot of. Offer to take ownership of some of the businesses problems and see what reaction that gets.
Paying someone more because they have kids. Well that’s pretty outrageous to be fair. I do understand that kids cost money and that your “job” doesn’t stop when you get home potentially due to kids but in most cases they are a life choice?
I’ve heard some companies have skill cards for individual employees in clear view of everyone else and a higher skill card justifies there higher pay?
I think some of the people in this thread saying there going to leave if they don’t get the pay they want need to get a bit of a reality check. How about try and be better and try that first? Offer to up-skill / cross train etc. It doesn’t matter if you move if you don’t get better your also likely to get found out. I get there are some very unscrupulous bosses/managers out there but those aside simply blaming the people above you for your pay situation is potentially not reasonable.
I’ve got several situations going on that I need to deal with this week and it’s not easy.
1. A guy left after 10 years and us having paid him over 500 times over 10 years without fail (they never ever seem to have any respect for this. Creating one persons wage is difficult never mind 500 times just for one person out of a team). He left because i called him out on his attitude and lack of respect for training and rather than take 4 weeks to improve he left. He was consistently adamant (coming back on topic) that he was as good as a guy who was 25 years his senior and could do more variations on the work we do and should get paid the same. Now he’s left the the guy who worked directly under him is wanting at least what the guy whose left was getting despite him having less experience.
2. A new guy coming in from another company angling for a wage that’s above everyone else’s. He might be exactly what we need but do I offer him what he’s after, take a risk on how good he really is and risk loads of issues with other staff and there pay or offer him less and he goes elsewhere?
One guy above said that you need to come at it from an angle of wanting to take more responsibility and offering more to the business and that’s not something I see a lot of. Offer to take ownership of some of the businesses problems and see what reaction that gets.
Paying someone more because they have kids. Well that’s pretty outrageous to be fair. I do understand that kids cost money and that your “job” doesn’t stop when you get home potentially due to kids but in most cases they are a life choice?
I’ve heard some companies have skill cards for individual employees in clear view of everyone else and a higher skill card justifies there higher pay?
I think some of the people in this thread saying there going to leave if they don’t get the pay they want need to get a bit of a reality check. How about try and be better and try that first? Offer to up-skill / cross train etc. It doesn’t matter if you move if you don’t get better your also likely to get found out. I get there are some very unscrupulous bosses/managers out there but those aside simply blaming the people above you for your pay situation is potentially not reasonable.
Last edited:
This is one of the dumbest thing's I've read in a while. You deserve more money because of your life choices? You genuinely believe this? Reminds me of that government poll where people were saying "give us 15 free hours of childcare per week", except it isn't free, it's paid for by tax payers who don't have kids.
Soldato
Train them to do it slightly wrong while looking for a new job. Ensure that you leave before the new starter is up to speed.
I'm really not sure where you're coming from there - in plenty of companies payroll is handled by some admin bod in some office tucked away near finance/HR. I'm not sure what you mean by "have any respect" for the fact an employer has paid the agreed wage on time? Not failing to pay employees is what you're supposed to do.
I dunno if you're familiar with a certain well known/controversial Chris Rock set (google "Chris rock Black people vs") but in that set he mentions a certain subset of people wanting credit for things they're supposed to do. I'm sorry but an employer talking about the fact the paid their employee what they owed them on time during the course of their employment seems like something along those lines!
Like a skills matrix? You get that in tech firms, though perhaps not necessarily prominently displayed - it is more about allocation of tasks to people/teams (and, I guess at a higher level, allocation of people to teams), having a quick overview of the different skillsets available etc..
But no It doesn't necessarily translate into higher pay - different skills have different values, some people might have a broad spectrum of skills but aren't specialist in anything in particular, conversely, at a previous firm, we had a guy who had no clue about the business and was hired simply because he was an expert in a particular language - he wasn't really in any particular dev team but was more of a floating resource for developers/dev managers and architects to call on. I don't know but I'd suspect that he was on quite a decent wedge if salaried, he might well have been a long term contractor.
