Salary Talk

I know what others make but I try to avoid talking about my stuff. My boss actually told me a story a while back about how some folks finding out about different pay rates ruined a good team and I believe he was right.
 
It's legal for employees to discuss their pay and compensation with each other. The only reason an employer wouldn't want that is because lower paid employees will get ****ed and either ask for more, leave, or be disgruntled.

I've worked in jobs where nobody talked about it - and nobody wanted to talk about it. I'm currently working in an industry where EVERYONE talks about it. Sometimes it causes angst, but sometimes it highlights the fact that money isn't the only part of the decision matrix for the jobs I take. For example, I was recently approached by a recruiter for a job that is similar to mine at another company. The pay is $122/day more than I currently make. I turned it down for several reasons - none of which had anything to do with the pay rate. If the pay rate was the only decision factor, I'd be working at the new job right now.
 
Salary discussion stigmas seem to be a US phenomenon. Norway even has a government operated website so that you can look up individual's salary, such as your CEO.
 
N918KT said:
Hey guys, just wondering, but it is normal or even okay for a coworker or even a boss to ask you how much the new employer would be paying you at your new job when they find out you are leaving for a new job?

I know it is generally frowned upon to discuss salary with your coworkers at your current job so would it also be frowned upon to discuss salary when they found out you got a new job?

I cannot find an answer on the Internet about this specific scenario.
Click to expand...
You need the internet to answer questions like this for you?o_O

In the "old days" when dinosaurs ruled the Earth, we used to have something called "discretion" and "none of your f***ing business" .
 
Last edited:
Anyone can ask the question but you can decide for yourself whether or not you want to answer. As stated previously, what is considered socially acceptable depends on many different factors.
 
GlennAB1 said:
Companies don't want employees sharing salary info because it causes internal problems. The old timers had a cow when they found out the new hires hired in at a higher rate than they were making, and yet the old timers had to train the new hires. But, the company had to offer the new hires that amount in order to entice them.
Click to expand...

That company is already in serious trouble anyway, if they're playing those games.

coloradobluesky said:
Telling him could work in your favor if you would be willing to stay if they match or exceed it. If you are out of there regardles, dont tell. But any time you tell someone how much money you make or how much money you have you run the risk that somehow they will use it against you. Don't talk too much to other employees that are leaving either. They tell a lot on their exit interview.

I know an employee that told employeeB how much money he made and it caused all sorts of trouble for him. His boss got mad because employeeB came to boss and said he wanted to make as much as the other guy because they did the same work (he was making less). Boss couldnt get the raise for the guy.

Dont ask farmers or ranchers how much land they have either. Its like asking them how much money they have.

Dont ever tell anyone except a spouse how much money you have. Not even your accountant or lawyer. It always ends up working against you, never for you.
Click to expand...

Accepting a counter offer is almost never in the employee's favor. You just became a "problem" for a front line manager not an asset. They have to go justify a raise they should have already justified if they were doing their job, to higher ups. Leaders take care of their people because they know they won't have a job if they don't. But that said, there's very few people who will go out on a limb to be good leaders of people in most corporate structures.

Nor do most middle managers spend enough time thinking about their staff and how to get the most from them. They usually allow themselves to get caught up in daily minutiae they should have delegated so they had time to find raises and justifications for same as well as new business to pay for it all, as the leader.

Subsea said:
Salary discussion stigmas seem to be a US phenomenon. Norway even has a government operated website so that you can look up individual's salary, such as your CEO.
Click to expand...

True. An even bigger stigma on asking someone how far in debt they are. Being debt free and owned by no man, should be a source of pride for all and a significant life goal worthy of celebration far above and beyond the stupid crap people celebrate.

Many paycheck earners think they're working "to pay the bills", not make a viable and sustainable business out of their own life. I've been there, living paycheck to paycheck and something had to change. In the end it was mostly my attitude that needed the most changing. Getting new and more valuable skills and better jobs, wasn't the hardest part.

Living below my means, learning to not play "compete with the Jones'", seeing how that mindset only led to unhappiness instead of realizing I had an abundance even in my poorest days, and paying myself first, all things the modern person promised things by politicians and TV, have a hard time figuring out.

