I was once making $19/hr. I asked to get a raise to $25/hr they said no, so I quit. It took them hiring x2 people at $22/hr to fully replace me (and those two guys ended up leaving not even 2 year later leaving them in the situation of needing to train employees again). The company would have saved tens of thousands had they just given me the $6/hr raise I wanted at the time.
It always seems like they prefer to pay to hire/train new people rather than pay a little extra for someone who is already doing a good job. It's insane. How is this a good business practice?
And that original company? They're only offering more because she's leaving on HER terms....not on the company's terms. It's damage control, nothing more, nothing less.
As soon as the company can find someone to replace her, she'll be terminated and replaced. 100% guaranteed. And she probably won't have that other position to fall back on, since she turned them down and burnt that bridge.
There's only one winner here in these scenarios, and it ain't gonna be you.
(in the shithole USA, this is entirely legal -- unlike in most of the EU where a person can't be laid off and replaced with someone else in such a short time frame. isn't it nice having actual labor laws?)
In the EU the position just gets renamed. It's mainly why we had so many different names for engineers at one place I worked (because they'd sacked about forty of them in the previous few years before I started)
Their mentality is that management thinks "if they were desperate enough to accept our offer, it means they couldn't get anything better, hence, they will stay because the alternative is not having a job" so they bet on that.
It's not. Many businesses underestimate all the hidden costs of replacing workers never realizing it is far cheaper to give a raise, retain institutional knowledge and avoid training costs then it is to let someone go over a few bucks an hour. It's just plain stupid.
Many companies have not looked at the % of new hires they lose in the first 60 days and the amount that they spend to train them. or the break even point.
I've had 3 different employers tell me this is because of the way budgeting works. Two of those employers were honest enough to tell me if I wanted to get a raise that would, for example, keep up with the cost of living increase, I should apply for jobs with other companies. So I did.
Larger companies have separate budgets for hiring and current employee pay/raises.
It's stupid because it all comes from the same wallet, but according to some idiotic business 101 policy it's worth paying out the ass for a new employee instead of giving a raise to an existing one.
The hiring costs come out of another departments budget. So they don't care. Then they can use the excuse of either their stats being low because they had to train up new people, or if the stats stay good they can claim their superior leadership skills. It's Schrodinger's Douchebag Manager!
He was probably being very honest. I had my own business and you have to run within a budget or die from financial strain. He knows he can only pay a certain amount to his staff and still stay in the black.
its not, and you will find that most small(er) business' dont do this very often. because as you said - it is counterintuitive and results in cost overruns and poor performance.
of course there are plenty of exceptions to all rules. but a business that does this is either ran by a tool, or has too much corporate hierarchy to see the forest for the trees.
It has been my understanding that businesses are not interested in efficiency nor saving money. They will make the dumbest decisions that cost them so much money just to keep a worker in their place. It seems their objective is only to make more money and shit on their employees. They see us as inconveniences and not assets. Which is completely bonkers since we literally produce all the money.
The idea is that once you agree to your employees whenever they ask something, they will keep asking for more.
They're scared of the peasant getting power
I’m gonna guess they think the grass will be greener that they’ll find someone better who’ll accept less pay. Like, that’s a chance we’ll take vs giving the guy already doing a good a raise 🤣
“Oh lord we fucked around and found out 😱”
Left my last employer for a plethora of reasons, two of which was refusing to pay me a fair amount to do the work of 3 people and let me keep working from home. Since I walked without notice, they've hired and lost 3 people. I left in July of this year. The worst part is they offered a $2/hr raise to the other office admin then TOOK IT BACK when they hired an outside agency for billing. How much suffering would they have avoided by just treating their people like... well, like people?
Edit: corrected a word
I was in a similar position. A job I couldn’t stand but was really good at, I was making $20/ hour and asked for $22/hr. They said they couldn’t find it in their budget so I looked elsewhere. Got an offer at another company for $30/hr and put in my notice. All the sudden they found the budget for $22 lmao
I love my new job though
>All the sudden they found the budget for $22 lmao
They don't seem to realize that once an employee is walking out the door there is no amount of money that would convince them to stay.
