LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
It depends on whether it is a genuine financial issue. After 2 or 3 years at one company where I had been sharing commuting costs with my sister and brother-in-law they changed jobs and I couldn't afford to stay despite really enjoying working there. I got an offer of a job closer to home and went to hand in my notice at which point I got given a decent rise to stay when I explained the situation.First.Aspect said:Received wisdom is that if someone threatens to leave, the payrise is a sticking plaster.
12 years or so later I was looking to leave and the MD got wind of it, he offered me a promotion I'd previously been told they couldn't offer me together with significant pay rise but within a year I was looking to get out again as I realised it wasn't the pay or position I had been looking for previously but that the company ethos had changed massively and it had become an unpleasant place to stay. They could have offered to double my salary at that point and I wouldn't have stayed (within a year or so of me leaving the MD and other senior staff that had made it somewhere so bad I felt ill at the thought of going back omn a Monday morning had gone and it is apparently a good place to work again).0 -
Doesn't matter if you can't get more elsewhere, does it?TheBigBean said:
"Pay me more, I'm making loads of money for the company" is a better argument.kingstongraham said:
I don't think saying "pay me more or I'll go and get paid more somewhere else" is extortion.rjsterry said:Extortion is not a great way to build a relationship with your employer. Very much an SME perspective but in order to award a pay rise the employer needs to bring in more income (all other things being equal). If you can demonstrate a positive impact on the bottom line that's a good place to start.
1 -
It's a take. A lot of people are loyal to the companies they work for and want something that is fair. If fairness isn't forthcoming they will move into the departure lounge and take better offers when they arrive. Many employers know this.kingstongraham said:
Doesn't matter if you can't get more elsewhere, does it?TheBigBean said:
"Pay me more, I'm making loads of money for the company" is a better argument.kingstongraham said:
I don't think saying "pay me more or I'll go and get paid more somewhere else" is extortion.rjsterry said:Extortion is not a great way to build a relationship with your employer. Very much an SME perspective but in order to award a pay rise the employer needs to bring in more income (all other things being equal). If you can demonstrate a positive impact on the bottom line that's a good place to start.
0 -
I appreciate I suffer from the opposite of survivorship bias with my own experience, but if there is no market for what you’re bringing to the firm, even if it’s valuable to said firm, they’re not gonna pay you much. Just enough to not make you leave, which in that context is not much.TheBigBean said:
It's a take. A lot of people are loyal to the companies they work for and want something that is fair. If fairness isn't forthcoming they will move into the departure lounge and take better offers when they arrive. Many employers know this.kingstongraham said:
Doesn't matter if you can't get more elsewhere, does it?TheBigBean said:
"Pay me more, I'm making loads of money for the company" is a better argument.kingstongraham said:
I don't think saying "pay me more or I'll go and get paid more somewhere else" is extortion.rjsterry said:Extortion is not a great way to build a relationship with your employer. Very much an SME perspective but in order to award a pay rise the employer needs to bring in more income (all other things being equal). If you can demonstrate a positive impact on the bottom line that's a good place to start.
It’s an unlikely event as if you make money for a firm you ought to be able to do the same elsewhere.
