21 year old sales person £500k target
55 year old sales person £50m target
Both called Sales Exec, both doing the same job, but with different parameters.
Job advertisements, Why do they do it!
- Thread starter Nevakonaza
- Start date
21 year old sales person £500k target
55 year old sales person £50m target
Both called Sales Exec, both doing the same job, but with different parameters.
The idea that experience holds no value is utterly crazy outside the menial roles and this is why it works like it does. If people started defining their value it might help their cause but most don’t because they are not able, willing or in a position to do so.
Businesses value things very differently.
Businesses value things very differently.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
That's sales, that's target based. That's not included in "same job" because that's a target based salary.
There is a basic wage for most, should that be the same?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
Basic wage yes. If it's the same job title.
Then you are naive
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
It's illegal not to advertise salary here in Austria.
The employer is legally obliged to state the minimum salary for the role, usually worded like this:
"Wage (gross): 3500 EUR/month
*By legal requirement we are providing the information about the basic wage component (minimum salary) for the advertised position.
Based on your experience/profile, the final financial conditions will be the subject to discuss and negotiate at the personal interview, however, not less than above mentioned minimum salary component."
The employer is legally obliged to state the minimum salary for the role, usually worded like this:
"Wage (gross): 3500 EUR/month
*By legal requirement we are providing the information about the basic wage component (minimum salary) for the advertised position.
Based on your experience/profile, the final financial conditions will be the subject to discuss and negotiate at the personal interview, however, not less than above mentioned minimum salary component."
Because he is better and will deliver additional value in the same role.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
What a load of balls that is. We know this isn't the case and the person who isn't better will get pooped on as usual.
I think the only place you're going to find that is somewhere like local government office work, where pretty much everybody gets the exact same, and it's highly regulated with very strict bands.
My personal experience (being a 39 year old software/network engineer with 20 years exp) is that the older and more experienced you get, the less "job title" tends to matter. For example you'll find in large tech companies - some people who are just called a "software engineer" are earning $160k, others in the exact same team with the same title might be earning $500k, it all depends.
Why is it balls?
Why do we know this isn't the case?
I don't know if he is, but it sounds like @tom_e might be a Developer.
His job is probably to read a technical brief and specification, and write some code to make a thing do a thing.
There are not always fixed rules about how you make a thing do a thing, and someone with more experience is likely to:
- Know shortcuts
- Have experienced failure in the past and be aware of gotchas and common traps
- Have done this kind of thing before
- Be quicker at executing this thing
- Produce a more polished outcome at the first pass
Surely this is just common sense?
You come across as an entitled graduate.
Of course experience matters unless it's an unskilled job.
Agree. A lot of places I have worked have "managers" or "team leads" on much less than some technical roles where the title will just be "Software Developer" because that's generally how you would sum up their role into a job title, despite that they add huge value in many other areas.
Going back to the OP, if you see a role you are interested in but it lacks detail, the idea is you make contact and find out. If they have left out pay or have put "salary DOE" or whatever, then you know what you are worth so open coms and just get straight to the point asking how much the base salary or contractual rate would be. When they come back with something too low, just politely but very quickly state that you aren't interested on that level. Done. It is absolutely NOT rude, nor does it paint a picture of you only thinking about money, when you come straight out with your opening line to the agent or direct recruiter with something like "Hi there, I'm interested in this role but just wanted to check what the salary range is for it first...". They are used to almost every phone call being like this when adverts are posted without the info. You are just a statistic to them at that point in the process.
I am and you're right in all your points.
Why would you want to constrain what people are paid based on their job title? Effectively that makes things even more 'unfair', because you are basically determining what someone gets paid based on what arbitrary title they are given as opposed to what value they bring. You'd effectively have a scenario where you'd need to create hundreds of different job titles just so you could pay people different salaries. Or you have a rubbish person leaves job title X which has a salary of £y, you then hire a replacement who is much more skilled, but can only pay them £y because that's the salary associated with job £x.
The worrying thing is, I've seen this in action where a former employer based pay rises around an algorithm using salary benchmarking data for given job titles (and other information). But even then, each job title still had two hidden 'sublevels' behind the scenes. When I discovered this I demanded a full review of job title mapping and associated remuneration stats for my team. I only noticed it because their crap system said someone had an expected median salary range of £0 as there was no mapping present, and hence it was offering them the lowest possible % salary change (despite them being the lowest paid member of the team).
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
FFS man. If someone has the same job with the same job title then they should be paid the same. It's as simple as that. If your mate crap brains is doing a job with extra duties then of course they should be paid differently.
If someone's doing the same job then YES. PAY = EQUAL.
What's hard to bloody understand about that? I don't care if crap brains knows more they shouldn't be paid more just because they know more. If their mate Johnny is doing the SAME job then the pay SHOULD be the same regardless of how skilled they are. (unless they are doing more work with more responsibility than sure pay them more).
So you lot would be happy your work collogue getting an extra 20K for doing exactly the same role? (I think not.)
Once a work colleague knows your been paid more then it ALWAYS gets to the point of "you are paid more than me, not in my pay grade - you do it" attitude.
You lot are missing my complete point but it doesn't matter. I don't give a ****, I'm out.
If someone's doing the same job then YES. PAY = EQUAL.
What's hard to bloody understand about that? I don't care if crap brains knows more they shouldn't be paid more just because they know more. If their mate Johnny is doing the SAME job then the pay SHOULD be the same regardless of how skilled they are. (unless they are doing more work with more responsibility than sure pay them more).
So you lot would be happy your work collogue getting an extra 20K for doing exactly the same role? (I think not.)
Once a work colleague knows your been paid more then it ALWAYS gets to the point of "you are paid more than me, not in my pay grade - you do it" attitude.
You lot are missing my complete point but it doesn't matter. I don't give a ****, I'm out.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 2,602
- Location
- East Sussex
It's not that simple - in our team at work we have loads of people with the same title "DevOps Engineer" - talent, experience and commitment varies wildly accross the team - so salaries do as well.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
Then surely you categories each job role then have a set salary unless it's like sales or something. There's only so many categories you can do in a workplace. If it's DevOps Engineer then that's 1 role, with 1 salary.
Unless that's a role where it's paid per fix or something like that? I do understand where people are coming from though.
Not necessarily, it depends on the job. If it's super generic then sure, person A stacking shelves at Tesco should get paid the same as person B stacking shelves at Tesco etc...
Other jobs might have a bit of a broader scope, room for some growth within those roles etc.. someone with a bit more experience, better skills etc.. could earn more.
Two Software Engineers with ABC Corp, both been there for 2 years after uni.
Dev A is clearly more talented, he's got a great performance review.
Dev B is just not hacking it, is being put on to PIP in the new year.
The team leader needs to dish out the bonus pool and award pay rises. Why should they both get the same pay rise and/or bonus?
Last edited: