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.
Does Negotiation even exist in the modern workplace anymore? Most of what I've seen today is "take it or leave it because we will just find some poor sucker willing to take what we offer"
My company is 86ing more of the high salary earners off their books and rehiring at the absolute bare minimum salary.
In fact, the worst thing you can do is eventually get to too high a salary
I spent many years in management, and see you are not getting it. Lets break it down.
Lets imagine each work 40 hours a week.
He works 40 hours doing clinical work.
She works 20 hours doing research work.
She works 10 hours doing research.
She works 10 hours teaching.
Lets imagine clinical work pays $100 an hour.
Research pays $20 an hour.
Teaching pays $50 an hour.
His salary is $4,000 a week.
Her salary is $2,000 for clinical work. Research $200 per week. Teaching $500 a week. Total is $2,700 per week.
As their duties are not equal, then there is no way to say she is being underpaid. She has 3 jobs with 3 different pay levels. He has one equal to her highest paid job. They are both being paid for what they are producing. You could not expect the employer to pay them the same salary as they are not giving their employer the same level of work product. Each is being paid for what they produce. The fact they both have the same amount of time in the work place, and the same education, has nothing to do with their pay check. That education and one year in the workplace and equal education has nothing to do with their pay check. Their sex, has nothing to do with their paycheck.
Each is paid for the work product they produce for the employer. She has 3 jobs, and 2 pay considerably less than the #1 job. He works all his time in the #1 job (clinical) and is naturally paid more. I have seen similar things and pay differential over the last 60 years since I started working. Sometimes the man makes the most money, and other times the woman makes the most money, when they have different duties, with some of the duties paying less or more than the others.
Yeah, the lawyer screwed up. She should have gotten regular pay increases as part of her contract, and the lawyer should have researched comparable positions.
If she walked in, asked for a raise and got one, she waited too long.
Here is a true story I just heard from a coworker regarding her daughter who a year ago finished up medical school, residency, and a couple fellowships after that. So she's been at her first actual position for a year now. She's in a sub-sub specialty and is a pediatric pathologist. In addition to being a doctor at that hospital she also does research and teaches at the medical school.
She had been advised to get a "contracts lawyer" to help her negotiate that first salary - I guess she did, and paid him big bucks to get her salary and she was okay with the result. Now, a year later a new guy gets hired - he has also only been out of school for a year, same school as she and no particularly high accolades. He shared with her his salary.....now mind you - he is NOT doing research and he is NOT teaching - it is DOUBLE her salary.
She went to the medical director and reminded her of all her responsibilities and then asked what the new guy was making - the medical director said she didn't know (!?) Really? So she told her she knew he was making x because he'd told her. Well, she got some kind of raise, I"m not sure what because her mom didn't say exactly but I got the impression it may have only brought her salary even with his, despite her many extra responsibilities.
The point is she even paid a lawyer good money and the LAWYER screwed her on top of the hospital low-balling her. I'm only glad she found out now before her entire was crippled, based on such a low starting salary that could have easily impacted all her future earnings.
The mom said she "didn't think that happened any more". Yes - wage discrimination DOES happen, even when you do all you can to prevent it.
How much education does she have? How much experience does she have? Are we getting the full story here?
I spent many years in management, and see you are not getting it. Lets break it down.
Lets imagine each work 40 hours a week.
He works 40 hours doing clinical work.
She works 20 hours doing research work.
She works 10 hours doing research.
She works 10 hours teaching.
Lets imagine clinical work pays $100 an hour.
Research pays $20 an hour.
Teaching pays $50 an hour.
His salary is $4,000 a week.
Her salary is $2,000 for clinical work. Research $200 per week. Teaching $500 a week. Total is $2,700 per week.
As their duties are not equal, then there is no way to say she is being underpaid. She has 3 jobs with 3 different pay levels. He has one equal to her highest paid job. They are both being paid for what they are producing. You could not expect the employer to pay them the same salary as they are not giving their employer the same level of work product. Each is being paid for what they produce. The fact they both have the same amount of time in the work place, and the same education, has nothing to do with their pay check. That education and one year in the workplace and equal education has nothing to do with their pay check. Their sex, has nothing to do with their paycheck.
Each is paid for the work product they produce for the employer. She has 3 jobs, and 2 pay considerably less than the #1 job. He works all his time in the #1 job (clinical) and is naturally paid more. I have seen similar things and pay differential over the last 60 years since I started working. Sometimes the man makes the most money, and other times the woman makes the most money, when they have different duties, with some of the duties paying less or more than the others.
Excellent example! I have seen numerous real life scenarios like this!
Yeah, the lawyer screwed up. She should have gotten regular pay increases as part of her contract, and the lawyer should have researched comparable positions.
If she walked in, asked for a raise and got one, she waited too long.
In medicine its quite different that the scenario you posed. The increases come in many forms - one is the increased value of their work RVU's. Others might be related to work volume. Often a physician can give themselves a raise by working smarter and often harder but not necessarily. As others mentioned, part of the issue could be poor salary negotiations. But without knowing more, I can't conclude this is the case.
