Why do companies make stupid decisions that cause them to lose good employees????

[steppinthrax]

So anyway. The last company I worked for started to suck because the promotion that I was promised failed due to budgeting matters. Actually during that year there were layoffs so you can pretty much say there was no possibility of promotion. When I informed my boss I was leaving he asked me to show him the offer letter. He tried but couldn't get me a counteroffer for that much. I found work elsewere making roughly 15K more then I was making there. Anyway they hired a person directly after me (2 mos) making 10K more then I was making there?????

Ok assuming he might be more qualified then me. That's a possibility, or he simply bargined his salary. So directly after that person was hired the person who worked alongside me quit (after 6 yrs). Found a job making 35K more then he was making. Before he left, our boss again tried to work up a deal were they could get him a counteroffer. He would stay if he took roughly 20K. The big boss said again "I can't do it". Well he left and they hired someone directly after him making 13K more then what he was making????

What makes it worse is since he's been there so long and done a lot of development he was ratained as a consultant.

So they company is paying a premium for his services as well as getting another employee (paying more) then they paid the last person, but not too much difference then what the person wanted if he stayed. Also your hiring someone with no exp. V.S. someone who is already fully trainned.....

 

[Insomniator]

Because the big whigs are usually morons or just don't care anymore by the time they get to that position.

 

[Deviant Grasshopper]

My bet is they were trying to call your and your coworkers bluff - i.e. why he wanted to see the actual letter. Employees do it all the time... (claim to get a higher offer just to try to make a couple more bucks)

 

[43st]

It seems HR is running the company.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: 43st
It seems HR is running the company.

Ahhh no. GOOD hr people do not tell boss's to do this. Bad HR/Mangers do this type of crap. In fact most HR try and keep a employee as it cost a lot more then people think to recruit, hire, train, and support a new emplyee then keep a old one.

I do HR work for the Fed so we don;t have these problems. Still have dumb managers, but not for pay reasons.

 

[Koing]

Because they want to save costs...but now they also know you are more £££ motivated then 'regular' employees and want to go regardless so the next year what do you want?

A lot of companies are also not very forward thinking.

Also with new employees it can bring a lot of new ideas and also really shit ones to the company

A mate wasn't happy, got a new job offer and bargained and got a better salary at his current job. The company deemed him worth paying extra. A few other mates didn't like it and went elsewhere. It just depends how important you are to them at the end of the day. We are all replaceable.

Koing

 

[Xavier434]

Short answer:

Those making the important decisions are bad at making decisions. They usually have problems paying attention to detail and considering the big picture before making those decisions.

 

[Kroze]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Short answer:

Those making the important decisions are bad at making decisions. They usually have problems paying attention to detail and considering the big picture before making those decisions.

So what you're saying is that the "big important" executives are only interested in how they look/perform on paper for the Quarter only? (Q1, Q2, Q3, & Q4)

Why? because they look like geniuses for the quarter & by the time everyone realized the company is going under a year later, they're getting ready to "resign/retire" with a $20 million dollar bonus for doing such a fine job as the company declare bankruptcy?

No way! Now that you mentioned it, I think that's why GM, Ford, & Chrysler is in this shenanigan.

 

[Gibson486]

Any company would rather hire contracters and consultants...why? B/C they do not get benefits. You pay for the work, and that is it. Once he is no longer needed, they can let him go easily. If an employee is no longer needed, they have lay them off, give them a package and do paper work....

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Kroze

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Short answer:

Those making the important decisions are bad at making decisions. They usually have problems paying attention to detail and considering the big picture before making those decisions.

So what you're saying is that the "big important" executives are only interested in how they look/perform on paper for the Quarter only? (Q1, Q2, Q3, & Q4)

Why? because they look like geniuses for the quarter & by the time everyone realized the company is going under a year later, they're getting ready to "resign/retire" with a $20 million dollar bonus for doing such a fine job as the company declare bankruptcy?

No way! Now that you mentioned it, I think that's why GM, Ford, & Chrysler is in this shenanigan.

