Can someone please explain raises and promotions? (fund, company, wage)

[mc33433]

LoriBee's post is very in line what I would respond.

Talk to your manager and define what it will take to get a promotion and/or a raise. Don't compare yourself to others. When I became a manager, the biggest surprise to me was the comp profiles of my team and how they varied dramatically. For example, someone who worked for the firm 30 years was paid significantly less than someone that had been there for 10 years, both in base and salary. However, based on where they had been in terms of experience and how they performed, it made sense.

One of my biggest raises was when I changed departments at my company. The new position was a promotion, and the manager, who I had known in a previous role, worked with HR to pay me what the average salary was for that level, which "corrected" my salary, so to speak and put me on par with others. So the raise was possible even within the company.

[sportsfan123]

[quote=LoriBee62;38061412]As a former HR professional I will tell you this:

1) More often, people get paid based on where they have BEEN than what they DO.

I just have to comment on this because this is really part of my gripe as well. During negotiation in which I ultimately failed, She told me that well based off of what you currently make , this is a considerable increase, like throwing it in my face. Just because Im making no money in one job , doesnt mean you make an insulting offer just to say its better than what you were making. It should be based off of what your worth , what the company can pay and what the positions salary calls for. Even if that's the way a company wants to justify an offer, I find it very insulting to straight out say it to the employee.

Back to my question, I think what I meant by the post was in regards to promotions , not necessarily raises in the same position.

I want to move to another department , which the company was clear about when they hired me. That department pays a lot more. So what I was getting at was if I'm paid undervalue for my current position , wouldn't I be underpaid for the new position , regardless of what salary that position calls for.

I always assumed that salary increases , regardless of same position or new , still usually stay at a certain percentage regardless of if that new position calls for a much higher salary.

I'm editing this post as I just read MC's post. What you answered was my question as I posted above. I just want to make sure that just because im behind the gun now , doesn't mean I will continue to be if I stay with the company.

Thanks for the responses.

[unixfed]

This happens everywhere. Your big chance at starting out ahead is in your negotiation when accepting the job. This is where you may very well command a salary higher than those with your same title who have been there longer. This is also where you could get lowballed.

I've read many articles on the subject, and typically a company will have a defined salary range for where your position should fall. Based on experience and need, they'll likely want to pay you anywhere from the bottom of the range (their best case scenario) to the mid-point (you are exactly what they're looking for and bring it all to the table). Very rarely, they'll go slightly beyond this point if you far exceed candidate expectations they need you badly.

That being said, your salary here can also impact your future positions with other companies. It is becoming fairly common practice for HR to ask for your previous salary and then use that fact to their benefit.

As far as promotions and raises, while it varies from company to company, MOST companies will have a defined percentage for raises and promotions depending on your performance or what you're being promoted to. For an example, my wife works at a major private university who has a university-wide policy that annual raises cannot exceed 2%.

For my company, annual raises tend to be a flat 2.5-3.5% assuming you meet performance requirements and dependent on how well the company is doing. For promotions, non-management steps up to the next pay tier is a flat 5%. Pretty crappy when you think about it. I could jump two paygrades and only get a 10% raise while I could jump ship to another company and perhaps grab another 20-50%.

It's for that reason that I hope I DONT receive a promotion. Why take all the responsibility that comes with a promotion for an extra 1.5-2.5%? No thanks.

[LoriBee62]

Originally Posted by sportsfan123

During negotiation in which I ultimately failed, She told me that well based off of what you currently make , this is a considerable increase, like throwing it in my face. Just because Im making no money in one job , doesnt mean you make an insulting offer just to say its better than what you were making. It should be based off of what your worth , what the company can pay and what the positions salary calls for. Even if that's the way a company wants to justify an offer, I find it very insulting to straight out say it to the employee.

Word to the wise: You don't have to disclose your current salary when interviewing for jobs at new companies. This is one of the reasons it's best to keep it to yourself.

As for being underpaid now, no. You will not continue to be underpaid forever at this company (if they are worth working for). I was in your position years ago, got into the HR department as a programmer and had access to everyone's salaries. People I was mentoring were making more than me. Yes, it's annoying an unnerving and you feel like a stooge. But ultimately, if you are a good employee and worth the money, you will continue to get increases and those other people won't.

Really, focus on making yourself valuable to the company. If it's a good company and they value talent, you will eventually end up on top if you make yourself worth it.

In my case, I kept getting promoted while those people I mentored are still at that same lower level today. They made more than me for a while, but ultimately, talent will rise to the top.

[unixfed]

I don't know about that... Many companies will not pay an employee more unless they have to (promotion, regular raises or threatening to leave). It is in their best interest to obtain the best talent for the cheapest price.

Look at it this way... If I stayed with my first job out of undergraduate 5 years ago for the 'meh' salary I was getting paid -- high-30s in a low cost of living area... Assuming I received regular 3% raises EVERY year (unlikely to happen), it would have taken me 24 years to earn what I earn now from changing companies twice.

I hate to say it, but company loyalty may be a thing of the past. I've seen far too many 20-30 year employees given the boot without even a thought. There's just no way you're going to keep up w/ market rates sticking around in one place.

[mc33433]

I've also seen instances where the person had a legitimate offer from another company for a higher salary and the current company "matched" the salary with a raise to retain the person since they were a good employee. But you have to be careful with approaching a manager with an ultimatum as well.

[tw71]

Yeah.... My experience has been, the smaller companies are the ones more likely not to pay you as much for what you do as the big ones. In many cases, they simply can't afford to do it because their annual profits are magnitudes lower than the mega-corps hiring for your same job position.

