Advice: Getting large companies to pay you your worth

[R4z0r]

I vehemently disagree with your first statement. Companies do not pay people what they are worth. They pay people what they can get away with.

Of course they will pay as little as possible if you just leave them to it but if you actively discuss you requirements with them they will pay you what you are worth to them.

Taking the OP, it's clear he's asked for a pay rise on numerous occasions and is getting nowhere. They're paying him (more or less) what he's worth to them. He could prove this point by threatening to leave and hope they offer a pay rise to keep him but I would imagine it would be fairly small even if they did.

Of course, what you, the OP or myself think we are worth is often different to an employer. If you don't like it, move on to someone that values you more ...

 

[Chronos-X]

Like any consumer, an employer spends what they need to and what they can justify on each purchase (or employee) - if you're already there then your leverage is minimal, but they could consider spending an extra few K to swing it for a new recruit. Sad, I know But I know people on the top end of the pay scale can still have an enormous gulf between them for doing the same job - then it really does become personal.

 

[spirit]

very very common situation. Market leader can get away with paying less as they know there will be a queue of people fighting to do your job if you leave. Working for the market leader looks great on your CV.

haha not all leading companies are like this, as it is a shorttermist approach - they understand that they wont be the leaders in the long term if they use this strat

 

[Youstolemyname]

haha not all leading companies are like this, as it is a shorttermist approach - they understand that they wont be the leaders in the long term if they use this strat

I agree with you there about it being a short term strategy bud. You need to also consider the bigger picture. In my experience of working for a number of leading companies, in publishing and IT, the managers and directors are paid extremely well as they are the ones with the irreplaceable skills and experience. Those lower down the organisation are merely rotated to keep the labour costs down.

 

[Vanilla]

One problem is there is no internal mecanism to get paid more if you get promoted.

Since joining i've been promoted pretty much 3 times. I don't just mean 'hey have a new title' I mean my job role and responsibilities has changed drastically. Where before I was pretty much in the background now i'm in the foreground, customer facing. I spend time with finance houses, law and retail firms.

It's not as if i've suddenly realised 'hay other places will pay me more money' my job has changed drastically with regards to responsibility yet the pay didn't.

 

[Sequoia]

One problem is there is no internal mecanism to get paid more if you get promoted.

Since joining i've been promoted pretty much 3 times. I don't just mean 'hey have a new title' I mean my job role and responsibilities has changed drastically. Where before I was pretty much in the background now i'm in the foreground, customer facing. I spend time with finance houses, law and retail firms.

It's not as if i've suddenly realised 'hay other places will pay me more money' my job has changed drastically with regards to responsibility yet the pay didn't.

Understood, but it comes back to market rate. Most companies will only pay people what they have to, especially if they are fairly easily replaced.

And, in large firms, they play the number game.

If you have 500 people, and you pay them all what you can get away with, some will leave. You then have the cost of replacing them, but the recruitment premium and training costs for the replacement will still likely be less than the cost of increasing everybody's pay.

It sounds cold, but that's how many firms look at it, especially when the people deciding policy and allocating budget are remote from the people who's lives are affected.

If that's what you're up against, you'll have to play the game ..... and leave.

 

[Vanilla]

I agree. Even as we speak they are employing the 'new blood'. Getting people in at a low level and let them work their way up without having to pay them much (exactly like me, started off low, and am pretty much staying low!).

They know the problem with the pay. They say they're going to do things about it, their hands are tied, etc but they are working on it for this October. I have the stinking feeling that Ooctober will become April, etc. There are around 8/9 people in the same bag as me, I guess every month they delay they save loads.

Going by what you've heard and what your own experiences would you say that there isn't going to be a rise, it's juts typical management dragging as much out while they can and at the same time bringing in new blood ready for when you leave?

 

[Dolph]

Apply for jobs elsewhere, and see if you're actually worth as much as you think you are (ie whether you'll be offered these higher paying jobs).

If you get an offer, approach your boss and discuss it, and if that fails, take the other job.

Don't go kicking off without actually having somewhere else to go.

 

[Sequoia]

........

Going by what you've heard and what your own experiences would you say that there isn't going to be a rise, it's juts typical management dragging as much out while they can and at the same time bringing in new blood ready for when you leave?

Anything I can say will be a guess.

Bearing that in mind, my guess would be that :-

1) There'll be a pay rise
2) It won't be very impressive. Inflation level, maybe plus a bit.

If you really want a significant rise, I'd guess that there's only one way you're going to get it, unless you really are indispensable, and in large firms, very few (if any) people actually are. It's more about the invonvenience someone can cause by leaving, than anyone being indispensable.