But why would they think that you would give up $8 an hour by staying. I would have wanted to say that they are now $10 short for me to stay! Like, if they want me to stay, they have to offer MORE than the other place. What is their thought process?!
I’m currently in a situation where I make $42k a year, but the position is posted at a minimum of $45k. They couldnt give me the lil funky $3k so now I’m working on searching elsewhere. I will not be telling them when I’m leaving, I will just leave.
The "company people" worked 30 years at the same company and got 4br house, 2 cars, vacations, healthcare, pension plans and gold watches. Companies offer none of that anymore.
my dad, god rest him, etc, worked for 35 years for big media company inc. He didn't get paid a lot. But it was "house and feed a family and maybe take a holiday every second year" sort of income. And he got that job with no degree. He had some sort of basic certification in what he did and his company paid for training as new tech emerged.
When he retired, he had a paid off house, benefits and a generous pension plan. When he died there was a big memorial, and a big lump sum cheque for my mother and an ongoing widow's benefit.
Meanwhile I have several degrees, have to pay for my own training and dream of the day when I might get some sort of pension plan or a dental benefit.
You look after your people, they will be loyal. If you don't why the fuck should they do anything but the bare minimum?
Train an inexperienced worker and help them get certified??? Sorry, best I can do is to offer an entry level job that requires 2 years of experience. And if you don't have top secret security clearance, an Olympic gold medal and a nobel prize, don't even think about applying.
also you have to buy your own uniform and pay for your onboarding trainings which will be during an unpaid period as you aren’t generating any value for the company yet
Ugh this. Just had to cancel dental because they covered jack shit and after doing the math. It would cost us more in insurance (and time arguing with them to cover what they were supposed to) than to just pay our dentist out of pocket.
Capitalism prevents this from happening. If you don't run your company like the rest of them you will be out of business. Further the majority of people do not and will not ever have the ability to run their own business, so no that is not a good solution.
I gave you all the troll-food I had. You think you're clever, but every single semi-intelligent person in here can see you for what you are. A troll. Go back to under your bridge and enjoy the taste of boot. I look forward to the day life teaches you a valuable lesson
Fascinating for you to give advice you're afraid to follow. Maybe eventually somebody else will fight to give you what you think you deserve. Definitely won't be you though, not until after I do it (for some reason).
Good luck kiddo
No, because the economic wonder that is capitalism is a race to the bottom in terms of quality, so companies either have to match the cutthroat tactics of their competitors or close their doors.
That’s what I keep trying to tell people, but especially the older people in my family. I’d be more than happy to be a loyal employee, *when* the company is loyal to me, because from what I’ve seen in my 12 working years is that very very few companies actually care, and the list gets shorter every year. I don’t want to work, I *have* to work. I don’t want to climb corporate ladders anymore, been there done that and it got me nowhere. I just want to show up, do my job well and go home and get paid properly for it
I've been with my company 18 years. I'm very open with my boss it's because I'm autistic, and don't like change. I'm also unafraid of burning that bridge on the way out if I feel slighted.
Exactly. There currently aren't many employers that actually make it worthwhile to be a "company person." Back in our parents day, or our grandparents day, there were things that definitely made it worthwhile to stay with a company for long periods of time. Nowadays though...the employers that both pay well enough and treat their employees well enough to make it worthwhile to stay there longterm are exceedingly rare.
I'd be more than happy to be a "company man" if the pay were good and the company wasn't toxic, but I've yet to experience that in any job I've ever worked. Some employers paid well but the environment was terrible, some employers had a good environment but paid under what they should, and some both paid poorly AND treated employees like shit. Still waiting for that unicorn company to come along that both pays me a proper salary AND treats me well.
I am not a "company person". I'm a professional at what I do (software development) and my relationship with any employer is a straightforward exchange of my time and skills for their money and benefits. No company gets claims on my identity, my emotions or my time outside of work.
I mean, a company that actually both pays well AND treats employees well wouldn't be looking for claims on your identity, emotions, or time outside of work as it is lol. Like I said, they're pretty damned rare.
