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.
If Im really good at job, have a great aptitude for it and work ethic I think it would be Safe to assume, that I would be ok for the next level up after a few week and that same effort is put in .
Companies would rather play the "oh he/she are too valuable in their current role, lets give the job externally to someone who may not know anything about anything and may not have an aptitude at all".
So the guy/girl that they just threw dirt on, quicts putting in the hard work, effort. OR just leaves the company entirely. So you have great employees gone and idiots in positions they shouldn't be in.
Lose/Lose situation for the company
That you're good at your job does not mean you would be good at the next job up. A promotion is giving someone a new job with a different set of required skills.
Being good at your job gets you annual raises, not promotions. Showing you understand and have the skills needed for the next job is what it takes to be promoted beyond simply good work ethic.
You don't get promotion by working hard, having good attendance, not calling in sick, having good technical skills, no matter you are young or "old".
You get promotion by having connection with the boss, knowing how to talk. Or when you are already in the company, you need to know how to socialize, bribing the upper management, or knowing how to use people at the workplace such as doing many fundraisings every year, make people to buy this and that, so you can get big bucks from them to do some "great" things for the company. That way, you become popular and famous and get promotion.
You don't get promotion by working hard, having good attendance, not calling in sick, having good technical skills, no matter you are young or "old".
You get promotion by having connection with the boss, knowing how to talk. Or when you are already in the company, you need to know how to socialize, bribing the upper management, or knowing how to use people at the workplace such as doing many fundraisings every year, make people to buy this and that, so you can get big bucks from them to do some "great" things for the company. That way, you become popular and famous and get promotion.
That's not true at all. Well maybe at some companies, but definitely not all!
That you're good at your job does not mean you would be good at the next job up. A promotion is giving someone a new job with a different set of required skills.
Being good at your job gets you annual raises, not promotions. Showing you understand and have the skills needed for the next job is what it takes to be promoted beyond simply good work ethic.
I would rather trust my top performer who's shown to have necessary skills, works hard, will go above and beyond etc. (Most skills are easy to learn anyways in the private sector provided someone puts in the effort to get them) then **** off my most valuable team and take a chance of someone that ay not have any required skill sets, mixed with no idea of the basic job functions.
You can only get so many raises anyways . Eventually you top out where you are. And with no one willing to take a chance on you or pigeonholing you into that job.....Then what? Most companies have an "up or out" mentality" now.
I would rather trust my top performer who's shown to have necessary skills, works hard, will go above and beyond etc. (Most skills are easy to learn anyways in the private sector provided someone puts in the effort to get them) then **** off my most valuable team and take a chance of someone that ay not have any required skill sets, mixed with no idea of the basic job functions.
You can only get so many raises anyways . Eventually you top out where you are. And with no one willing to take a chance on you or pigeonholing you into that job.....Then what? Most companies have an "up or out" mentality" now.
Why do you think a high degree of skill in one job translates to a job that requires a different skillset?
Take an software engineer. A high degree of skill in that job doesn't mean they are ready to be a senior level engineer. Senior level engineers assume that person has people skills so that they can help direct and mentor less experienced employees. Managing software engineering is a relationship based job moreso than one requiring technical ability. The best, highest performing software engineer will not automatically make the best, highest performing senior employee or manager of software engineering.
We've spoken before, with respect, given you've said you voluntarily stayed at jobs (and industries) you hated, I have a hard time believing you aren't simply painting them unfairly in a poor light.
We can agree to disagree.
Yes, I have voluntarily stayed at jobs that I have hated. That was my decision and now that I am retired I feel good to have stayed because of my hefty savings and the feeling that I am in paradise because of the hard work that I did (and don't do now). Who knows what would have happened if I tried to job hop my way into finding a company that I liked to work for.
Did I lack the courage to leave the jobs that I hated and try something new? Yes. But it doesn't matter now since I am retired.
I only worked in one industry - IT, specifically software development. I did like the industry. I enjoyed working in just about every area of the Software Development Life Cycle. What the killer was for me was the low quality work environments that I had described in previous posts. That made working at those places awful. But I stayed for the money. Why should I paint those places unfairly in a bad light when I was paid very well? What do I get out of it if the places that I worked at were great? Would that make me some kind of a hero? No. Would I be a hero if the places that I worked for were awful? Also no. What difference does it make at this point in my life? Whether the places were bad or good doesn't matter anymore. I made good money at those companies which now allows me to have a good retirement. I even emerged with my health unscathed from those pressure cookers, and I am very thankful for that. I was simply relating my experiences during my 35 year IT career. I can now since I have a lot of time on my hands.
Whether you believe me or not doesn't matter to me. What do those companies mean to you anyway? The companies were Software Control, Inc., First of America Bank, Hygrade Food Products, Systems and Computer Technology Corporation, and Automatic Data Processing. Why are you so concerned about their reputations? They were awful places to work for. Most of my colleagues agreed. Why does it matter to you that these companies may have been slandered by me? Again, I made good money there even though I hated working for them.
But again, that is in the past. I have a great life now.
Yes, I have voluntarily stayed at jobs that I have hated. That was my decision and now that I am retired I feel good to have stayed because of my hefty savings and the feeling that I am in paradise because of the hard work that I did (and don't do now). Who knows what would have happened if I tried to job hop my way into finding a company that I liked to work for.
Did I lack the courage to leave the jobs that I hated and try something new? Yes. But it doesn't matter now since I am retired.
