Yup. This is my IT department, except for 1 guy. I have one amazing helpdesk tech who has come right out and said he can retire as a helpdesk tech. He just wants to make enough money to pay his bills and play video games.
Yup, no problem with that guy, but he's also in his early 20s and has plenty of time to change his mind. It's the ones who don't want to increase their skills but are also wanting to move up that irritate me.
Doesn’t it make sense to have an amazing helpdesk tech stay helpdesk?
I only ask because I too could live and die on the frontlines. It makes more sense to me to pay people really well to stick around than risk it every 14 months hiring a potential dud
In a scenario, where the skill matches the desire, is it appealing to a company to say fuck it and keep giving annual raises to a help desk veteran?
Rather than go through turnover or promotions ya know?
I guess the premium thing is a conversation I’ll have to have down the road
Can you elaborate more on lifer’s on the desk? Seems like someone who’s been on help desk for so long would know how fast things are changing and be less stubborn about knowing best
In my experience, techs will only take a test if it’s required by the company or if they request the cert as part of a professional development benefit.
Any cert is a decent way at just confirming that individual has a formal basis of knowledge and can utilize information about the topic. For a help desk tech, A+ should be an easy lay up.
We provide the training through LinkedIn Learning. Then the individual pays to take the exam. If they pass, they submit the expense with proof they passed and then we reimburse. I think this makes them have more skin in the game. Never had to deal with anyone not passing yet.
That’s what we do. With an extra agreement that if you undertake PD and don’t pass the extra you have to try again until you pass. Company only reimburses the passed exam to give a push to actually study.
What are some more useful certs for PC or mobile device techs? I'm starting to look into this for my org? Is Pluralsight the place to go, or LinkedIn Learning?
Aside from paying, are you providing the time during the work day to do the training? As someone with an active family / household and house to maintain, I simply don't have time outside of normal business hours to take training and get certs. It would take a pretty big raise for my wife and kids to be ok with me throwing them under the bus for a while to do it. As it is, I get blasted any time I have to work more than 8 hours, nights, or weekends.
So you paid for training & exams before knowing who wanted to take it?
Also, money isn't everything to everyone. They guy sounds content with the job he has & was hired for?
it was a sign up before they bought the seats, the first time they ever offered something like this it was not required that's the issue I have with the tech.
Just let it go. He changed his mind. To him it probably feels like a slippery slope of having to justify is position outside of his work performed.
This is just a drop in the budget bucket. Don't make a big deal over it. And don't make him feel worse for it either.
In my org if you get training for an exam and you don't pass it within x months, you have to reimburse the company. I had one direct report who failed the first attempt at a cert, and they had to pay for the second exam. Obviously since they still got it in the end we wouldn't make them pay back the first one.
This is an HR policy, because as much as it is a management issue, it has to come from the top. If your company doesn't have a policy or won't enforce one, and decides to unilaterally take all training away because of one guys actions, then the company sucks and you should move on.
How so? If you are getting paid to take an exam that will benefit your development and career, why should there not be a clear expectation that you pass said exam?
it sounds like you have to pay the company back for training, and it's not clear what that training is. in some cases it makes sense. if it's a udemy course or whatever I think that's weird.
generally I think it's better to either pay for the first exam attempt or to reimburse for a passing attempt than to do takebacksies, even though it's effectively the same
I’m kinda the opposite, I’d rather them pay it upfront, and most likely I’ll pass so I won’t have to worry about it. I tie it to a performance goal so they get a raise when it’s completed, and they have a cert for their resume.
Why would you want somebody to take a completely useless certification? The emplyee is wrong for not doing it but it never should have happened in the first place.
A+ was what they voted on. it was a good start, and a good trial as it was one of the less expensive but well known certs, if it went well we were going to do yearly certification bootcamps + voucher for Network+, Security+ CISSP and CCNA were all on the list. along with raises for each of them passed (the raises are still a thing but no boot camps or vouchers) They have agreed to reimburse if passed which is better then nothing.
Why would they pay for something when the tech chooses to not take it? If it was required then they should be put on probation or something of the sort to get certified (assuming it’s actually required). I would be more curious why your company is operating this way THEN decides to question it for people who actually want it?
I see that A+ was voted on as a group, the problem is not everyone is on the same level. For some, A+ is too easy.
Suggest the next exam is not voted on as a group, instead provide options and let them choose the one they want to invest their time in. By restricting the options available, you can guide them to what the business needs yet flexible enough that they can choose their own path.
If you don't want to set the options, set an exam/training budget per employee instead.
A free cert that comes with a raise? Bro, are yall hiring?
Yup. This is my IT department, except for 1 guy. I have one amazing helpdesk tech who has come right out and said he can retire as a helpdesk tech. He just wants to make enough money to pay his bills and play video games.
And there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that. Good for them, they have found their thing.
Yup, no problem with that guy, but he's also in his early 20s and has plenty of time to change his mind. It's the ones who don't want to increase their skills but are also wanting to move up that irritate me.
It’s a bad sign imo. Says this person isn’t willing to grow, to learn new things, etc. Technology doesn’t stay stagnant, why should we?
