It sounds like my employer is going to be giving salary increases that average 3%. So my best case scenario is that I get a 4-5% raise this year.
woohoo
You could always ask other companies what they would pay you.
Yeah, unfortunately hopping to another employer means hopping to a completely different geographic area. I faced that option earlier this year (higher nominal salary, lower after adjusting for cost of living) and we decided we weren’t ready to move. Of course, if Ohio keeps getting more and more batshit crazy, we might change our minds.
1 Like
Yeah, it sucks. The incentives are all screwed up so that the employers are incentivized to lowball existing employees to capitalize the inconvenience to employees incur when making a move (or, heaven help them, the employees’ loyalty to their employer). Employees are incentivized to be as absolutely transactional and disloyal as they possibly can to max out their earnings by jumping ship at the first opportunity.
It’s maddening to see this play out. Inevitably the best people bail over pay then the organization pays more than the departed person wanted to an inferior replacement, plus a big fee to a recruiter.
1 Like
I remember asking a management bro once why they did above.
The answer was something along the lines of well if we do it for an existing employee then we kind of have to do it for everyone. But if we do it for a new hire, that’s just standard negotiations. So it works our cheaper this way.
Seems like bullshit, but that’s what he told me.
1 Like
They just depend on people not discussing their salaries, and on their current employees also just assuming that a fucking new hire couldn’t possibly make more than they do.
1 Like
No, I don’t think it’s bullshit. When companies set salary increase budgets for current staff, they will look at the payroll of the whole company, make a cost/benefit analysis based on how much they can afford to increase the total payroll, and then they’ll cascade that budget down to team and business unit managers. The managers then allocate among their team with some people getting more and some people getting less and, if the shit hits the fan, the managers will go back up the food chain to request an “exception” to get a little more budget to pay an employee more if they threaten to quit or something.
Note that in this system, the only way to get paid meaningfully more than average is to ask for pay that’s way above “budget” and have your manager acquire an exception to provide it. Basically the squeaky wheel gets the grease. I can also tell you that HR teams are wise to this and will propose an initial “budget” salary increase that is “conservative”, i.e. they are holding back money in the anticipation of needing to provide “above budget” money to people that complain. The whole system is geared to reward people that ask for more pay and punish loyal warriors that accept vague promises of future improved conditions. It’s an absolute free roll to ask for more money, if you complain that a 2% salary increase isn’t enough they never, ever come back saying that they’re yanking the 2% because you’re not a team player.
It’s almost like unions serve a really important function.
3 Likes
THAT’S SOCIALISM!
Radical compensation transparency would go a long way to achieving supposed corporate goals like gender and ethnic status pay fairness. Weird that the don’t want to to it, since they keep saying over and over again that they really deeply care about pay fairness.
Like many other schools, our salaries are public. And there is also severe salary inversion - a bunch of more experienced, tenured people make less than newly hired assistant professors.
My little corner of academia just negotiated a new contract with 2.75% increases for the first 3 years. Wild times out here in the streets.
3 Likes
Apropos of nothing here I suppose, but eons ago when I was an Undergrad at OSU, my student job was at the main library. This was before we put all this stuff online and they bound the University salary listings and kept them at the reserves desk. Those books were, by far, the highest circulation items in the entire library system. We had to have 3 copies of them there because they would check out 20 times a day lol.
2 Likes
My Dad worked in low level college administration at a state school. Worst time of every school year was the week when the local newspaper would publish the salary of every “public official” (which in their definition included his position). Mostly he just had to deal with some disgruntled faculty, but we’d occassionally get random calls from people who wanted to scold him about he should be ashamed to take so many of their tax dollars to teach kids about whatever the crt of the day was.
I’m 43. Can I retire with $15 million?
https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=381450&newpost=6766176
I didn’t see the thread, but I can kind of understand being a little wary. Given what he is invested in, he has already lost a few million this year.
On the other hand, he is going to add another 5-10 million to the 15 he already has, so the conclusion is LOL.
Depends on your expenses, ldo.
Those are listed. 200K/yr
If you want to spend $200k per year then $15M is probably easily enough, just put it in dividend paying stocks and generate $200k in after tax income.
Even if you’re worried about the market crashing, age 43 is probably the best time to do this. If things turn south you could probably reenter the job market at 50 if absolutely necessary.
It’s less than 1.5 percent withdrawal rate. If that doesn’t work out for a 40-50 year horizon then like 99 percent of us are fucked.