0 -
This. I was off once I'd had an offer. The previous company either didn't value me, or were deliberately shafting me. Either is a reason to leave.TheBigBean said:
It's a take. A lot of people are loyal to the companies they work for and want something that is fair. If fairness isn't forthcoming they will move into the departure lounge and take better offers when they arrive. Many employers know this.kingstongraham said:
Doesn't matter if you can't get more elsewhere, does it?TheBigBean said:
"Pay me more, I'm making loads of money for the company" is a better argument.kingstongraham said:
I don't think saying "pay me more or I'll go and get paid more somewhere else" is extortion.rjsterry said:Extortion is not a great way to build a relationship with your employer. Very much an SME perspective but in order to award a pay rise the employer needs to bring in more income (all other things being equal). If you can demonstrate a positive impact on the bottom line that's a good place to start.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
-
The guy did not mince his words when speaking to the head of our department. He categorically said (or words to this effect include the swearing) "we operate in a high performance environment and I expect the compensation to match. If you think that a sub inflation payrise is acceptable then you have seriously underestimated me and my ambition. If you think I will settle for this bullshit then I will find somewhere else who will value my efforts. I have worked hard on a number of projects with zero financial benefit to myself and if this is how you think you can get away with paying me, then think again."rjsterry said:
*Slightly* different tone to SB's example.rick_chasey said:All depends on the context. Obviously. But yes if you’re good and paid below market rate it’s quite straightforward to say “I’d like to work here but the comp is making it very hard to stay because I can genuinely get x over here”
The partner went away to do some thinking and presumably came back with the right answer.0 -
Does suggest a lack of attention from the head of department if things have got to that point.shirley_basso said:
The guy did not mince his words when speaking to the head of our department. He categorically said (or words to this effect include the swearing) "we operate in a high performance environment and I expect the compensation to match. If you think that a sub inflation payrise is acceptable then you have seriously underestimated me and my ambition. If you think I will settle for this bullshit then I will find somewhere else who will value my efforts. I have worked hard on a number of projects with zero financial benefit to myself and if this is how you think you can get away with paying me, then think again."rjsterry said:
*Slightly* different tone to SB's example.rick_chasey said:All depends on the context. Obviously. But yes if you’re good and paid below market rate it’s quite straightforward to say “I’d like to work here but the comp is making it very hard to stay because I can genuinely get x over here”
The partner went away to do some thinking and presumably came back with the right answer.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Patience, young Jedi.rick_chasey said:1 in 4 pensioners are millionaires yada yada
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Mustard after the meal, old jediStevo_666 said:
Patience, young Jedi.rick_chasey said:1 in 4 pensioners are millionaires yada yada
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
?pangolin said:
Mustard after the meal, old jediStevo_666 said:
Patience, young Jedi.rick_chasey said:1 in 4 pensioners are millionaires yada yada
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Lots are millionaires because of property right? What's the point of being sat on hundreds of thousands of pounds of illiquid assets long after you need that much space?Stevo_666 said:
?pangolin said:
Mustard after the meal, old jediStevo_666 said:
Patience, young Jedi.rick_chasey said:1 in 4 pensioners are millionaires yada yada
Anyway it's an old debate on here.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Lots of London millionaires.
Largely down to stupid property prices as a result of the focus on London over the rest of the UK.0 -
True. But need and want are two different things. Its good to have the choicepangolin said:
Lots are millionaires because of property right? What's the point of being sat on hundreds of thousands of pounds of illiquid assets long after you need that much space?Stevo_666 said:
?pangolin said:
Mustard after the meal, old jediStevo_666 said:
Patience, young Jedi.rick_chasey said:1 in 4 pensioners are millionaires yada yada
Anyway it's an old debate on here.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Lots of people think they'll downsize early in retirement. In reality they don't as they want their kids, kids partners and grandkids to come and stay, so need ghe same size house as when their kids were younger.pangolin said:
Lots are millionaires because of property right? What's the point of being sat on hundreds of thousands of pounds of illiquid assets long after you need that much space?Stevo_666 said:
?pangolin said:
Mustard after the meal, old jediStevo_666 said:
Patience, young Jedi.rick_chasey said:1 in 4 pensioners are millionaires yada yada
Anyway it's an old debate on here.
They only tend to downsize when the property becomes difficult to manage and maintain.0 -
And if you're going to spend a fair bit of time at home in retirement, may as well be a nice one with a bit of space inside and out.Dorset_Boy said:
Lots of people think they'll downsize early in retirement. In reality they don't as they want their kids, kids partners and grandkids to come and stay, so need ghe same size house as when their kids were younger.pangolin said:
Lots are millionaires because of property right? What's the point of being sat on hundreds of thousands of pounds of illiquid assets long after you need that much space?Stevo_666 said:
?pangolin said:
Mustard after the meal, old jediStevo_666 said:
Patience, young Jedi.rick_chasey said:1 in 4 pensioners are millionaires yada yada
Anyway it's an old debate on here.
