this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
112 points (95.2% liked)

Programming

17000 readers
90 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Think of it from the company's point of view. If you're hiring a new employee then the options for a good candidate are a) move jobs and work for you, b) move jobs and work for someone else. You're competing with other companies.

If you're reviewing an existing salary for a good employee their options are a) do nothing and accept the shitty raise, b) move jobs and work for someone else.

Moving jobs has significant cost for most people - it's time consuming, stressful, might involve moving house, etc.

That downside gives employees who haven't proven they are looking for a new job a significant negotiating disadvantage.

If you really want you can tell your boss you are actively looking for new jobs. That will increase your chances of getting a bigger raise, but of course it has other downsides so most people don't do that.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

There's downsides to the companies, though. Interviewing new candidates takes money, and takes time away from people already on the team. If everyone is switching jobs to get a higher salary, then companies aren't saving anything in the long run. They also have a major knowledge base walking out the door, and that's hard to quantify.

It's a false savings.

If I were to steel man this, it'd be cross-pollination. Old employees get set in their ways and tend to put up with the problems. They've simply integrated ways to work around problems in their workflow. New people bring in new ideas, and also point out how broken certain things are and then agitate for change.

This, I think, doesn't totally sink the idea of the "company man" who sticks around for decades. It means there should be a healthy mix.