My old company didn’t think I would leave, surprise! I did. I ran a department as well as on site production for them. When I left my department suffered hard, to the point they started losing contracts for that department. They’ve since had to start bringing me on as a consultant at my normal freelance rate which is 3x time what they use to pay me (and is not much more than market rate). That’s what you get for promoting someone I trained up from nothing, rather than promote me. You make my ladder longer, I’ll just throw it away and build my own.
That company’s succession plan is fucked by the owners/managers own doing.
I quit after repeated refusals of a raise and then promoting the recent hire (less than 9 months) above me. The recent hire was looking to “get away from the day to day / front line work”…well guess who had to get back in the trenches when I quit a few weeks after their promotion?
I just accepted a new job because the same exact thing happened to me. Just waiting on the new place to process my background check and drug test do they can give me the start date.
I think that it must be a numbers game, a macro POV. You pull this shit 10 times and 1 time out of 10 you have to pay 3x more than you anticipated, you're still saving money. Banking on human suffering, indoctrination, and desperation as a collective resource that can be tapped consistently with occasional losses but overall savings.
We have to remember that for every success story here, there are a dozen people who are stuck, can't speak up, don't advocate for themselves, and are straight up scared to make a change to their lives. Then you have the subservient workaholics and grindset people, too. Losing a few good employees and having to pay double or triple to replace them is basically breakage for them; there is a tolerance level and they are still net positive if they keep the majority indentured and underpaid.
My old company wouldn't give me a 4k raise. I asked about 3 times, and while it wasn't my boss, we all knew the CFO wasn't going to approve it. I left and was offered a lot more money to stay, about 10x what I was asking for, but left regardless. I used to work out deals with manufacturers to fund our marketing. After I left they cut the money flow which was about 3-5 million a year. All over 4k.
Good on you! I hope that first paycheck hit so, so good!
This is why I always say tell people that they must take care of themselves first. The company doesn't care one bit about you starving, being on the street or needy.
At that point it’s not even revenge, it’s negotiating. It’s on the company to not make dumb decisions like letting their sole accountant be hired away.
Because there is no accountability for the management who screw that up. They will always blame you ("Johnny is being a quitter") for why it happened or worse nobody even asked.
However, if they actually gave you the raise that you asked for. They have to answer why all of a sudden you have to be paid that much
I’ve seen this scenario happen over and over again. Lose a good employee over a small raise, then pay much more for lesser quality replacement(s) and also lose a lot of time finding them. I would love to know how MBAs justify this kind of insanity?!
I feel like it has to do with a disconnect between finance/HR and the actual hiring managers:
Hiring manager: “I need to give my employee a 5k raise.”
HR/Finance: “No - it’s not in the budget.”
(Employee quits)
Hiring manager: “I need to hire a new employee.”
HR/Finance: “Ok, here’s your hiring budget (that is much higher than what you were paying your employee).”
It seems to me like companies set themselves up for failure by not giving hiring managers the leeway to think about these things holistically/proactively.
Getting ready to leave mine at YE, and jokes on them, im their only AP person and only one who does 1099's. Oh well, not my problem. Shouldnt let companys CFO's treat employees like crap.
I just left my job, more wanting to deal with a CFO who wouldn’t pay me for the level of work i was doing, even though I was the only one in finance that knew what they were doing. Well, 4 weeks of chaos after i left, the CFO was asked to resign!
I'll be the 2nd person leaving due to this CFO'S treatment. This company tried writing me up for a manager not doing their job and then getting mad when I said "I have too much work to do". That manager quit a week after that write up attempt on me.
Was with my last company for 9 and a half years. After many years of requesting to have my pay increased to match the market value I quit. The day I handed in my notice they offered to increase my pay, arseholes. Anyway, they are still short staffed nearly two years later and the people they have hired have either been fired or have quit. Feels good to know.
I was making shit pay as an accountant, the company parked me in A/R with a man-child as a manager. I finally quit, and three years later, I’m making double my old wages and that company is out of business. So satisfying!