As far as never telling anyone income levels and extending that to professionals hired to work for you like accountants? That's nuts. You have to hire trustworthy professionals and then stay on top of them. I have one investment guy who I need to call and have a frank discussion about his company's fees. Their investment options simply can't pay for their higher fees in this economy and he's going to have to do some hard explaining about why I shouldn't invest the money elsewhere. I like the guy, he gives good advice, but I can't ignore that his competitors offer the same product at lower cost. He knows what we make, and have, (well most of it) and knows most of our overall fiscal picture and doesn't use it against us in any way.

A recommendation here. Stay away from corporate folks in these sorts of things. You want independent accountants and fiscal advisors, perhaps working through larger entities and not some fly by night with your investments in some account only they know about of course, but your advisors and pros you hire need some of their own skin in the game.

I always laugh when I hear commercials touting that some fiscal company has "salaried investment advisors"... Yeah, no. So they can do the same crappy job and go home at 40 hours in with my large investment as they will with some guy who's invested $1000? Screw that. I'm happy to and want to pay them a percentage fee.

The better I do, the better they do. But if they start slipping or in my case the over-arching investment house keeps bumping fees, we're going to have a chat about who's percentage that increase is coming out of. I'm not going to make it easy for the investment guy and let his cut stay the same as mine drops. No chance in hell.

You can't be passive about your budget. It's your business. Literally. You and your family as a business.

This also goes for great independent insurance agents. Love ya. Glad you've always helped us when things went sideways. But if your company and underwriters penalize loyalty instead of discounting long term customers? I'm out. Sorry. Find another sucker. Or a better brand to work for.

Also never had any problems talking to farmers or ranchers about land size. That one is even weirder. We have family farms still in Kansas and they have no problem at all mentioning how big the different land parcels are or giving an aggregate number. Nor do their neighbors. Many lease the land to larger growers anyway. It's no secret. All right there in County records for anyone to look up, so there's not much point in trying to hide it.

Another tip. If your hired professionals haven't called you at least once this year, and I don't mean a bunch of newsletters sent in bulk via Constant Contact, or Salesforce, but called and had an honest to goodness conversation with you? Find one that actually needs your business. They don't.
 
Subsea said:
Salary discussion stigmas seem to be a US phenomenon. Norway even has a government operated website so that you can look up individual's salary, such as your CEO.
Click to expand...
...and we all know Norway is just another word for Utopia...;)
 
denverpilot said:
That company is already in serious trouble anyway, if they're playing those games.
Click to expand...

It's no game, just a fact of life. You have salaried employees that are at mid scale of their pay grade range, they can only get x raise, annually. You have a position opening that you want to entice prospective applicants and they are already making that same amount or higher. As hiring manager, it's your job, and you have leeway, to offer what you need to to secure employees, and you can offer anything inside pay grade range. Once everyone understood that, it was less of an issue. Still some hurt feelings of course. We're talking about one of the most successful companies in US history.
 
GlennAB1 said:
It's no game, just a fact of life. You have salaried employees that are at mid scale of their pay grade range, they can only get x raise, annually. You have a position opening that you want to entice prospective applicants and they are already making that same amount or higher. As hiring manager, it's your job, and you have leeway, to offer what you need to to secure employees, and you can offer anything inside pay grade range. Once everyone understood that, it was less of an issue. Still some hurt feelings of course. We're talking about one of the most successful companies in US history.
Click to expand...

It simply shows the organization doesn't value experience, longevity, nor loyalty. The origination will naturally get the same in return over the long haul.

Just don't hold rah-rah meetings telling those same folks you're all one big happy family. They now know better.

Of course the company is successful. That's about bottom line, not how to properly appreciate and lead people.
 
denverpilot said:
Just don't hold rah-rah meetings telling those same folks you're all one big happy family. They now know better.

Of course the company is successful. That's about bottom line, not how to properly appreciate and lead people.
Click to expand...