:laugh:

 

[her209]

If you think your company has your best interest in mind, you're in for a world of hurt.

 

[sdifox]

I left my last job because I could not stand the idiotic decisions any more. Apparently they hired my replacement 6 month after I left, then hired 2 more consultant to cover the replacement. 3 people to replace me and I am going WTF, there isn't that much work!

 

[MrChad]

I don't understand. They got equivalent or better experience for $5000 and $7000 less, respectively, than you and your coworker were willing to agree to. Sounds like they made a pretty good decision, especially considering they're under a tight budget.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: MrChad
I don't understand. They got equivalent or better experience for $5000 and $7000 less, respectively, than you and your coworker were willing to agree to. Sounds like they made a pretty good decision, especially considering they're under a tight budget.

You have to understand a couple of things. When you hire a new employee you are first taking a risk that he/she is a best fit. It takes time for the employee to adjust and takes time for training. In most situations it can take up to 1 full year to train an employee (1 yr salary). By which you are not getting max production from him/her. So just imagine an employee is making 70K. He/she wants 20K more after 6 yrs of work and did a very good job. You let him/her go. You hire someone else making 10K more. Within that first year you just lost 80K. You probably got maybe 40 or less of real work. You also have to see if that employee is a good fit.

Most are under 90-day or so probation. Unfortunatley probation is not really long enough. It's quite easy to spoof till you get past that.

 

[theeedude]

I had same problem at my old company, and I think it's generally the case that companies will bet on your complacency until its too late.
They wouldn't give me a $10K raise when I asked for one, kept dragging it out for months coming up with excuses, so I found another job, and then they were offering me $25K more to stay once I put in my 2 week notice. My new job got me $35K more, so I walked. At the exit interview one of the leads asked why all the good people were leaving...

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: MrChad
I don't understand. They got equivalent or better experience for $5000 and $7000 less, respectively, than you and your coworker were willing to agree to. Sounds like they made a pretty good decision, especially considering they're under a tight budget.

LOL...are you the boss of OP's company?

 

[dullard]

Essentially, you are asking a false question. Good employees don't threaten to leave when wanting a raise. Instead, good employees show the employer that they are invaluable and ask for a raise for that reason. Your question doesn't exist: since there was no good employee in that case, there was no decision to make regarding a good employee.

Studies show that in MOST cases if you have an employee who threatens to leave, then the cheapest long-term solution is to let that employee leave. Not only that, but on average even if you do pay their demands they STILL leave in about a year.

Why? Because you now know that employee is not loyal. If you make an offer to keep the employee, in the best case scenario you now have a high-priced employee who doesn't like your company and who will just ship at the first opportunity. In the worst case scenario, you pay that employee a bunch of money AND give him or her time to sabatoge your business or steal clients for the eventual switch to another company. Neither situation is good. Instead, you can just hire a new employee who likely will be loyal.

I'm not saying that companies don't make stupid decisions - they do. In your case, their stupid decision was to make you think you wanted another job and that occured months or years before you demanded a raise. But management rule #1 is to let unloyal employees go. Once you demanded a raise and threatened to leave, they made a wise decision. The risks of keeping an unloyal employee are too great and good employees are everywhere. Sure, you might have to hire and fire a few to find a good replacement, but that is still cheaper than the risks of keeping that unloyal employee around.

 

[vi edit]

I've been in a number of companies where new hires were making more right out of the gate than employees that those that had been there for years.

I can see both sides to the story. To get the best you need to pay the best. But on the flip side to keep the best you have to pay them that way too.

I guess the bartering chip that employers hold over exisiting employees is benefits accruels, 401k vesting, and seniority for stuff like PTO requests.

But it is a pretty shitty deal knowing that the new guy sitting next to you is probably making more than you since you got grandfathered in at a salary worth half his 10 years ago and your measly 3% annual raises hasn't brought it to parity yet.