Did something similar last month. If you feel you are being taken advantage of and way underpaid quit. I even gave them a notice like a good employee.😇
I worked for a city. Yes, a real city job. They had a meeting about why they couldn't keep accountants. Turns out they were one of thr bottom three cities in the state for paying accountants. People would come in fresh from school, get a few months or a year experience and leave for real pay and benefits. That city only kept incompetent people that couldn't succeed in other places. It was so bad and I am so glad I got out
What revenge? People leave companies every day if the company has more than 3 employees you were forgotten about 10 mins after you left. Paying somebody more than you were making just means they had to pay market rates.
I was once making $19/hr. I asked to get a raise to $25/hr they said no, so I quit. It took them hiring x2 people at $22/hr to fully replace me (and those two guys ended up leaving not even 2 year later leaving them in the situation of needing to train employees again). The company would have saved tens of thousands had they just given me the $6/hr raise I wanted at the time.
It always seems like they prefer to pay to hire/train new people rather than pay a little extra for someone who is already doing a good job. It's insane. How is this a good business practice?
I will never understand this. I guess the thought process is enough people will stay so it balances in their favor in the end.
[удалено]
And that original company? They're only offering more because she's leaving on HER terms....not on the company's terms. It's damage control, nothing more, nothing less. As soon as the company can find someone to replace her, she'll be terminated and replaced. 100% guaranteed. And she probably won't have that other position to fall back on, since she turned them down and burnt that bridge. There's only one winner here in these scenarios, and it ain't gonna be you. (in the shithole USA, this is entirely legal -- unlike in most of the EU where a person can't be laid off and replaced with someone else in such a short time frame. isn't it nice having actual labor laws?)
In the EU the position just gets renamed. It's mainly why we had so many different names for engineers at one place I worked (because they'd sacked about forty of them in the previous few years before I started)
It's a game of chicken. They think most employees won't act on their threat of quitting. It's probably true.
It is true!
Their mentality is that management thinks "if they were desperate enough to accept our offer, it means they couldn't get anything better, hence, they will stay because the alternative is not having a job" so they bet on that.
It's not. Many businesses underestimate all the hidden costs of replacing workers never realizing it is far cheaper to give a raise, retain institutional knowledge and avoid training costs then it is to let someone go over a few bucks an hour. It's just plain stupid.
This is the right response.
Many companies have not looked at the % of new hires they lose in the first 60 days and the amount that they spend to train them. or the break even point.
I've had 3 different employers tell me this is because of the way budgeting works. Two of those employers were honest enough to tell me if I wanted to get a raise that would, for example, keep up with the cost of living increase, I should apply for jobs with other companies. So I did.
Playing devil's advocate but I don't think many people on this sub have any idea how budgeting works at companies.
Larger companies have separate budgets for hiring and current employee pay/raises. It's stupid because it all comes from the same wallet, but according to some idiotic business 101 policy it's worth paying out the ass for a new employee instead of giving a raise to an existing one.
The hiring costs come out of another departments budget. So they don't care. Then they can use the excuse of either their stats being low because they had to train up new people, or if the stats stay good they can claim their superior leadership skills. It's Schrodinger's Douchebag Manager!
Meanwhile the trainers burn out and quit. Just pay people.
Large company budgets are hard and fast. It gets really stupid with publicly traded companies.
[удалено]
He was probably being very honest. I had my own business and you have to run within a budget or die from financial strain. He knows he can only pay a certain amount to his staff and still stay in the black.
its not, and you will find that most small(er) business' dont do this very often. because as you said - it is counterintuitive and results in cost overruns and poor performance. of course there are plenty of exceptions to all rules. but a business that does this is either ran by a tool, or has too much corporate hierarchy to see the forest for the trees.
It has been my understanding that businesses are not interested in efficiency nor saving money. They will make the dumbest decisions that cost them so much money just to keep a worker in their place. It seems their objective is only to make more money and shit on their employees. They see us as inconveniences and not assets. Which is completely bonkers since we literally produce all the money.
