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.
Because they think current employees can never be as smart and capable as the employee they don't have yet. And when they hire that new employee, that employee becomes a current employee and isn't as smart anymore.
Same reason they love to have consultants come in who mostly just go around and ask the current employees. Then package it up and sell it back to the company when if management were smart, they'd just ask their own employees to start with.
it's easier to brainwash new employees (or hold them hostage to contracts) with how employers want employees get the jobs done. the longer an employee is with an employer, the harder it is to manipulate them into how you want them to behave/perform
Common occurrence in the health care industry. My previous job in which I was a faithful - not perfect - nurse making $25/hr is now having to pay $45/hr to get nurses to come to work for them. I hear they are still having recruiting problems due to the poor reputation of the manager, who wanted to fix what wasn't broken, thereby running off about 75% of the staff in 6 months.
This was mentioned on another thread, and I thought it was an interesting topic. Why does it seem that many employers are not willing to pay the talent they have well for promotions and such, but are willing to pay larger amounts to outside talent who will have to be trained and gain experience of the new organization's processes?
This seems very counter-intuitive and costly.
You are asking for an explanation of bad management. Why do companies when they are downsizing one department and hiring in another leave the employees to fend for themselves instead of having HR match them up with similar jobs in the open positions in another department? Bad management.
Common occurrence in the health care industry. My previous job in which I was a faithful - not perfect - nurse making $25/hr is now having to pay $45/hr to get nurses to come to work for them. I hear they are still having recruiting problems due to the poor reputation of the manager, who wanted to fix what wasn't broken, thereby running off about 75% of the staff in 6 months.
Where I work, apparently the nursing management team had such abysmal reviews and so many complaints from the staff (my company gives surveys) that they got rid of them. But I know that is not common.
In my field, I was interested in a place that pays well but then I heard that the manager is HORRIBLE and I heard that from more than one source. They're too stupid to realize that in this field, everybody talks and it's such a "small world" you'll always know someone who knows someone else.
depends on the managers/supervisors, but often they want change, and with someone "new" they think they have a fresh start/clean slate...rather than changing existing management that may ..resist change or rebel against it
If/when companies pay (or give other incentives) to current employees to 'retain' them, you likely will not hear about it. Salaries are hush-hush in the private sector.
While I believe the OP is a good worker, he seems naively obsessed with getting more pay for his services in short periods of time.
Look at it this way: if John has given 5-10 strong years and continues to add value and show commitment to the org, they might feel comfortable giving him a salary that is out of line with those across the company in similar roles.
Now if Bob has given a strong year and asks for more responsibility and pay, especially if giving signals of moving on, the company would consider it reckless to give him a spike in pay already. Because each spike in pay can avalanche, making more spikes necessary for others moving forward.
So it's a little like a mandated raise in the minimum wage, sometimes tough for a company to swallow (and afford).
Lot of goofball employers would rather just cut their most experienced and productive only to acquire cheaper employers with knowledge of anything and as a result long term the company goes to s****
Just to save a few measely bucks. Experience. Knowledge and hard work is priceless. And while you may save money short term you're running the company into the ground long term. You may not experience for a year or so but eventually everyone suffers. I've seen it happen too many times to count
I love companies that fire people and then cant figure out where all the information is for the next person to do the job. They just fired a medical records person that had been here for 16 years and had been doing it many years on her own. Now they are running around like wild chickens trying to figure out how to do her job. lol
I love companies that fire people and then cant figure out where all the information is for the next person to do the job. They just fired a medical records person that had been here for 16 years and had been doing it many years on her own. Now they are running around like wild chickens trying to figure out how to do her job. lol
Luckly its not my problem.
Many companies prefer to have a revolving door of incompetent employees than one well paid one.
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.
