• sudo_shinespark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, I would prefer to stay at the same place than hopping around, but I’ve never gotten a raise that pays as good as a new job at a different company

    • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      I still don’t understand the reasoning behind that tactic.

      Why would a company effectively force turnover like that? No argument I’ve ever heard makes sense, if you think about for more than a few seconds.

      • _pete_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because job hopping is scary as hell (especially for developers who struggle with imposter syndrome) and job hunting is generally shitty.

        What if I don’t like the new place? What if I can’t feed my wife and kids? What if I’m actually terrible at this and my current place is so stupid they haven’t figured that out? What if the economy tanks in the next couple of months and I’m out on my ear with no severance pay?

        Better to stay put, accept slightly less money for another year and look at it again when I’ve got the time and energy to cope with it.

        • sudo_shinespark@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          Better to stay put, accept slightly less money for another year and look at it again when I’ve got the time and energy to cope with it.

          but Watch Out

          Seriously, though, this is hitting the nail on the head. That dangling carrot of job security can be so exploitative when there’s so many unknowns (many of them confidence-based in a dev’s situation). I’ve heard that little evil voice (recently) telling me “yeah, you could probably go back to physical labor when you can’t find any more work as a dev. you’ll do okay out there”

          I work hard for my company. But paying me raises to deal with inflation? Rewarding my efforts and loyalty? Why bother when they can just hold out and pay my identical wage to someone greener and less jaded in a couple short years?

        • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          And now think about, who stays in such positions. Not the ambitious people. It’s the risk averse, socially inept people. They will perform just enough to get by, simply because there’s zero reward for any ambition.

            • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You used all these words just to say nearly nothing - and even that bit is wrong.

              It’s not about “go getters” it’s about people who know their value. Those are very different things. If I know my value, I won’t stay in an underpaid job.

              But if I don’t know my value, I’ll stay in a position that doesn’t fit me, that frustrates me and I will be neither happy nor particularly productive.

              If you would have bothered to actually read what I wrote, I advocated for these people you described. But in your rage against, I don’t know, ducks, maybe? You decided to not think about what I wrote and instead came up with a worthless sob story.

              Maybe you are exactly the kind of frustrated, underpaid, undervalued employee. Maybe you should not project your frustrations at other people.

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because business people are generally not actually competent, they’ve failed upwards and just continue doing the things that haven’t completely failed them yet.

        Really, capitalism as a whole is fundamentally inefficient and just kind of dumb, and the economical theory underpinning it is simply incorrect.

        • kakes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Even knowing that though, job-hopping does come with risk. As with most money-related things, the more risk you take, the bigger payout you can get.

          • andrew@lemmy.stuart.funOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Plus, luck favors the prepared. If you’re confident you can get the next job then you probably won’t feel like taking a risk is actually that much risk.

      • tim_0475@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think it works when employees don’t want to switch jobs even when they don’t get good raises. Then it’s like a decision between giving out 100 good raises and keeping everyone or giving out 100 low raises and keeping 95 people.

      • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Interesting! Do you think they would take Embedded System Software Engineers?

        • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’ve been organizing with them for over a year, they want to help unionize the entire tech industry! They’ve helped organize unions at Google, Activision Blizzard, Paizo, Sega, and more. Knowing the people leading CODE, they would love to expand beyond the games industry