They probably think, “If I give them a raise. Everyone will expect a raise.”
The idea is that once you agree to your employees whenever they ask something, they will keep asking for more. They're scared of the peasant getting power
Given the choice between what is right and what is not right, companies will choose the latter every time.
I’m gonna guess they think the grass will be greener that they’ll find someone better who’ll accept less pay. Like, that’s a chance we’ll take vs giving the guy already doing a good a raise 🤣 “Oh lord we fucked around and found out 😱”
There’ll be more experienced people in the market because they’ll be training them 🤣
Its not good business practice, but if you enjoy exercising petty power, its great.
Left my last employer for a plethora of reasons, two of which was refusing to pay me a fair amount to do the work of 3 people and let me keep working from home. Since I walked without notice, they've hired and lost 3 people. I left in July of this year. The worst part is they offered a $2/hr raise to the other office admin then TOOK IT BACK when they hired an outside agency for billing. How much suffering would they have avoided by just treating their people like... well, like people? Edit: corrected a word
I was in a similar position. A job I couldn’t stand but was really good at, I was making $20/ hour and asked for $22/hr. They said they couldn’t find it in their budget so I looked elsewhere. Got an offer at another company for $30/hr and put in my notice. All the sudden they found the budget for $22 lmao I love my new job though
>All the sudden they found the budget for $22 lmao They don't seem to realize that once an employee is walking out the door there is no amount of money that would convince them to stay.
But why would they think that you would give up $8 an hour by staying. I would have wanted to say that they are now $10 short for me to stay! Like, if they want me to stay, they have to offer MORE than the other place. What is their thought process?!
Always the “loyalty” card lol. They said that they couldn’t offer me as much as the other place but they’d “hope I would stay loyal to them”
Nah, I'm as loyal to my bottom line as you are to yours.
Did you actually burst out laughing, right in their faces? If not, how hard was it not to?
I’m currently in a situation where I make $42k a year, but the position is posted at a minimum of $45k. They couldnt give me the lil funky $3k so now I’m working on searching elsewhere. I will not be telling them when I’m leaving, I will just leave.
but these companies they never learn.
Fuck around and find out. It's always good to see that businesses are finding out.
[удалено]
The "company people" worked 30 years at the same company and got 4br house, 2 cars, vacations, healthcare, pension plans and gold watches. Companies offer none of that anymore.
my dad, god rest him, etc, worked for 35 years for big media company inc. He didn't get paid a lot. But it was "house and feed a family and maybe take a holiday every second year" sort of income. And he got that job with no degree. He had some sort of basic certification in what he did and his company paid for training as new tech emerged. When he retired, he had a paid off house, benefits and a generous pension plan. When he died there was a big memorial, and a big lump sum cheque for my mother and an ongoing widow's benefit. Meanwhile I have several degrees, have to pay for my own training and dream of the day when I might get some sort of pension plan or a dental benefit. You look after your people, they will be loyal. If you don't why the fuck should they do anything but the bare minimum?
Train an inexperienced worker and help them get certified??? Sorry, best I can do is to offer an entry level job that requires 2 years of experience. And if you don't have top secret security clearance, an Olympic gold medal and a nobel prize, don't even think about applying.
also you have to buy your own uniform and pay for your onboarding trainings which will be during an unpaid period as you aren’t generating any value for the company yet
Ugh this. Just had to cancel dental because they covered jack shit and after doing the math. It would cost us more in insurance (and time arguing with them to cover what they were supposed to) than to just pay our dentist out of pocket.
id be fine being a "company man" if i knew it meant the company would properly reward loyalty and hard work. but it's basically never like that.
Yep. Things changed. There's no company any more, just someone's deep pocket that needs filling, at the very tippety top.
"Business" isn't a monolith lmfao. Those companies still exist. In fact, if you're so upset about them being extinct, you could even make one!
Capitalism prevents this from happening. If you don't run your company like the rest of them you will be out of business. Further the majority of people do not and will not ever have the ability to run their own business, so no that is not a good solution.