They only tend to downsize when the property becomes difficult to manage and maintain."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I well remember visiting an elderly couple who were friends of the family... once upon a time, the husband had been an accountant (before retiring from that and becoming a dairy farmer then a thatcher), and when we were in their rather large house, he said that they were going to move "because we're rather over-capitalised here", whereas most people would have said "This house is too big for just the two of us".0
-
Weird to take on progressively harder manual jobs.briantrumpet said:I well remember visiting an elderly couple who were friends of the family... once upon a time, the husband had been an accountant (before retiring from that and becoming a dairy farmer then a thatcher), and when we were in their rather large house, he said that they were going to move "because we're rather over-capitalised here", whereas most people would have said "This house is too big for just the two of us".
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry said:
Weird to take on progressively harder manual jobs.briantrumpet said:I well remember visiting an elderly couple who were friends of the family... once upon a time, the husband had been an accountant (before retiring from that and becoming a dairy farmer then a thatcher), and when we were in their rather large house, he said that they were going to move "because we're rather over-capitalised here", whereas most people would have said "This house is too big for just the two of us".
They were a remarkable couple. Quakers. I went to her funeral earlier this year, and she was just a couple of weeks shy of 101. The sort of people it feels like an honour to have known.
Oh, and he hated being an accountant, apparently.0 -
Rick - Can you clarify the point you're intending to make with the post above, please?0
-
I think he's saying UK average salaries are so low that the pension is actually not that bad in comparison.wallace_and_gromit said:Rick - Can you clarify the point you're intending to make with the post above, please?
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono1 -
It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.
0 -
Thing is, with unemployment social security, you're ultimately trying to get them back into work (and it's means tested) and you're working to reduce unemployment.
With retirement social security, you're ultimately trying to get them to take it for a long as possible by keeping them alive, and it's very hard to reduce the numbers of retired with an aging population.
Surely if we decide we want to keep it as generous as it currently is we're gonna have to massively hike the retirement age?
Is there a case for means testing pensions? Surely at this point they're so material it makes sense?0 -
Should increase in line with minimum wage, surely?0
-
They'd have to be very careful if means testing that they didn't create a wide band where people just don't bother saving- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Yeah, I guess you'd have to scale it in some way.pangolin said:They'd have to be very careful if means testing that they didn't create a wide band where people just don't bother saving
I dunno. The actuaries got it very wrong on the cost of the triple lock so it's hard to calibrate these things well.0 -
No. Aside from anything else the threshold of "wealthy" would include lots of people who are nowhere near. And there would be knock on effects of the resulting poverty that could cost more.rick_chasey said:Thing is, with unemployment social security, you're ultimately trying to get them back into work (and it's means tested) and you're working to reduce unemployment.
With retirement social security, you're ultimately trying to get them to take it for a long as possible by keeping them alive, and it's very hard to reduce the numbers of retired with an aging population.
Surely if we decide we want to keep it as generous as it currently is we're gonna have to massively hike the retirement age?
Is there a case for means testing pensions? Surely at this point they're so material it makes sense?
This is another example of your war on the old, RC. You have this image of wealthy serial cruise holidaying permatan boomers. They are going to die soon. The next generation going through are the first who have been royally screwed by boomer house mega-inflation and the fact that the UK has been sold to investors from under them, and you are proposing to give them another shafting.
Your lot are only 10-15 years behind. Blink and you'll miss it.3 -
I'm probably being dense here, but I still can't pin down your precise point. Can you just spell it out, please? Thanks!rick_chasey said:It's a rather disingenuous list above once you line them all up together:
https://data.oecd.org/pension/net-pension-replacement-rates.htm < UK is below the EU 27 average (Netherlands is a whopping 89%).
It's a tool economists sometimes use to evaluate how generous or not the pension is.0
