Posted on 06/23/2014 12:08:26 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The worst kept secret is that employees are making less on average every year. There are millions of reasons for this, but we’re going to focus on one that we can control. Staying employed at the same company for over two years on average is going to make you earn less over your lifetime by about 50% or more.
Keep in mind that 50% is a conservative number at the lowest end of the spectrum. This is assuming that your career is only going to last 10 years. The longer you work, the greater the difference will become over your lifetime.
Arguments for Changing Jobs
The average raise an employee can expect in 2014 is 3%. Even the most underperforming employee can expect a 1.3% raise. The best performers can hope for a 4.5% raise. But, the inflation rate is currently 2.1% calculated based on the Consumer Price Index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This means that your raise is actually less than 1%. This is probably sobering enough to make you reach for a drink.
In 2014, the average employee is going to earn less than a 1% raise and there is very little that we can do to change management’s decision. But, we can decide whether we want to stay at a company that is going to give us a raise for less than 1%. The average raise an employee receives for leaving is between a 10% to 20% increase in salary. Obviously, there are extreme cases where people receive upwards of 50%, but this depends on each person’s individual circumstances and industries.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Hubby got a letter from the company at the end of 2013 that there would be no raises for any employee during 2014. As a digital design engineer he could make more money someplace else, but he’s relatively happy where he is, so he stays. Started with the company September 10, 2001.
A lot of the comments here will be totally invalid in 5-10 years. Companies don’t want permanent employees. They want temps, contractors, etc to do a specific piece of work then leave.
An argument could be made it rewards longevity too much. It forces businesses to lay off older workers when they are paid much more than younger workers of comparable contribution. There are many exceptions but in general pay should actually start declining at some point to track output.
The old rule of thumb was that you should stay with your new company twice as long as you were at your old company.
Well, somewhere between 2.1 and 21.0, I think.
Both times I took a hefty pay cut to make the change... but more than caught back up after a few years with my new employer.
So, I think performance has a lot to do with it.
I have known printers who were fired because they could not do work that was beyond the capabilities of the equipment that their idiot bosses insisted they do it with. It was like demanding that someone haul five tons on a half ton pickup truck. At times I took trouble calls on new machines and found that the only trouble was that the equipment, which was new, was not built to do what the customer was trying to do and I was told that the salesman who sold it said that it would do it.
That is in a growing economy, and applies most to people in the very earliest part of their career.
For established workers in a contracting economy, keeping your job is task #1.
We debated about the deception such a plan would entail and, in the end, decided not to go forward with it for that reason.
Similar plans have been discussed among IT forums since the beginning of the H1B slaughter took off after Y2K.
There is nothing deceptive about a trade association, or a consortium, or free-lancers sharing office space, or even sharing virtual office space for zilch.
What is deceptive and economically destructive is the practice of IT recuiting (or third-party recruiting or staffing in any industry) for dozens of different reasons.
Not true at the place where I’m in my 36th year.
Maybe at a low skill job. People in my field are still fairly useless after 2 years. 5 years is a minimum to be competent, and if you moved up after 5 years, your career would be in the hands of the guys that that actually know what they’re doing.
That was my argument but I got outvoted.
A pound of Oscar Mayer sliced sandwich meat went up $.50 last week.
Last place I worked at,we got no raises at all for about the last 10 yrs.
That’s more of an indicator of the economy than anything else. Temporary/indirect arrangements don’t allow for much long-term planning and disincentivize offers based on competitive advantage. More permanent/direct arrangements, in general, resolve these issues while starting with a higher level of trust of the person doing the work.
Many employees today are part-time or temporary. What I have noted is Management continues to see them in the same light they would a full-time employee. Companies have failed terribly in that respect.
As we know how an employee sees full-time work verses part-time is vastly different. Management however has not changed their approach with the change of the workforce.
We just had 5 employees give notice....a new Manager, who obviously does not know how to manage a workforce, was all they needed to walk. Intimidating employees never works but if they’re part-time they’ll simply walk....a full-time worker would be more inclined to wait and see.
After reading all the comments, I’m extra glad that I’m not in the rat race anymore.
Retired in 1999 and have loved every minute of it.
I recently watched a woman assume the managerial duties of our department....the more she took on the more the rightful dept manger handed her.....and this without compensation. This went on for about a year.....she gave notice this week.
I have well noted that in today's workforce exceeding your responsibilities is rarely going to advance you in any measure....but it wasn't this way before companies determined it was cheaper for them to roll employees.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.