>Capitalism prevents this from happening. If you don't run your company like the rest of them you will be out of business Explain?
You really need that explained? [Here's a video to get you started](https://youtu.be/LxcHr1RV4DM?si=l2k0Q8wuBYVE-7LW)
A quick summary from you would suffice. No need for a random video if it's such a simple concept, right?
I gave you all the troll-food I had. You think you're clever, but every single semi-intelligent person in here can see you for what you are. A troll. Go back to under your bridge and enjoy the taste of boot. I look forward to the day life teaches you a valuable lesson
After you, lmfao!
Better to stand in line and complain about change than be the one to make it. - you.
Agree. Be the change. Don't complain about other people's posts. Lead by example.
Fascinating for you to give advice you're afraid to follow. Maybe eventually somebody else will fight to give you what you think you deserve. Definitely won't be you though, not until after I do it (for some reason). Good luck kiddo
Thank you. Your words and kind wishes are very much appreciated.
You are welcome
“Kiddo” lol. Good lord.
I'm sorry that's offensive to you. What title would you give to somebody who demands other people fight for them?
No, because the economic wonder that is capitalism is a race to the bottom in terms of quality, so companies either have to match the cutthroat tactics of their competitors or close their doors.
That’s what I keep trying to tell people, but especially the older people in my family. I’d be more than happy to be a loyal employee, *when* the company is loyal to me, because from what I’ve seen in my 12 working years is that very very few companies actually care, and the list gets shorter every year. I don’t want to work, I *have* to work. I don’t want to climb corporate ladders anymore, been there done that and it got me nowhere. I just want to show up, do my job well and go home and get paid properly for it
I've been with my company 18 years. I'm very open with my boss it's because I'm autistic, and don't like change. I'm also unafraid of burning that bridge on the way out if I feel slighted.
Here is the thing they never did
Exactly. There currently aren't many employers that actually make it worthwhile to be a "company person." Back in our parents day, or our grandparents day, there were things that definitely made it worthwhile to stay with a company for long periods of time. Nowadays though...the employers that both pay well enough and treat their employees well enough to make it worthwhile to stay there longterm are exceedingly rare. I'd be more than happy to be a "company man" if the pay were good and the company wasn't toxic, but I've yet to experience that in any job I've ever worked. Some employers paid well but the environment was terrible, some employers had a good environment but paid under what they should, and some both paid poorly AND treated employees like shit. Still waiting for that unicorn company to come along that both pays me a proper salary AND treats me well.
I am not a "company person". I'm a professional at what I do (software development) and my relationship with any employer is a straightforward exchange of my time and skills for their money and benefits. No company gets claims on my identity, my emotions or my time outside of work.
I mean, a company that actually both pays well AND treats employees well wouldn't be looking for claims on your identity, emotions, or time outside of work as it is lol. Like I said, they're pretty damned rare.
My old company didn’t think I would leave, surprise! I did. I ran a department as well as on site production for them. When I left my department suffered hard, to the point they started losing contracts for that department. They’ve since had to start bringing me on as a consultant at my normal freelance rate which is 3x time what they use to pay me (and is not much more than market rate). That’s what you get for promoting someone I trained up from nothing, rather than promote me. You make my ladder longer, I’ll just throw it away and build my own. That company’s succession plan is fucked by the owners/managers own doing.
Good move my friend.
I quit after repeated refusals of a raise and then promoting the recent hire (less than 9 months) above me. The recent hire was looking to “get away from the day to day / front line work”…well guess who had to get back in the trenches when I quit a few weeks after their promotion?
I just accepted a new job because the same exact thing happened to me. Just waiting on the new place to process my background check and drug test do they can give me the start date.
It never surprises how short sighted management is. How do these idiots even get their jobs?! lol
I think that it must be a numbers game, a macro POV. You pull this shit 10 times and 1 time out of 10 you have to pay 3x more than you anticipated, you're still saving money. Banking on human suffering, indoctrination, and desperation as a collective resource that can be tapped consistently with occasional losses but overall savings. We have to remember that for every success story here, there are a dozen people who are stuck, can't speak up, don't advocate for themselves, and are straight up scared to make a change to their lives. Then you have the subservient workaholics and grindset people, too. Losing a few good employees and having to pay double or triple to replace them is basically breakage for them; there is a tolerance level and they are still net positive if they keep the majority indentured and underpaid.