I only worked in one industry - IT, specifically software development. I did like the industry. I enjoyed working in just about every area of the Software Development Life Cycle. What the killer was for me was the low quality work environments that I had described in previous posts. That made working at those places awful. But I stayed for the money. Why should I paint those places unfairly in a bad light when I was paid very well? What do I get out of it if the places that I worked at were great? Would that make me some kind of a hero? No. Would I be a hero if the places that I worked for were awful? Also no. What difference does it make at this point in my life? Whether the places were bad or good doesn't matter anymore. I made good money at those companies which now allows me to have a good retirement. I even emerged with my health unscathed from those pressure cookers, and I am very thankful for that. I was simply relating my experiences during my 35 year IT career. I can now since I have a lot of time on my hands.
Whether you believe me or not doesn't matter to me. What do those companies mean to you anyway? The companies were Software Control, Inc., First of America Bank, Hygrade Food Products, Systems and Computer Technology Corporation, and Automatic Data Processing. Why are you so concerned about their reputations? They were awful places to work for. Most of my colleagues agreed. Why does it matter to you that these companies may have been slandered by me? Again, I made good money there even though I hated working for them.
But again, that is in the past. I have a great life now.
What I think shouldn't matter, and I couldn't care less who you worked for. You're missing the point. People who dislike their jobs tend to only look for and overestimate the bad while ignoring the good parts of those jobs. Regardless of how good the company is, if a person has a negative attitude, they will find ways to complain about any company or any job. I take what anyone with such an attitude says with a grain of salt, as should people looking for advice on these forums. That's all.
What I think shouldn't matter, and I couldn't care less who you worked for. You're missing the point. People who dislike their jobs tend to only look for and overestimate the bad while ignoring the good parts of those jobs. Regardless of how good the company is, if a person has a negative attitude, they will find ways to complain about any company or any job. I take what anyone with such an attitude says with a grain of salt, as should people looking for advice on these forums. That's all.
That's a strange attitude to have. You are lumping just about everyone who dislikes their jobs not to be credible because of "negative attitudes". There are many different people with different experiences, some with negative attitudes, some with positive attitudes. There are no cookie cutter people.
Besides, I didn't have a negative attitude during my IT career. I stayed at my jobs for the money. How is that negative? I turned a negative situation into a positive. I hated the jobs but got along well with my coworkers and managers. How is that a negative attitude? While many of my colleagues complained, I did not because I knew that complaining wouldn't change anything. I played the hand that I was dealt. How is that a negative attitude? I was constantly praised by my management for not complaining and for having a positive and optimistic mindset. How is that a negative attitude? Even though I hated working under these managements, I was always praised for doing good work, got good reviews, and good raises. How is that a negative attitude? I was paid good money for what I did and knew that I had to turn over quality work for that money and I did. How is that a negative attitude? I stuck it out in those jobs voluntarily, 28 years at my last IT employer. If anything, it shows endurance not a negative attitude. I was successful in my career and am proud of it. How is that a negative attitude?
I’m not one to find suspicion or conspiracy theories but I’ve been at my company for 5 years. And I’ve noticed they never promote anyone over 25. Most people are right out of college and within in a year are promoted, when a 35-50 year old is busting their ass for years to always be turned down. Yes I’m sure some are just better suited for the job....but there are some pretty great older people here that can’t catch break. This is happening all the time so I’m starting the think they do base it on age. Mostly men under 30 are the first to get the jobs (they interview everyone who applies and many people do). My coworker was passed over for a 23 year women who is the least qualitified. It’s hurtful. Once in a while an older man might get promoted but never a women over 35.
I don't know about this. From my own personal experience and observation, younger people are generally "hungrier" to make a name for themselves than older people. They have more enthusiasm, drive and are more passionate about what they do and where they are going in life.
Most older people I have experienced in a work environment do not actively seek to improve their skills and knowledge because they feel that they "know all there is to know" about the work they are doing. I'm not even talking about technology. I've met salesmen who, as some great motivational speaker put it; "have not been selling for 19 years, they have been selling for 1 year, 19 times". (I believe that was in "Think and Grow Rich")
Again, I can only speak from personal experience, but the people I have known who get ahead and promoted are the ones who make it known that they will do "whatever it takes" to advance forward in their careers. They make it known that they are hungry, and driven and passionate about what they do and they have a plan for their life and that they WILL NOT settle for less, under any circumstances. Age has never been a determining factor, as far as I am concerned.
That's a strange attitude to have. You are lumping just about everyone who dislikes their jobs not to be credible because of "negative attitudes". There are many different people with different experiences, some with negative attitudes, some with positive attitudes. There are no cookie cutter people.
Besides, I didn't have a negative attitude during my IT career. I stayed at my jobs for the money. How is that negative? I turned a negative situation into a positive. I hated the jobs but got along well with my coworkers and managers. How is that a negative attitude? While many of my colleagues complained, I did not because I knew that complaining wouldn't change anything. I played the hand that I was dealt. How is that a negative attitude? I was constantly praised by my management for not complaining and for having a positive and optimistic mindset. How is that a negative attitude? Even though I hated working under these managements, I was always praised for doing good work, got good reviews, and good raises. How is that a negative attitude? I was paid good money for what I did and knew that I had to turn over quality work for that money and I did. How is that a negative attitude? I stuck it out in those jobs voluntarily, 28 years at my last IT employer. If anything, it shows endurance not a negative attitude. I was successful in my career and am proud of it. How is that a negative attitude?
I've seen many, many people in my career who could find something to complain about with literally anything. You have expressed how much you disliked your job often here, and how you disliked it for decades. It might be because the job was bad, it might be because you simply had a negative attitude. I have no way of knowing.
I'm not saying you are wrong. I am saying you could be, and I am taking what is said with a grain of salt. If what you have said about your career is true, you were in a very unfortunate, very slim minority of people in the tech field.
Last edited by Lekrii; 04-27-2018 at 10:52 PM..
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.
