Ask for a raise 15

[dcceecy]

Our company has a salary freeze since April 2009. I came to this company in 2007 (did get 5% raise in 2008).

we do employee evaluation every year. Every time my boss said I have done an outstandig job and he was going to propose a raise for me. But he came back to me said that the big boss did not agree with the raise.

I am pretty sure the company did well last year (from the work load and bonus they gave to all employees). I also think they will pay more if they hire someone to replace me.

Does that mean I have to look for better paid jobs somewhere else?
Any comments?

Thanks.

 

[supercub]

I just completed 1 year of service at my new employ. The company has 400 employees in a nafta country and I am here in the corporate headquarters with about 20 people. The review policy is that you have to ask them for a review. After 3 months I asked the HR for a review and never got one. I work under a senior employee who declines to be too much manegerial. He handed me my Xmas bonus, although he stated he was not party to the amount. We had a 1/2 hour chat about goals and accomplishments and he mentioned some good points about my work. I mentioned an upcoming aniversary and a review. I didn't get a review and the day passed without a congrat for 1 year or anything. The guy that hired me is the owners son. He out most of the time and we never really hit it off. I am thinking of waiting a few weeks and asking for a direct amount of increase. The company is doing well. Any input?

 

[cry22]

Well JAE

I dsagree in a lot of what you're saying

1. The work experience they get here vs. there.
The more companies you work for, the better the experience, you get a new way of doing things, you diversify your expertise, etc..

2. The risk of losing seniority at a new firm.
Common' man, seniority? this is not an airline company with unions. I was hired last once and was among the two remaining form 18 when downsized.

3. The loss of vacation/PTO time off - or the lower rate given to new hires.
PTO? I never accept an offer unless I got 4 weeks vacation plus sick leave. You match my benefits if you want me to work for you-it always worked.

4. The work environment here vs. there.
The work environmet already sucks where he is at? it always gets better when one changes jobs, - ALWAYS.

5. The impression jumping around to different jobs gives when pasted on your resume.
That is easy, if my tenure is less than a year, I just scratch it form my resume, yeah I lied and I did not mention that company in my resume, so what?, what are you going to do about it? fire me? (don't do this in a governement application though), private sector? knock yourself out.

6. The fact that some firms hire in bad economies only to fill short term project needs - then out the door they go.
That you are right, one has to know how to spot them and turn their offer down. But the OP is deep sh..... he's got nothing to lose.

But in general, no offense but you're just another boss, you're no different, you are in it to pave the road to your driveway, and ONLY your driveway.

 

[JAE]

cry22 - oh please.

1. The more companies you work for, the better the experience, you get a new way of doing things, you diversify your expertise, etc.. not always. I had a good friend of mine resign from our firm and go to work for another larger firm in Chicago. No mentors, no variability in projects...he just popped in parameters into a computer program and did retaining walls over and OVER AND OVER again.

2. The risk of losing seniority at a new firm.
Common' man, seniority? this is not an airline company with unions. I was hired last once and was among the two remaining form 18 when downsized. sometimes you do lose "seniority" in that for some smaller firms, the last hired, first let-go policy stands. This is simply a truth in many firms and you just can't deny it by referring to unions.

3. The loss of vacation/PTO time off - or the lower rate given to new hires.
PTO? I never accept an offer unless I got 4 weeks vacation plus sick leave. You match my benefits if you want me to work for you-it always worked. Sometimes negotiating PTO doesn't fly - especially for younger engineers. Sometimes it does. But I was just pointing out that this is something that you should consider - not that it always applies.

4. The work environment here vs. there.
The work environmet already sucks where he is at? it always gets better when one changes jobs, - ALWAYS. Not always. Sometimes you can be surprised. I was in a firm I went to work for once. The former firm was great but, moving because I wanted to live in another city I found the new firm had some dysfunction within. Again - just something to consider.

5. The impression jumping around to different jobs gives when pasted on your resume.
That is easy, if my tenure is less than a year, I just scratch it form my resume, yeah I lied and I did not mention that company in my resume, so what?, what are you going to do about it? fire me? (don't do this in a governement application though), private sector? knock yourself out. Uh...OK. So when I call these past firms and verify their employment and there are 1 or 2 year gaps - what am I to think?

6. The fact that some firms hire in bad economies only to fill short term project needs - then out the door they go.
That you are right, one has to know how to spot them and turn their offer down. But the OP is deep sh..... he's got nothing to lose. Again, cry22 - I'm just pointing out things to consider - not granite carved truths.

