Agree. Just interesting to think of why. Sharing that information is not illegal by statute. It is illegal because they make you sign the employment agreement that says you won't disclose. They do that so the information doesn't get out and they can low ball the next potential hire. In a twist of irony, eventually they get sued for not paying females or minorities as much as males for the same job.
Many companies have pay escalation formulas based on years of service, especially union but also in corporate space. In some ways it makes sense. You hire someone new at a certain wage and make them prove they are not a slacker, rather than pay them like they practically invented the job. The key is to be able to objectively determine the productivity of each worker. That way the boss can tell Rick his raise is 2% and Mary's is 5% because he is not as productive and she excels. He may leave, but should they care if he was less productive? Maybe he can convince the next employer that he is a superstar, but that will only last so long. The main problem is instead of Rick trying to up his game, he gets his arse hurt and treats Mary poorly. Then the employer can get rid of him anyway, which should be the company goal.
Was on a job with a guy once who was a superintendent for a different company he was telling one of his guys. "You can be dumb or lazy but you cant be both"
I think you experience isn't reflective the the broader industry. I work for a private consulting engineering firm. This is my 15th year. At our office (1 of 6 in the company) with anywhere between 17-25 employees in a given year (120 company wide), I've only known one person to leave on their own accord for another job. While I agree that the benefits sucked as a new employee, it's also the only way into the company, we don't hire 40 yr old employees. You start, and if you last, your compensation will come. Especially compared to the public sector comps. I think our company does a couple things well, 1) pays hourly (allows noobs to work lots of OT before they have kids and can make bank) 2) fire crappy employees. The latter seems to be my biggest issue with the public sector, judging my the incompetence of most of our clients (muni's).
The trouble for me is that the sense of pride only comes from a job well done. Many home improvement things I cannot do well lol.Sense of pride, I'll take the sweat equity everyday. Although I'm technically a millenial I dont identify as one.
Which is better, turn over at the top or bottom? Is it worse to lose a CAD monkey or someone who actually understands how to design a $20mil WWTP? Do you really want an employ that charts their course in life based on a couple of grand more or one that can see the value in a long-term career choice?
Slackers think they are superstars
I just dumped a vendor of 8 years. They are short-staffed. I offered to pay overtime if they got enough volunteers to work the weekend. Any weekend. I was told 23 weeks to replenish when 3 weeks was the norm. They want to fill the openings that were let go during Covid but those guys moved on so are having to hire and train. But, they want to pay pre-Covid wages so have lots of openings. Sales are about 90% of pre-Covid. Staffing on the production floor is under 60% of pre-Covid. The VP of Sales is almost certainly going to lose his job. I am not the only customer to walk to a competitor that adjusted to the new normal. So, they are saving money on the CAD monkey types and going to jettison the senior guy that has poor judgement, does not have his finger in the wind and is not very persuasive about why wages should rise. A lot of knowledge is gone from that company and few veterans to train newbies. I suppose the frozen wage will work as once they lose enough customers they will have the right amount of employees to meet the collapsed demand.
This makes me think of the recent cyber attack on Colonial pipelines. During the shutdown they had to operate things manually in order to keep operating at all. Manually - physically turning open valves to keep stuff moving. The CEO told the press (and Congress I think) that the older employees retained those skills and that was the only way it was possible. Those skills were “aging out” as everything went to automation. That is a scary thought, and it got little press. The movie Mad Max enters my mind.