I can only assume you more consistent and reliable at work then when you are posting here....
Because like normal I suggest your posting history shows your views to be an inconsistent mess...
So in one case you suggest there's nothing wrong with paying people more or less based on negotiation and you are aware that women may, on average, not be as likely to push as hard for salary raises and you also rather bizarrely seem to be arguing for a rather sexist view that men, specifically married men (or thoose in a relationship) with children should be paid more in the same job based on them being in a relationship with children to pay for!
But then if the companies don't constantly themselves review pay regardless of the employees negotiating skills they may be discriminating...
So what is it? .... Is it discrimination or is there nothing wrong with negotiated salaries where employees can potentially use their domestic situation to argue for pay raises when
its likely that more men are going to be the ones in a position to argue for such raises?
Caporegime
People would rather jump around until they find a place they can get away with being mediocre and still get the same pay, it could actually be seen as quite smart.
Slaving away and taking on more and more responsibilities doesn't necessarily improve your situation in an organisation, it can just become the new norm for your performance level and it can take a huge toll on your mental health.
Soldato
Work smarter, not harder. Very occasionally, you’ll find a manager that will reward you financially for your putting in extra effort. Usually, they’ll just expect this effort every month and start threatening you with a performance review if you revert to your previous levels of effort.
Put in a decent effort if you’re paid a decent wedge and have an exit strategy if your employer starts to extract the urine.
I understand what your saying but I did say there are some unscrupulous managers / bosses out there. You’ve also said “continue to get away with being mediocre”. Why would this be anyone’s aim? Be better?
Caporegime
It was a counter to your point about why some people move around without bettering themselves first. The world would be a hugely different place if everyone's aim was just to get better at their current job, people like stability and comfort and loyalty has gone out of the window.
Soldato
That would depend if you have a job that you love or a job that merely pays the bills.
In the latter case, where promotion and/or a pay rise is unlikely, why would anyone work harder than they have to?
lolwut?
"Yeah hi boss I want to live in Mayfair so can I haz a massive payrise plz?" Since when do company's need to care what your outgoings are? Salaries are negotiable based on market rate for the role and the individuals skillset. It's like when one of my girlfriend's direct-reports told her she should stay later because she has a shorter commute (and gets paid more...). That went down well
lolwut?
"Yeah hi boss I want to live in Mayfair so can I haz a massive payrise plz?" Since when do company's need to care what your outgoings are? Salaries are negotiable based on market rate for the role and the individuals skillset. It's like when one of my girlfriend's direct-reports told her she should stay later because she has a shorter commute (and gets paid more...). That went down well
My work place has "life event" days, typically people call in and say their kid is sick and are given a life event day. So basically people with kids can just call in and say their kid is sick when ever they fancy a day off, and because their front line managers are all soft they don't ever question it. Mean while I have to buy extra holidays out of my salary.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,924
To be fair, kids do get sick a lot so chances are they are off genuinely.
That's not exactly fair on you though.
That's not exactly fair on you though.
Caporegime
How would they genuinely question it? Produce a sick note for your child? Blaming their line manager for a company policy is a bit daft.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2014
- Posts
- 2,678
so if they are (in your opinion) falsely claiming a "life event" day, that would be no different to someone else who doesn't have kids falsely claiming one, what is to stop you ringing up and saying, "pipe burst waiting for plumber all day"
i don't see it as any different to people falsely pulling sickies, and most workplaces have a policy in place to govern absence, I assume (obviously I could be completely wrong) that if you take too many life event days then you would be pulled up on it.
And as someone else has said, kids do get sick quite a bit.
The thing is sickness is targeted, there's a system in place, but you have like 5 or so "unplanned" life events per year which can be given at the discretion of a line manager. I'm not one to skive, but I'd probably get questioned if I had more than 1 or 2 days where something in my house broke, yet like you say - kids get sick all the time, so that's just a free day off no questions asked. Even if the kid is sick, we're all being paid a salary yet someone is working less.