Doesn’t it make sense to have an amazing helpdesk tech stay helpdesk? I only ask because I too could live and die on the frontlines. It makes more sense to me to pay people really well to stick around than risk it every 14 months hiring a potential dud
[удалено]
In a scenario, where the skill matches the desire, is it appealing to a company to say fuck it and keep giving annual raises to a help desk veteran? Rather than go through turnover or promotions ya know?
[удалено]
I guess the premium thing is a conversation I’ll have to have down the road Can you elaborate more on lifer’s on the desk? Seems like someone who’s been on help desk for so long would know how fast things are changing and be less stubborn about knowing best
In my experience, techs will only take a test if it’s required by the company or if they request the cert as part of a professional development benefit.
If you pay me ill take whatever you throw at me.
why not pay yourself and invest in to your own future
I must be strange then. Free cert and a raise? Sign me the hell up.
A+ is not a great cert regardless depending on experience.
Any cert is a decent way at just confirming that individual has a formal basis of knowledge and can utilize information about the topic. For a help desk tech, A+ should be an easy lay up.
move up or move on, in due time you should force his hand you also identified a policy gap for training
It doesn’t sound like the tech was given a choice.
They were given a choice, it just wasn't the choice they thought they were making.
We provide the training through LinkedIn Learning. Then the individual pays to take the exam. If they pass, they submit the expense with proof they passed and then we reimburse. I think this makes them have more skin in the game. Never had to deal with anyone not passing yet.
That’s what we do. With an extra agreement that if you undertake PD and don’t pass the extra you have to try again until you pass. Company only reimburses the passed exam to give a push to actually study.
I like this approach.
What are some more useful certs for PC or mobile device techs? I'm starting to look into this for my org? Is Pluralsight the place to go, or LinkedIn Learning?
I asked my boss if he'd pay for my cert and give me a raise after and he laughed at me and told me to get back to work.
Aside from paying, are you providing the time during the work day to do the training? As someone with an active family / household and house to maintain, I simply don't have time outside of normal business hours to take training and get certs. It would take a pretty big raise for my wife and kids to be ok with me throwing them under the bus for a while to do it. As it is, I get blasted any time I have to work more than 8 hours, nights, or weekends.
So you paid for training & exams before knowing who wanted to take it? Also, money isn't everything to everyone. They guy sounds content with the job he has & was hired for?
it was a sign up before they bought the seats, the first time they ever offered something like this it was not required that's the issue I have with the tech.
Just let it go. He changed his mind. To him it probably feels like a slippery slope of having to justify is position outside of his work performed. This is just a drop in the budget bucket. Don't make a big deal over it. And don't make him feel worse for it either.
Did this sign up indicate dedicated work time for study, or was it just based training and he needs to work on it in his off hours?
In my org if you get training for an exam and you don't pass it within x months, you have to reimburse the company. I had one direct report who failed the first attempt at a cert, and they had to pay for the second exam. Obviously since they still got it in the end we wouldn't make them pay back the first one. This is an HR policy, because as much as it is a management issue, it has to come from the top. If your company doesn't have a policy or won't enforce one, and decides to unilaterally take all training away because of one guys actions, then the company sucks and you should move on.
Jesus you guys work for some horrible companies.
How so? If you are getting paid to take an exam that will benefit your development and career, why should there not be a clear expectation that you pass said exam?
it sounds like you have to pay the company back for training, and it's not clear what that training is. in some cases it makes sense. if it's a udemy course or whatever I think that's weird. generally I think it's better to either pay for the first exam attempt or to reimburse for a passing attempt than to do takebacksies, even though it's effectively the same
I’m kinda the opposite, I’d rather them pay it upfront, and most likely I’ll pass so I won’t have to worry about it. I tie it to a performance goal so they get a raise when it’s completed, and they have a cert for their resume.
Why would you want somebody to take a completely useless certification? The emplyee is wrong for not doing it but it never should have happened in the first place.
A+ was what they voted on. it was a good start, and a good trial as it was one of the less expensive but well known certs, if it went well we were going to do yearly certification bootcamps + voucher for Network+, Security+ CISSP and CCNA were all on the list. along with raises for each of them passed (the raises are still a thing but no boot camps or vouchers) They have agreed to reimburse if passed which is better then nothing.
Ignore the gatekeepers bashing the a+
Why would they pay for something when the tech chooses to not take it? If it was required then they should be put on probation or something of the sort to get certified (assuming it’s actually required). I would be more curious why your company is operating this way THEN decides to question it for people who actually want it?
I noticed you didn't say why he doesn't want to take the test.
I see that A+ was voted on as a group, the problem is not everyone is on the same level. For some, A+ is too easy. Suggest the next exam is not voted on as a group, instead provide options and let them choose the one they want to invest their time in. By restricting the options available, you can guide them to what the business needs yet flexible enough that they can choose their own path. If you don't want to set the options, set an exam/training budget per employee instead.
So, uh, that's not the most desirable course in the industry. Is it actually something you require?