So true. Unfortunately some companies think doing these bull**** meetings each month makes team members think they are great----It just makes us more displeased
 
I always make it a habit to accept the new offer before I even talk about leaving my existing job.

That way if I get a counter offer when I resign, I can say "Sorry, I've already accepted, too late". There has been one and only ONE time where I accepted a new offer, my employer countered (handsomely) and I stayed..but in that case I still left 3 years later.

In any case, I've never told my current employer what my new job would pay me. People have tried to fish it out, but at the end of the day I just end up saying "more" and smiling.

My limit for most companies is about 2-3 years. I've had one job where I stayed longer, but that's because although the working conditions sucked, there was no hope of promotion, etc, the pay was good and benefits were great.
 
Concur - A while back (ten plus years?) we found that most folks who stayed after we counter-offered to keep them ended up leaving in about 7 months or so. Seems (often, not always) the reason they started looking wasn't just money, though they might not have articulated that; other job satisfaction issues were in play, even if they weren't conscious of the them. I've left a few jobs for money, but never took one just for money . . .
 
And - concur again; if you ain't curing cancer, advancing human knowledge, or defending freedom, you're selling your services for compensation. They ain't your "family"; just try asking them to babysit or kick in for your kid's tuition. . . you need a streak of the mercenary in you; be assured if it becomes economically or politically expedient, they will sacrifice you like a Voodoo chicken. They might genuinely feel bad about it, certainly. but you'll still be gone.
 
My boss wasn't treating me well, so I went off and took an internal position that came with a raise and a better job. Work from home, less hours, and a better title with a better specialty. Better than leaving the company and better than staying with my old group! Unfortunately, I'm no longer tied to an aviation business unit. I just support some of them.
 
Sundancer said:
They ain't your "family"; just try asking them to babysit or kick in for your kid's tuition. . . you need a streak of the mercenary in you; be assured if it becomes economically or politically expedient, they will sacrifice you like a Voodoo chicken. They might genuinely feel bad about it, certainly. but you'll still be gone.
Click to expand...

Totally how I feel about jobs these days. I don't do the social thing at work unless it benefits me in some way (promotion opportunity, pay raise/benefit, etc).

They pay you to do something, it's a contract. The job where I was at the longest, people tried to constantly make it personal. At the end of the day, if you don't compensate someone fairly (benefits, title, pay, training opportunities, etc) they have no incentive to stay.

My wife is a softie when it comes to work, she's been at the same place now almost two decades even though its a coin toss each year whether or not she'll get an increase. Complacency is a horrible thing..
 
In my company, everybody is uptight about discussing salary. And the people are mostly in their 20's and 30's, so it's not necessarily an age or generational thing.

The person that said that we are not family and there's no loyalty anymore is 100% correct. This isn't 50-60 years ago when all you needed was a handshake and a your word. Now, we are a "team" only in the quarterly townhall meetings when it's time to discuss the goals for the next year. But it sure doesn't feel like a team or family. And if they have a chance to improve the bottom line by 1/100 of 1%, they would drop you without a second thought to your 4 kids, your mortgage, nor your elderly parents who you support.
 
Hah, get this. I know someone that works for a large company and the company has rules on who you can SOCIALIZE WITH. If you are tier 3, you can socialize with tier 2, tier 4 (and tier 3, your own tier). One up and one down! Talk about control freaks! And its apparently legal. They are doing it!
 
Last edited:
The larger the company the greater that chance that there's some severe disconnects up and down the chain. I highly doubt a company has a policy about fraternizing with people from various support tiers, now a culture could develop that promoted that belief within a facility and that's going to be the leads and managers faults. Reminds me when I was brought in to correct some issues on a long term contract and it was an absolute mess. It was a mixed vendor contract environment and you had people promoting themselves as leads and managers, giving directions and the staff not knowing it was wrong because the offsite VP was completely disengaged. Had to let someone go and educate the team on some things but when I went back 3 months later it was a totally different atmosphere.