But in general, no offense but you're just another boss, you're no different, you are in it to pave the road to your driveway, and ONLY your driveway.
Quite an absurd statement. You can paint with a broad brush all you like, but you don't know me and you don't know all the "bosses" out there.

As I said above - I was listing things that should be considered - none of which are invalid. Some might apply - some might not.

 

[TJOrlowski]

Cry22,
I feel bad for you, and also bad for anyone you work for. If I were JAE, I'd feel pretty insulted that you basically called him a liar. If I were your employer, I'd want you off my team ASAP, lest your misconception that all bosses are only interested in keeping their team members under their thumb to take a bigger and bigger piece of the profits spread to other team members.

Have you given full and complete thought to what it actually COSTS to employ someone? Have you given full and complete thought to what it actually COSTS to give someone a salary raise? In my state, there are at least a half-dozen extra costs that must be accounted for. For every dollar in salary increase, an employer can expect an increase in these other costs of employment that you as an employee never see.

Suppose all other costs of running the business remain constant: utilities, mortgages/leases, raw materials, consumables, taxes, etc. Also suppose that the company does not raise its prices, and that sales volume and profits are equivalent to that of last year. Where does the money come from to give you a raise?



Dcceey,
Back to the original OP: how many employees in the company you work for? Is the ownership group large, or small? Are year end bonuses a part of your employment contract? Or are they non-contractual bonuses in the form of either profit sharing, or straight bonuses?

-TJ Orlowski

 

[rowingengineer]

cry22,
"But in general, no offense but you're just another boss, you're no different, you are in it to pave the road to your driveway, and ONLY your driveway"

What a BS statement!!, The bigger companies in my area reduced staffing by 20-50% at the down turn, a few smaller companies have not taken a profit for 2-3 years and kept their staffing rates constant.

Not every boss is the same, not every company is the same, not every country is the same.

http://www.nceng.com.au/

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

 

[cry22]

TJ, ROW, and JAE

well, well, well, looks like I opened a can of worms here.

first, I am my own boss now, I used to be an employee not long ago and I am bringing up the employee side of things.
If you guys are hurt, well tough, only the truth hurts.

Don't give me that BS that you're in it for charity! that you care for your employees? you care for yourself first, your company second, and then if any compassion left, it passes on to the employees.

As for me as a boss, I am a one man shop for now, but if I were to grow, I know that I will look at my company bottom line before peoples' feelings. Sure, every employer would love to hire instead of firing, the more people they have, the more they make.

One last thing TJ - I do not see where I insulted JAE in my statements (I just sent in the cold hard facts from the other side of the fence).
As for JAE - you seem stuborn, you are wrong in all your answers, I lived the situations I described, it's not my imagination. ok, I grant you points for sticking to your opinions, I bet you stick by your designs as well.

 

[rowingengineer]

cry22,
There is no truth in your statements, only opinions. You don't know us and you have never worked for me.

Never said we were in it for charity, but we are in it for the long haul, our company has an employee ownership offer and we look to retain staff over profits when things turn south for a few years. We have o a large % of staff heading into 10+ years of service, and generally only have a 5% change of staff in any one year, mostly in non technical staff.

http://www.nceng.com.au/

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

 

[TJOrlowski]

Cry22,
From your arrogant (and ignorant frankly) tone, it is understandable that you are "your own boss." If you have any employees, do you view them in the same manner as you assert that those on this fora view their employees? Or are you a divinely inspired exception to the "rule" that all business owners are greedy profiteers, concerned with nothing but lining their pockets?

As rowingengineer stated, nobody is in business for the practice. At the core of every business is the idea that the company has a product or service they can deliver to market for a profit. I'd agree with the premise that owners or managers who are only concerned with company or division profits are short-sighted; and not employing a strategy for long term strength and growth. Corporate sharks who move from company to company, showing huge margins in their divisions, but not actually improving the portion of the company they're responsible for give other bosses/managers a bad name: mostly because they are the type that is most visible, and most often discussed.

On the other side of your cynical coin: if all bosses care nothing for their employees or their customers, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that all employees care nothing about their company, its customers, or their work? Aren't all employees only concerned with how big their paycheck is, how much non-wage compensation and PTO they get, and how they can extract the greatest possible amount of benefits from the company for doing the least possible amount of work?

Good luck on your endeavor as "your own boss." If and when you hire your first employee, remember what you've stated here, and recant it for your employee at his/her first performance review.

