IT jobs - why must all large raises come with changing companies?

[Joemonkey]

I saw a job posting that I was qualified for, and on a whim sent in my resume. 1 hour later I had a reply email asking when would be a good time to call me. I get a phone call, immediately say "there's no point in going forward unless I hear what the pay is, I would prefer at least $X" where $X is 33% more than what I'm making now. Twenty minutes later I get another phone call offering me exactly $X (pending interviews I suppose). The new job would increase my commute from 25min to 1hr 15min.

If i was single, this would be a no brainer, but I'm married w/ a 2yo daughter, and we currently live close (within 10 minutes) to all of our immediate family...

 

[jamesave]

supply and demand.

when the company need a worker, they'd pay more..

 

[Anubis]

you coudl always tell your current employer that company X will give you 33% more then what you currently make and see what they do to keep you

 

[jandrews]

Originally posted by: Anubis
you coudl always tell your current employer that company X will give you 33% more then what you currently make and see what they do to keep you

thats true but 33% is a huge number.

 

[pulse8]

It's not just IT jobs. I've never been able to get much out of a company once I'm there. Most companies have no foresight to keep around good people.

 

[Joemonkey]

Originally posted by: Anubis
you coudl always tell your current employer that company X will give you 33% more then what you currently make and see what they do to keep you

I'd love to do that come review time which is March 2008, but not sure how long this offer will be good for

 

[Descartes]

As pulse8 said, it's all jobs. If you got into your current position at what seems like a 33% reduction in salary compared to a competitive market, then you undersold yourself. Asking for a 33% raise is often bureaucratically more difficult than simply hiring someone for 33% more. This is especially true of companies where titles are associated to salary levels, and a 33% raise would likely promote you to new levels, say from associate to assistant.

 

[Joemonkey]

well, since I've been here I've obtained my MCSA and MCSE, vs. experience only when I was hired, so that can explain SOME of the defecit. I've also obtained quite a lot more responsibility, yet my pay rate has only gone up 1.9%

 

[NuclearNed]

I've gotten BIG raises within at least 2 of the companies where I've worked. Both raises came from a job title change.

 

[Joemonkey]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
I've gotten BIG raises within at least 2 of the companies where I've worked. Both raises came from a job title change.

I suspect something similar may happen in March come review time, but am I willing to wait that long is the question? What if it is a job title change and only 10%?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: NuclearNed
I've gotten BIG raises within at least 2 of the companies where I've worked. Both raises came from a job title change.

That's not a raise. That is a promotion and usually carries a substantial bump in pay, at least 10%.

As already said pay raises and salary grades are set in stone. By policy you can't go outside the small 1-4 % raise without some kind of promotion.

This is why it is SO important to negotiate properly when first hired on because this sets your bar for a long time. The difference could be 10s of thousands of dollars on starting salary.

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: pulse8
Most companies have no foresight to keep around good people.

around here, for the most part, the only way to get a promotion is to apply for an open position that is better than what you are currently doing. and then it is a crap shoot, seems like lately they always want to "bring in fresh ideas" or some such crapola

 

[Allanv]

The new job would increase my commute from 25min to 1hr 15min.

I do that trip twice a day I would never consider moving. The pay more than compensates for a couple of hours on the road.

Take that with sometimes i have to goto the other office which is 140 miles away.

What I did was negotiate starting work early and finishing early to miss the rush hour traffic

 

[Glavinsolo]

Originally posted by: Anubis
you coudl always tell your current employer that company X will give you 33% more then what you currently make and see what they do to keep you

Excellent idea, and when they meet your demands you will be the first to go when they hire and train your replacement.

 

[Svnla]

Not just IT jobs, it is in other fields as well.

Like I said before, if you are not happy at your job, time to move on, life is too short to wait around.

 

[Eeezee]

Consider how much extra gas you'll have to pay for that commute. Will you really make more money with a 33% raise and steadily increasing gas costs? An hour and a half is a lot of gas.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

When you have a young family, time means more than money. You can always make more money, but you can't get time back.

Wait till your kids are in school and start to think you're uncool before you become a mercenary.