 

[Muse]

I think a lot of the time it happens because they are crappy companies. They just can't hold on to the best people. I saw all the really good people leave one by one at my last FTJob. They made many bad decisions and it became a hopeless situation. They eventually got bought out and they after a while fired the woman who started the company on her breakfast room table. That was after I was canned (they sent my job to India). I actually had thought that I was the most important person they had because I was the only person who knew what was going on under the hood of their mission critical database system. But they decided to figure out how to do without me and I even played along, kind of. I told them they could call me for consultation if they needed me, but they never did.

 

[imported_Imp]

Cause you aren't as special as you think you are, and the people up top don't give a shit. The way they see it, things are going to get done regardless. One super person won't do that much to improve business or increase productivity, especially in a corporate environment with a few thousand employees. And you're leaving/dying someday, so they may as well start getting use to it now.

 

[darkxshade]

Similar thing happened to me... I worked in a group of 5 people(of which 3 were new hires who didn't know how to do much at the time). So I was 2nd in terms of seniority in that group. When the 1st left(the manager), he was making 70k at the time and got countered with like 80k but he left anyway. I(assistant manager) was way underpaid and I knew it at 45k which is actually also less than the new hires. So after that I had to pick up the slack left by #1 doing 80% of the work with the other 3 doing 20%. Then I was told they were bringing in someone within the company to take control and manage the group... I would have to train him to mange me and the group. WTF?

I handed in a letter of resignation 2 weeks later, they knew they screwed up and counterd with 60k, 10k less than what my manager was making before he quit and 20k less than his counteroffer. I turned it down. I ended up with a job elsewhere that has less hours and 55k. I found out eventually they had to hire 3 more to replace me. As of today that group consist of about 10 people doing the work of 2. Nice job corporate douchebags.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
So anyway. The last company I worked for started to suck because the promotion that I was promised failed due to budgeting matters. Actually during that year there were layoffs so you can pretty much say there was no possibility of promotion. When I informed my boss I was leaving he asked me to show him the offer letter. He tried but couldn't get me a counteroffer for that much. I found work elsewere making roughly 15K more then I was making there. Anyway they hired a person directly after me (2 mos) making 10K more then I was making there?????

Ok assuming he might be more qualified then me. That's a possibility, or he simply bargined his salary. So directly after that person was hired the person who worked alongside me quit (after 6 yrs). Found a job making 35K more then he was making. Before he left, our boss again tried to work up a deal were they could get him a counteroffer. He would stay if he took roughly 20K. The big boss said again "I can't do it". Well he left and they hired someone directly after him making 13K more then what he was making????

What makes it worse is since he's been there so long and done a lot of development he was ratained as a consultant.

So they company is paying a premium for his services as well as getting another employee (paying more) then they paid the last person, but not too much difference then what the person wanted if he stayed. Also your hiring someone with no exp. V.S. someone who is already fully trainned.....

The moral of the story here is you can't let the grass grow under your feet. The nimble will succeed, the complacent will be taken for granted.

 

[Babbles]

People who are otherwise very good and smart at their job will quite often make insanely dumb management decisions. It happens time and time again.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: senseamp
I had same problem at my old company, and I think it's generally the case that companies will bet on your complacency until its too late.
They wouldn't give me a $10K raise when I asked for one, kept dragging it out for months coming up with excuses, so I found another job, and then they were offering me $25K more to stay once I put in my 2 week notice. My new job got me $35K more, so I walked. At the exit interview one of the leads asked why all the good people were leaving...

This. Sounds par for the course.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: vi edit
I've been in a number of companies where new hires were making more right out of the gate than employees that those that had been there for years.

I can see both sides to the story. To get the best you need to pay the best. But on the flip side to keep the best you have to pay them that way too.

I guess the bartering chip that employers hold over exisiting employees is benefits accruels, 401k vesting, and seniority for stuff like PTO requests.

But it is a pretty shitty deal knowing that the new guy sitting next to you is probably making more than you since you got grandfathered in at a salary worth half his 10 years ago and your measly 3% annual raises hasn't brought it to parity yet.

Yeah, you're not a happy camper when that happens. Disgruntled is the word, and it's not a good situation.