-TJ Orlowski

 

[cry22]

TJ
First of all, it is clear that we do not agree BUT I reject the cynical stamp you're sticking on me, I am just blunt, may be too blunt, but cynical? I don't think so.
As for your last two statements:
1- About the workers caring: Some statistic I read somewhere - It is said that 70% of all workers do just enough to keep their job; 15% do much more that is expected of them (find those 15% and reward them); and 15% you could actually get rid of AND improve your company bottom line and moral (find these 15% and fire them).

2-If I ever have staff, I'll let you know when raise time comes in, If you don't hear from me, it means I went capput.

Keep smiling TJ, life is too short to exchange mean statements on the web. I bet you're one nice fella, I just happen not to agree with.

ROW
Good for you, your comapany and staff man, I am glad to read about your low turnover and your happy staff, really.
And YES, you're right, those are my Opinions, not scientific evidence, BUT my statements are facts from my experience, and that is proof enough to me.
How's the statistic of 15%/70%/15% doing at your company ROW?

Good on you guys.

 

[jmw]

The idea that caring for the employees doesn't go with worrying about the bottom line is absolute nonsense.

There are plenty of examples that show where care and compassion for the employee pays dividends.

Back in the early days of the industrial revolution when children worked in the mines or spent 16-17 hours a day tending looms in the cotton mills some employers did worry about their workers.
Some of the most notable were Quakers and in the Uk you can see the "villages" they built for their workers. Cadbury's Bournville, Lever's Port Sunlight and so on. Model villages by any standards.

In the days before there was a legally defined maximum working hours one of the big mill owners commissioned a time and motion study.
He found, for example, young boys walked 20 miles a day around the looms helping them keep running.
He made some drastic changes and was behind new government legislation on working hours.
One of the first things he did was reduce the working week for his workers to below the limit that was later set by government, and he made sure their take home pay remained the same.

He was prepared to suffer a drop in output just to make life better for his employees and because he had a conscience.
He was surprised to find that in fact, productivity increased.

There are many companies that find ways that energise their employees even if it is only with share schemes.
I've been in three of these and one of them paid the deposit on my house.

Giving employees a share in the company gives them a shared interest in the success of the company.

Yes, for many people work is a 9-5 thing with HR determined to treat workers as replaceable cogs with the same depreciation as machinery. But you can tell the difference.

I suspect that the cynical watch the bottom line attitude is a characteristic of many modern companies. These are the ones forever substituting acquisitions, take overs and mergers for real activity. These also appear to be successful. But when you add up the various constituent companies you don't find a leaner meaner more profitable company you find the ruins of lots of good companies where the collective sum is a fraction of the component parts and not more efficient and with zero employee moral in all.

I have worked for companies headed by the sort of boss who worries about the bottom line and nothing else, "paving his own driveway" and the devil take the rest.
These were some of the most odious despicable people I ever met.
I have also worked with some bad managers who nevertheless cared about the employees (they just shouldn't have been managers) and you not only forgave them their bad management you tried to steer them away from the worst decisions and made sure you did all you could so the company would survive them.
I have seen companies with bad management kept afloat through the years by he workforce because the workforce cared.
I have also seen just how little the employees cared when faced with cynical bottom line watching managers.
Sometimes this was an inherited family run business memory and sometimes they just did what they did to make sure the managers mistakes didn't do more damage than necessary.

I remember my Grandfather telling me about his time in the cavalry.
He said they had some good officers and good NCOs but they also had some really bad ones.
When the war came, the first day they left the trenches most of the bad officers and bad NCOs met their death and if anyone looked closely they would have found they were all hit in the back.

When times get tough the cynical manager will not only find he is on his own but he had better watch his back.

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[ewh]

my statements are facts from my experience

Key phrase here is "from my experience".
My own experience is different, and I abhor using absolutes where they are not true, which seems to be what you are doing.
I have worked for companies that put employees first; those employees recognized that the company had to show a profit {a portion of which did flow down to them) or they would no longer have the company to employ them.
I can't claim the business knowledge or experience of many here, but I have also lived through several examples of company "leaders" squeezing out every possible penny so that they can show a profit with no regard for the future solvency of the business, much less profitability (other than their own) and I know that not every company is run in that manner.
Those are facts from my experience.

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Technically, the glass is always full.