That said, I've got a double digit percentage raise at least once a year every year since I started at my company eight years ago. I also turned down a half dozen jobs before settling on this place because I got the best feel from it. Go figure.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: Allanv
The new job would increase my commute from 25min to 1hr 15min.

I do that trip twice a day I would never consider moving. The pay more than compensates for a couple of hours on the road.

Take that with sometimes i have to goto the other office which is 140 miles away.

What I did was negotiate starting work early and finishing early to miss the rush hour traffic

Depends on how much you make I guess. As a consultant, hours on the road are lost billable hours, and I spend about 3 hours on the road now to travel 25 or so miles combined

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: Anubis
you coudl always tell your current employer that company X will give you 33% more then what you currently make and see what they do to keep you

Most employers don't take easily to threats like this. Unless your job function has an incredibile amount of knowledge to a point if you left shit would erupt. I remember an employee did this and our boss simply said OK....., turn in your laptop, thumb drive, keys..... If the boss does increase your pay you may end up like what Glavinsolo said. Because think of it like this. Your employer can higher a kid and pay him half of what you make and he will probably do the job just as well (but require training).

A lot of modern IT enviroments want employees to document everything they do so in the event something happens like this they have insurance. But don't automatically expect you boss to bend over backwards. A lot of them look at it as disloyal.

 

[Joemonkey]

if i break down the numbers, it would cost me an extra $240 a month in gas, plus ~2 hours a day to get around an extra $2k a month (gross of course)

 

[PricklyPete]

Originally posted by: Anubis
you coudl always tell your current employer that company X will give you 33% more then what you currently make and see what they do to keep you

I definitely would not do this unless you have a firm offer that you are seriously considering. Even then I wouldn't advise it. There are many managers that will immediately put you on the "likely to leave" list and start preparing for when you leave (or when they decide that your new increase is too much for what they want to pay that position).

Also, in general IT is not a money making unit of your company...so when the economy is doing poorly, it will be one of the first places where they will see what they can do to reduce the bloat. If they think you are overpaid and likely to leave anyway...you may be let go.

 

[Farang]

If you factor in your time it isn't that great of a deal. You will spend an extra 1 hour 40 minutes on the road every day, that is 20% more time away from home assuming you have an 8-hour day. Factor in gas costs and the hassle of switching jobs and I think it is a bad deal.

 

[Special K]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Your employer can higher a kid and pay him half of what you make and he will probably do the job just as well (but require training).

Although I am not in IT, I just started my first real job and this statement really bothers me. It must be a very risky position to be in that a company could simply hire someone at half the cost who could do the job just as well.

I would hope that someone with several years experience in any professional field would have acquired enough experience that they could not be so easily replaced. Sure, your employer could always hire someone new, but would a kid really be able to do the job as effectively? Could you not develop experience that can't simply be taught to a new kid during a training session?

 

[Homerboy]

Originally posted by: Special K

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Your employer can higher a kid and pay him half of what you make and he will probably do the job just as well (but require training).

Although I am not in IT, I just started my first real job and this statement really bothers me. It must be a very risky position to be in that a company could simply hire someone at half the cost who could do the job just as well.

I would hope that someone with several years experience in any professional field would have acquired enough experience that they could not be so easily replaced. Sure, your employer could always hire someone new, but would a kid really be able to do the job as effectively? Could you not develop experience that can't simply be taught to a new kid during a training session?

You're right. The post by steppintrax ws stupid.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Special K

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Your employer can higher a kid and pay him half of what you make and he will probably do the job just as well (but require training).

Although I am not in IT, I just started my first real job and this statement really bothers me. It must be a very risky position to be in that a company could simply hire someone at half the cost who could do the job just as well.

I would hope that someone with several years experience in any professional field would have acquired enough experience that they could not be so easily replaced. Sure, your employer could always hire someone new, but would a kid really be able to do the job as effectively? Could you not develop experience that can't simply be taught to a new kid during a training session?

Everybody can be replaced in an instant. Nobody is THAT special that somebody else couldn't be brought in to immediately do their job.

Ever been through "reorgs"? Many times they'll lop multiple vice presidents off and half a department and a handful of middle managers, then replace them later.

Everybody can be replaced, rather quickly in fact.