I tend to have the salary discussion a lot with employees, it's my assumption that it's openly talked about at work and if you have access to our financial systems then you can look it up yourself. If they have an existing job offer I NEVER match it... to me that's like saying 'well you were worth more but we weren't wanting to pay you what you're worth'. Anytime I have someone come asking for a compensation increase, especially if the premise is because they know someone else in the workspace making that much. I'm all for discussing it and can usually point out job/responsibility differences or education/experience differences, or they are filling a completely different job function. On top of that when I do give some suggestions on steps to take for some self improvement (Education, Certifications, Help on Project X) they're usually not interested...
 
Officer's club, non-coms club, enlisted's club. Military does it. Not sure they have specific rules about it though.
 
Caramon13 said:
I always make it a habit to accept the new offer before I even talk about leaving my existing job.

That way if I get a counter offer when I resign, I can say "Sorry, I've already accepted, too late". There has been one and only ONE time where I accepted a new offer, my employer countered (handsomely) and I stayed..but in that case I still left 3 years later.

In any case, I've never told my current employer what my new job would pay me. People have tried to fish it out, but at the end of the day I just end up saying "more" and smiling.

My limit for most companies is about 2-3 years. I've had one job where I stayed longer, but that's because although the working conditions sucked, there was no hope of promotion, etc, the pay was good and benefits were great.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what industry you're in, but we try to weed out people that will only stay 2-3 years unless it is an admin or a very low level technical position. It costs us a lot to lose senior employees, not just in replacement costs but lost continuity, severed business relationships, etc... so we try fairly hard to retain people.

But, as stated before, the concept of "family" does not exist. But, it goes both ways. Example: Key member of the busiest group, in a very specialized and difficult to replace skill, indicated to someone she had interviewed for another job. With a competitor. I reached out to her, asking what she did like and didn't like about the organization, how we could improve, and by the way we're willing to pay her more to keep her aboard. Ultimately, she said f*** you (in a cordial manner) and left. Never mind we kept her and her group on during a period of economic downturn when most other organizations would have dumped her.

Fast forward to a couple weeks ago. "Hey, Sac, so.... I really didn't like it over at Two-Names, so I was hoping..."
"Sorry to hear about that."
"I'll come back at my original salary..."
"Mm hm. What do I do about the two people I hired to replace you?"

Yeah, sorry baby, you had the opportunity. You're like a squirrel, trying to get a NUT. Like the cornflakes, without the MILK. (Oran Juice song gently playing in the background)
 
coloradobluesky said:
Officer's club, non-coms club, enlisted's club. Military does it. Not sure they have specific rules about it though.
Click to expand...

The military does do it and there are very specific rules in the UCMJ about it. Can't compare that with a private company.
 
I think in most cases it's not solely about money. It's about respect. And the best way to show respect is by paying people well.
 
Sundancer said:
Concur - A while back (ten plus years?) we found that most folks who stayed after we counter-offered to keep them ended up leaving in about 7 months or so. Seems (often, not always) the reason they started looking wasn't just money, though they might not have articulated that; other job satisfaction issues were in play, even if they weren't conscious of the them. I've left a few jobs for money, but never took one just for money . . .
Click to expand...
My dad has been in business for 50+ years and his rule, which I have adopted is to NEVER counter offer when an employee tells you they are leaving! In their mind they have already quit and they will leave sooner or later, usually within a year. Just get it over with now and find the new person to fill the slot. I talked one guy into staying and 6 months later he was gone! Same goes for pay cuts, it's better to fire a man than to cut his pay. Once the pay is cut they will never be happy.
 
N747JB said:
[snip]Same goes for pay cuts, it's better to fire a man than to cut his pay. Once the pay is cut they will never be happy.
Click to expand...

This one I'll take exception to. It depends on why. We have had two lean times in the last 5 years and took a pay cut across the company (executives took a higher percentage cut than the rest) to preserve jobs. We were able to restore pay within 6-7 months each time. Our retention rate is in excess of 95% and we've been employee rated as one of the Best Places to Work in our region for 5 years running.

If you're cutting an individuals pay because of performance problems pay is probably not the issue. If you're singling out people to cut pay for other reasons, I can see they'd be disgruntled.

