Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've spoke to a number of job recruiters this week and virtually all of them have new jobs opened up and are looking to fill them with someone who has atleast 3-5 years experience in a particular field or product. But, the sad part is they are offering 2001 rates instead of 2014 rates.
I told two recruiters that if the company wants to hire and retain workers think of the cost it takes to rehire someone. If they don't pay people enough factoring cost of living increases for 2014, they would have problems retaining people this year. It cost atleast $15-30k to refill any skilled position making over $75k+
Why not just offer people a real honest rate and increases it just enough to make people feel content. Companies really need to think the process through, when they offer too little they will have to spend more to cover turnovers and lost productivity when position is not filled or not finding the right candidate that offer more value.
Even in shops that are busy outsourcing, you aren't saving much because you need more resources to manage them and contractors to keep the outsourcing contracts honest.
I worked for a local contractor to a Fortune 500 back home at my last assignment. The F500 had outsourced probably half of the IT work to the contractor and quality was so bad that the contractor could not meet some of its SLAs to the F500.
Help desk personnel were in the low $20k range, developers and more senior infrastructure personnel were rarely hired above $35k. The senior help desk manager had been there over a decade and I overheard him saying they had a candidate that wanted $20/hr for some position, and that he didn't make that. The contractor did not offer benefits to people at my level.
Turnover was very high and morale was low. No one was really familiar with the client's systems because no one stayed long enough to learn them well. There were a lot of critical failures because people didn't have enough knowledge of the systems to perform well. This cost the client lost production and money, so the contractor company had to pay fines.
These types of situations are often losses across the board for all parties (client, contractor, and workers) and perform worse than in-house staff.
I've spoke to a number of job recruiters this week and virtually all of them have new jobs opened up and are looking to fill them with someone who has atleast 3-5 years experience in a particular field or product. But, the sad part is they are offering 2001 rates instead of 2014 rates.
I told two recruiters that if the company wants to hire and retain workers think of the cost it takes to rehire someone. If they don't pay people enough factoring cost of living increases for 2014, they would have problems retaining people this year. It cost atleast $15-30k to refill any skilled position making over $75k+
Why not just offer people a real honest rate and increases it just enough to make people feel content. Companies really need to think the process through, when they offer too little they will have to spend more to cover turnovers and lost productivity when position is not filled or not finding the right candidate that offer more value.
Even in shops that are busy outsourcing, you aren't saving much because you need more resources to manage them and contractors to keep the outsourcing contracts honest.
This would easily be solved:
1. Drop the experience requirements.
2. Offer more money.
1. Drop the experience requirements.
2. Offer more money.
My explanation to other senior management is:
- Pay more, it is 2014 and the ACA just increased cost for every employee
- Hire managers that manage, too many mgrs that only good for order services
- The Work isn't getting easier, outsourcing actually creates more work and inefficiencies unless you invest heavily in overseers in many LOBs to ensure product and services delivered match expectations.
Look at the Government's Healthcare website, it serves as the perfect example of how American companies and government agencies screw up constantly because they outsource and contract out their jobs and don't do the work.
I've spoke to a number of job recruiters this week and virtually all of them have new jobs opened up and are looking to fill them with someone who has atleast 3-5 years experience in a particular field or product. But, the sad part is they are offering 2001 rates instead of 2014 rates.
I told two recruiters that if the company wants to hire and retain workers think of the cost it takes to rehire someone. If they don't pay people enough factoring cost of living increases for 2014, they would have problems retaining people this year. It cost atleast $15-30k to refill any skilled position making over $75k+
Why not just offer people a real honest rate and increases it just enough to make people feel content. Companies really need to think the process through, when they offer too little they will have to spend more to cover turnovers and lost productivity when position is not filled or not finding the right candidate that offer more value.
Even in shops that are busy outsourcing, you aren't saving much because you need more resources to manage them and contractors to keep the outsourcing contracts honest.
Salary rate is not really tied to the job market. I mean, it is a little. When companies are doing well, they may overpay you and when they aren't doing great, they may lowball you, but decent established companies in most markets offer a standard rate which is competitive with your vocation at level of experience.
You do have some people who are underpaid, and some people who are wildly, wildly overpaid for what they do. But those people who are overpaid are done so even in rough times.
Salary rate is not really tied to the job market. I mean, it is a little. When companies are doing well, they may overpay you and when they aren't doing great, they may lowball you, but decent established companies in most markets offer a standard rate which is competitive with your vocation at level of experience.
You do have some people who are underpaid, and some people who are wildly, wildly overpaid for what they do. But those people who are overpaid are done so even in rough times.
That's incorrect. Why else would these fast food and retail positions be paying $14/hr+ in ND? There are not enough workers to fill the open positions, so they have to raise the pay to attract workers. Likewise, if there was not a minimum wage, companies would pay substantially less for minimum wage work, and employ more workers.
Likewise, if there was not a minimum wage, companies would pay substantially less for minimum wage work, and employ more workers.
I think that could be partially true. Companies will only hire enough workers to fulfill their needs. I am not sure if no minimum wage is a good idea because would companies actually lower prices to keep up with it or keep them at current prices. That is the issue I have with that proposal. If companies would actually lower prices, it would be good but if not the cost of living would be too high.
I think that could be partially true. Companies will only hire enough workers to fulfill their needs. I am not sure if no minimum wage is a good idea because would companies actually lower prices to keep up with it or keep them at current prices. That is the issue I have with that proposal. If companies would actually lower prices, it would be good but if not the cost of living would be too high.
This is why I have issues with monkeying with the minimum wage too much. There's a lot of variables at play.
I think that could be partially true. Companies will only hire enough workers to fulfill their needs. I am not sure if no minimum wage is a good idea because would companies actually lower prices to keep up with it or keep them at current prices. That is the issue I have with that proposal. If companies would actually lower prices, it would be good but if not the cost of living would be too high.
The full savings would not likely be passed on to consumers. I think there would be some lowering of prices, particularly in low wage but highly labor intensive industries, but that there would be additional profit reaped by business that would not be passed down.
I'm not even sure how effective the minimum wage is now. I know several people who are on some form of social assistance, whether that's TANF, SNAP, WIC, Section 8 or other forms of housing assistance, Lifeline wireless (the Obamaphone), Medicaid, state health care programs, OASDI, etc. That's not even counting what these people are often getting through private charities like food banks or the Salvation Army. These people are doing better than a <$10/hr person who is trying to do the honest thing.
There are a couple of people at my old job making in the low $30k range but at the food bank.
If the legal minimum wage is eliminated but the market equilibrium goes to, say, $3/hr or even $5/hr, who can even cover their costs on that? What's the incentive to work for a day to gross $24?
I keep getting he impression from reading these threads, that a lot of young people seem to think that any job they apply for should start somewhere over $50,000 per year, and go way above that because they have a college degree. Wrong.
A lot of degrees do not pay very well at all compared to their expectations. Some degrees are worth less for getting a decent salary than many get with just a high school education.
Lets look at what the typical college graduate with a degree has to start at to get a job. Takes a little bit to load the list of degrees and the starting and mid career incomes. Starting pay can be from low 30K to 100k to start, depending on degree. The higher pay jobs, have a shortage of applicants, and the low paid ones are a dime a dozen, and not enough jobs by far to go around. Ability to get a job and salary, can really be effected by what course of study you followed.
Just because a person has a college degree, does not mean they will get a great job, paying 6 figures. It may be a profession that only pays $30, or just a little more if they can even find a job opening due to an over supply of degrees in their chosen field. They may have to take a job that does even require a college education to get a job, or to make decent money.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