Nonetheless, I've always worked for the small or mid-sized companies (and received a lower salary than all of my friends in my field who worked for the big guys). For me, it's just a matter of it being a better fit. At the really big places, you tend to become more of a number than an individual. Things can go along great one week, and next thing you know -- your boss gets transferred someplace and now you report to someone new. He or she may be miserable to work for. Who knows? And you tend to have less say-so in anything. There are simply too many layers of management and decision making.

Different places I've been have different takes on "employee loyalty" though. I worked at one place where the only time I ever got a decent raise, it was via threatening to leave and accepting a counter-offer. (I was let go about a year after that, which wasn't all that surprising.) At another, I knew I was underpaid but the flip side was, they let me call pretty much all the shots on things related to my job. I got to report directly to the company owner and as long as he thought my idea or suggestion had merit, I got the green light to make it happen. That made my job more fulfilling because I knew I was making positive changes there and building the environment I wanted to work in. That's something you can't just find in a job posting when you're hunting .... And when the economy had a downturn, the upper management took pay cuts larger than the 10% or so they eventually asked the rest of us to take. And it was clear it was done because the owners actually cared about their workers, and didn't want to have to let any of us go.

Bottom line? Don't worry too much about whether or not you're making the same salary the web sites or your friends in the field claim you should be getting. Worry about your overall job satisfaction. If they're making a lot of demands of you and your time, and you constantly feel like you don't get paid enough to get your bills paid? Start looking elsewhere. But if you're getting by ok and you have a reasonable work/life balance? I'd be tempted to recommend just leaving well enough alone.

[reneeh63]

Originally Posted by sportsfan123

As I have posted a few days ago , I joined a new company three weeks ago and already want out.

I know based off glass door and speaking to other employees im like 5-10k off other employees in similar positions.

My question is , and the main reason I'm looking to leave is , when getting promoted or raises , don't most companies keep it to a certain percentage?

I feel like no matter how many times I may get promoted , because Im underpaid in my original position , I will always be underpaid going forward.

So for example if I start at 50k and the next position is 70k , If 50k is below the standard and is underpaid for the position , they could never bump me up that high to 70k in the new position and thus would always be below the norm.

Is this logic correct?

Yes, most raises are a percentage...however, it could be a HIGH percentage...so yeah, it'll always be less than if you base had been higher to start with. That doesn't mean it's not worth pursuing however.

If you feel your pay is so low, why did you take the job in the first place? Why did you not try to negotiate a higher salary? Did you find out from colleagues something you didn't know before? Otherwise, sounds like you're thinking of quitting for a silly reason...some kind of buyer's remorse?!

[Jukesgrrl]

Originally Posted by joe from dayton

Each employere does their own thing. If you are making less than the industry average you will always be playing catch up and, probably, not getting there. If you are significantly underpaid, expect to have to switch employers to get a pay raise that will take you up to "average" pay.

That was not my experience. I once took a job at a Fortune 100 company for far less than others in my field turned out to be making. It was stupidity on my part — I was youngish, had never worked for a major corporation, didn't do any research on the company's pay scales, etc. My ignorance ... compounded by a savvy HR person who saw an academic coming and decided to make hay out of me. He probably got big points from his superiors for snagging me for a ridiculous salary.

It wasn't long before I wised up. (I was naive when I was young, but not brainless.) I didn't blame anyone but myself. I worked very hard to earn the respect of my superiors. I got a raise after one year, then in less than another year a job came open that would be a promotion in responsibility for me. I applied for it, made a good impression on the interviewers and when I was pretty sure they wanted me for the job I laid it out for them that I expected my salary in the new position to be commensurate with the skills I had demonstrated.

The hiring manager agreed with me that I was underpaid for my education and experience. We negotiated an immediate 25% raise (which was high in that place, but little about corporate salaries is ever cast in stone) and a promise (which she kept) that my salary would be raised a minimum of 10% more per year conditional on getting good performance reviews the entire time I worked for her. I was up to a totally appropriate level in no time. I'm sure my success was due to the fact that I had clearly demonstrated worthiness and was reasonable in the time I gave them to correct their "oversight."

One thing that worries me about the OP's letter is the admission that s/he wants out of this new job after only three weeks. How can anyone be sure of something like that in such a short period of time? It's like moving to a new state and deciding you hate it after three weeks; you haven't even experienced three of the four seasons. In three weeks at a new job, you're lucky if you know where all the bathrooms are.

There's always an adjustment period; the employee needs to get comfortable in the job and management needs to get to know the employee. I can't help but believe that a pretty bad attitude is being silently conveyed due to the opinion that the job stinks after only three weeks. That certainly isn't going to help the situation. OP, I'd advise getting your nose to the grindstone and trying to make yourself indispensable. When that happens, you're in a position to negotiate a far better salary. And by that time you might not even think the job is so bad. If you still hate it after a year, fine, but this is no time to be making sweeping evaluations. Sportsfan, I'd concentrate on what you are doing for them the first year; after that, worry about what they are doing for you.

[Bo]

IMO, it's impossible to gauge whether one was hoodwinked on their initial pay, without knowing 2 things that an employee will likely never know.

- Were there acceptable fallback candidates right behind you in the pool from which you were hired?

- What is the dollar amount in the salary negotiation at which the employer would rather take one of those other candidates than pay what you're asking?

To put it another way, if you're asking for a salary that's outside the range for the position (another bit of information you're unlikely to know going in), you'll need to be a truly exceptional candidate to get hired at that higher salary.