John
 
I avoid "Never dos", though I think your dad is probably right most of the time.
 
jsstevens said:
This one I'll take exception to. It depends on why. We have had two lean times in the last 5 years and took a pay cut across the company (executives took a higher percentage cut than the rest) to preserve jobs. We were able to restore pay within 6-7 months each time. Our retention rate is in excess of 95% and we've been employee rated as one of the Best Places to Work in our region for 5 years running.

If you're cutting an individuals pay because of performance problems pay is probably not the issue. If you're singling out people to cut pay for other reasons, I can see they'd be disgruntled.

John
Click to expand...

"Restore pay" is still falling behind as long as there was positive inflation during the downturn overall.

"Restore pay plus inflation and continuing to keep up with inflationary dollar valuation changes long term" is really the sign a company is growing enough and rewarding employees for making the place profitable.

Bottom line, if monetary policy makes everything I buy 3% (pick a number - they're all inaccurate in some way) more expensive each year -- and my pay isn't rising 3% annually, because the company can't afford that, the company is losing more money than they think they are.

Yes, I actually track this. Two things. Rate of pay vs inflation and how much MORE than that, that I made or saved the company this year. In a year where I made or saved them less than inflation, I understand my pay also "falling" by not getting a raise. If I beat inflation, I make sure more than one boss knows it. I'm never "mean" about it, but if I'm adding to their profit, I do expect some percentage of that to end up in my pocket, and not just theirs.

It was one of the major things that started me evaluating one employer very heavily when I noticed the founder was sucking the capital out of the place to retire. He hadn't announced it yet, but EDGAR filings didn't lie.

He was gone about six quarters after he started squirreling huge amounts of cash into family trusts and the stock price was temporarily propped up by a whirlwind tour of the next CEO after him in CNBC and the like. New CEO was eventually escorted out of corporate HQ AFTER I left, per demand of the Board for embezzlement and fraudulent expense report charges, and the stock price fell to half of what it was once worth (billion dollars in revenue annually, dropped from $35 to around $17) and stayed there for a number of years.

This month it was announced that they would be acquired by a Canadian firm.

All traceable back to the founder sucking the life blood out of the place. It couldn't survive on its own and do the level of R&D and making new products it did under him after he made the place undercapitalized to fill his retirement coffers.

Around the time I left, the "I can only give raises to three out of twelve staff" commentary was already coming from middle management. I suspect it only got worse.

All of this stuff interrelates is my point. I saw the place going down years before it went. All I needed was the warning sign of the whole "we aren't giving raises" and a couple of hours pouring over public filings. The story was right there.

They were hoping the new "vibrant" CEO would pull their asses from the fire of having all their capital drained away by the lucrative contract the original CEO had (and deserved in many ways, he did build it to a billion dollar company from nearly nothing after all), but I knew it couldn't work. The products were becoming commodities and they didn't have a lock on the market, and Cisco had already jumped into their market and started to eat them alive.

Gotta pay attention to these things. A notice that pay is being cut or held steady is a good time to start investigating the books and seeing why.

"Best place to work" is kinda meaningless unless you're attracting staff that wants perks (usually how that award is won) and not interested in sharing in growth and profits directly. Some people want that. I look for places that are growing enough to keep up with paying me a chunk of what I saved or made them overall and buying my own perks.

Example: The "free lunch in the company cafeteria" thing in tech companies cracks me up. I'm fine with just taking $5/day more in my check and buying my own nice (or crappy, my choice) lunch. Haha. But that's just me. PB&J may be being eaten at my desk for a reason this year... Maybe I'm saving up for a new car. I'll make the PB&J and save the other $4.75. Heh.
 
Well, we more than made up for the "restore pay" this year. Which we intended all along. In fact, the line folks got decent + raises each year. Executive and corporate waited until this year. But we're also partly employee owned so the company doing well helps everybody at least some.

We're in DoD contracting and the cycles are long and getting longer. But we kept people employed who needed work and we need now.

John
 
I work for a rather large company, and I know what everyone makes and everyone knows what I make. The pay schedule is posted on the pilots website and if you know how long someone has been with the company and what airframe they are flying you can figure out what they make.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top