BTW - posters are discussing her "salary"., but for physicians isn't really a true salary in that if they work said number of hours they get agreed upon compensation. Typically, they have to see a specific # of patients and certain types of encounters to "earn" their agreed upon salary. They can fall short or go over each month and year end. There are a few pay models but they are now tending to be more similar than not.
I spent many years in management, and see you are not getting it. Lets break it down.
Lets imagine each work 40 hours a week.
He works 40 hours doing clinical work.
She works 20 hours doing research work.
She works 10 hours doing research.
She works 10 hours teaching.
Lets imagine clinical work pays $100 an hour.
Research pays $20 an hour.
Teaching pays $50 an hour.
His salary is $4,000 a week.
Her salary is $2,000 for clinical work. Research $200 per week. Teaching $500 a week. Total is $2,700 per week.
As their duties are not equal, then there is no way to say she is being underpaid. She has 3 jobs with 3 different pay levels. He has one equal to her highest paid job. They are both being paid for what they are producing. You could not expect the employer to pay them the same salary as they are not giving their employer the same level of work product. Each is being paid for what they produce. The fact they both have the same amount of time in the work place, and the same education, has nothing to do with their pay check. That education and one year in the workplace and equal education has nothing to do with their pay check. Their sex, has nothing to do with their paycheck.
Each is paid for the work product they produce for the employer. She has 3 jobs, and 2 pay considerably less than the #1 job. He works all his time in the #1 job (clinical) and is naturally paid more. I have seen similar things and pay differential over the last 60 years since I started working. Sometimes the man makes the most money, and other times the woman makes the most money, when they have different duties, with some of the duties paying less or more than the others.
Mod cut. As I stated, the daughter, who is the doctor, conveyed this...the daughter (who is the doctor) knows what each component of her job is worth...because yeah, she's the doctor doing the work, you know? Most of her hours are clinical and she's doing ADDITIONAL research and teaching. I'm not reading about some stranger online and coming to my own conclusions.
Even with that amount of time you put into this you still couldn't manage to create an example showing how he deserves double her salary so not exactly persuasive. BTW, as I'd said, she puts in more than 40 hours a week though I don't know that he doesn't also. And yeah, her management realized THEY had "miscalculated" and did give her a major increase...not enough, as she plans to start looking elsewhere but yes, they made a "correction" obviously based on something so the proof is in the pudding.
Mod cut.
Last edited by PJSaturn; 04-18-2016 at 07:56 AM..
Reason: Rude comments.
In medicine its quite different that the scenario you posed. The increases come in many forms - one is the increased value of their work RVU's. Others might be related to work volume. Often a physician can give themselves a raise by working smarter and often harder but not necessarily. As others mentioned, part of the issue could be poor salary negotiations. But without knowing more, I can't conclude this is the case.
BTW - posters are discussing her "salary"., but for physicians isn't really a true salary in that if they work said number of hours they get agreed upon compensation. Typically, they have to see a specific # of patients and certain types of encounters to "earn" their agreed upon salary. They can fall short or go over each month and year end. There are a few pay models but they are now tending to be more similar than not.
Yes, the above is a much more realistic view of how a physician is compensated. It's not like a regular job. Seniority and experience often do not factor into the equation. Physicians do not earn a "salary" in the typical sense of the word. They do not get annual adjustments or COL increases. The only physicians who are compensated in such a simplistic manner are maybe those in a VA, State or Indian Health Services system. For everyone else, compensated is a function of productivity (however that is defined) regardless of whether a physician is in private practice, academics or a health system employed position.
A physician contract will usually "guarantee" a minimum salary, and then provide for a bonus structure on top of that. The guarantee is based primarily on clinical productivity in the form of how many RVUs (relative value units) or collections. RVU's are a better measure, because they actually measure what you are doing, whereas if you are using only collections, physicians who see lots of Medicaid, Medicare and charity patients are going to get the short end of the stick because they reimburse so poorly (often the case in academics). The productivity target is usually outlined in the contract and you, as a practitioner, better know what is a realistic goal. Very few lawyers are going to know a realistic RVU target for any specific specialty. Sometimes, you can get physician compensation salary surveys like the MGMA, but mostly, a physician must know these things (or should) based on what they've attained in the past. If they are straight out of training, they usually get this information from talking with other colleagues in similar circumstances. If your lawyer knows this, all the better, but if not, that is certainly not an indication that he/she was somehow remiss in their duties.
You have a productivity target and you better meet it. Every month, administrators are tracking and trending, and if, at the end of the year, you are well below target, they are going to use that as leverage to lower your guaranteed salary, as most contracts give them this option. If you are well above target, then you can use that to try and leverage yourself an increase, but usually you will be getting financially rewarded via a bonus structure, but only after all the other parties that have their hands in your pockets take their percentage. There's usually a "Dean's tax", where the Med school will take a cut, an amount taken by the academic practice group or Practice Association etc. If you are in private practice, then it's very easy: you only get paid when your collections exceed your expenses. Lower collections- less money. Less work, less money etc.
Here is a true story I just heard from a coworker regarding her daughter. . .
Hearsay. Don't believe everything you hear.
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.