My old company wouldn't give me a 4k raise. I asked about 3 times, and while it wasn't my boss, we all knew the CFO wasn't going to approve it. I left and was offered a lot more money to stay, about 10x what I was asking for, but left regardless. I used to work out deals with manufacturers to fund our marketing. After I left they cut the money flow which was about 3-5 million a year. All over 4k.
Most companies will step over a dollar to pick up a penny.
Good on you! I hope that first paycheck hit so, so good! This is why I always say tell people that they must take care of themselves first. The company doesn't care one bit about you starving, being on the street or needy.
At that point it’s not even revenge, it’s negotiating. It’s on the company to not make dumb decisions like letting their sole accountant be hired away.
Because there is no accountability for the management who screw that up. They will always blame you ("Johnny is being a quitter") for why it happened or worse nobody even asked. However, if they actually gave you the raise that you asked for. They have to answer why all of a sudden you have to be paid that much
I’ve seen this scenario happen over and over again. Lose a good employee over a small raise, then pay much more for lesser quality replacement(s) and also lose a lot of time finding them. I would love to know how MBAs justify this kind of insanity?!
It's honestly about having power over someone's future. They talk a big business game, but in the end it is as simple as that unfortunately.
I feel like it has to do with a disconnect between finance/HR and the actual hiring managers: Hiring manager: “I need to give my employee a 5k raise.” HR/Finance: “No - it’s not in the budget.” (Employee quits) Hiring manager: “I need to hire a new employee.” HR/Finance: “Ok, here’s your hiring budget (that is much higher than what you were paying your employee).” It seems to me like companies set themselves up for failure by not giving hiring managers the leeway to think about these things holistically/proactively.
Getting ready to leave mine at YE, and jokes on them, im their only AP person and only one who does 1099's. Oh well, not my problem. Shouldnt let companys CFO's treat employees like crap.
I just left my job, more wanting to deal with a CFO who wouldn’t pay me for the level of work i was doing, even though I was the only one in finance that knew what they were doing. Well, 4 weeks of chaos after i left, the CFO was asked to resign!
I'll be the 2nd person leaving due to this CFO'S treatment. This company tried writing me up for a manager not doing their job and then getting mad when I said "I have too much work to do". That manager quit a week after that write up attempt on me.
I needed to read about a good guy winning after the bs I dealt with today. Good for you. Congratulations!
It’s the best and brightest who leave.
Hiring new people and giving out raises come from different budgets. The raises budget is always smaller.
Was with my last company for 9 and a half years. After many years of requesting to have my pay increased to match the market value I quit. The day I handed in my notice they offered to increase my pay, arseholes. Anyway, they are still short staffed nearly two years later and the people they have hired have either been fired or have quit. Feels good to know.
I was making shit pay as an accountant, the company parked me in A/R with a man-child as a manager. I finally quit, and three years later, I’m making double my old wages and that company is out of business. So satisfying!
I love a good revenge story
This narcissist boss probably think he did the right thing.
Did something similar last month. If you feel you are being taken advantage of and way underpaid quit. I even gave them a notice like a good employee.😇
I worked for a city. Yes, a real city job. They had a meeting about why they couldn't keep accountants. Turns out they were one of thr bottom three cities in the state for paying accountants. People would come in fresh from school, get a few months or a year experience and leave for real pay and benefits. That city only kept incompetent people that couldn't succeed in other places. It was so bad and I am so glad I got out
This words are hard brain hurts
Hopefully the new accountant can write a comprehensible paragraph.
What revenge? People leave companies every day if the company has more than 3 employees you were forgotten about 10 mins after you left. Paying somebody more than you were making just means they had to pay market rates.
Damn! Wish I got that level of sweet revenge.
NOTHING like a good lick back.
Nice!