 

[jmw]

Names to consider:
George and Richard Cadbury
Lord Lever
Andrew Carnegie (the US philanthropist0
Richard Ostler
Robert Owen

Owen knew from instinct and experience that workers responded more positively to consideration and kindess than to cruelty, and now he began to put into practice his reforming ideas. He built a model community with quality housing for his workers, a school, a day nursery for pre-school children, a playground, evening classes for adults and a shop which was the forerunner of the co-operative retail movement.

Robert Peel (the same for whom police were nicknamed "Peelers".

Peel argued in Parliament that the state needed to protect the interests of its most vulnerable citizens, and in 1802 he was largely responsible for the Health and Safety of Apprentices Act, which limited the working hours of pauper cotton-mill apprentices to 12 a day.

However, this act was largely ineffective and Peel - aided by reformers like Robert Owen - continued to fight for change until the passing of the 1819 Factory Act, which outlawed the employment in cotton mills of anyone under the age of nine and restricted the hours of older children.

Sir Titus Salt who created the Saltaire Model village for his workers.

I think the one I was trying to remember was John Wood (John Wood was in collaboration with Richard Ostler above) but I remember more than was in this link.

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[MacGyverS2000]

I think considering the Ben & Jerry Ice Cream business model is in order here... I'd say those employees do quite well for themselves and have a good pair of bosses.

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com

 

[JAE]

cry22
You say that "all my answers are wrong".

I didn't really give any "answers" to the original post - all I essentially said (read my post above again why don't you?) - was that not all employers feed their employees a "line of crap".

I am an employer and I know I don't. I know a lot of other employers in engineering that also rely on and cherish many of their key employees. This is not just my "experience" but rather facts that are true.

The only other thing I posted was some SUGGESTIONS that if the OP wanted to jump ship there are things beyond just the salary that they should consider. So you are saying that it is WRONG to consider other things besides only salary?

You sound quite jaded in your own experiences about employers. Sorry to hear that.

 

[cry22]

JAE
I am not saying that it is WRONG to consider other things besides Salary.
I got a $35,000 a year raise offer from an employer that knew me well and I rejected the offer (Yes, I am that good at what I do to command that kind of money. Ooops, I may sound arrogant to some people on this site), my reason was that I was in a large firm and I enjoyed the large projects I was working on, I enjoyed the team and lots of other things. Which is much better than moving to a mom and pop shop with the wife and son running the business.
No sir, money is not everything, but you certainly know that employers who care about their employees are few to go around and are an endangered specy.

 

[Forensic74]

In my experience, at the end of the day, even employers with good intentions are really only concerned with themselves.

Just an observation, JAE, you may not intentionally feed your employees a line of crap, but I know if I saw my boss spending as much time on this site as you appear to, I would not be happy with management. I would expect my boss be out there trying to get new jobs so that my pay is competitive. If not, then I'd leave, which is directly what the OP is asking about.

 

[JAE]

MainMan10,

"as much time as you appear to". I think you don't have enough data to support such an assertion. You don't know my job conditions, hours worked, success in business, etc.

You do have a point if a business leader spent too much time on Eng-Tips and didn't do their job.

Good business leaders and owners realize that their employees well being and happiness are directly related to their own personal and business success. A poor leader, one who feeds out lines of crap and is solely self-interested, ends up hurting themselves and their company more than they realize.

The OP appears to be (appears mind you) under leadership that isn't aware of this. My only real point in this was to push back a little on the posts above that suggested that ALL owners, ALL managers are TOTALLY self-interested.

To make that assertion, logically, you'd have to know every manager in the universe, which you don't. To defend against such an assertion, you only need to know at least one manager who doesn't.

But you all have your own unique and varied opinions and experiences. I believe that the posts here are generally sincere, and reflect that there are numerous leaders out there who just don't get it. Just not all of them.

 

[patprimmer]

MainMan

Have you ever successfully run your own company?

JAE.


Have you ever successfully run your own company?

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm

for site rules

 

[rowingengineer]

I don't understand why a few people on this tread think it is OK to personally attack other peoples work principles and abilities without any evidence or knowledge.

JAE from what I can see is a great participant for the engtips community averaging about 10 posts a week, hardly enough to worry any staff members. Not to mention that these days that most marketing companies will encourage you to participate online to grow your business.

http://www.nceng.com.au/

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

 

[patprimmer]

Row

Hence the questions in my previous post although nI am pretty much sure of the answers.

Ready, aim, fire sure as hell beats ready, fire aim. ;-)

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm

for site rules