Accepting counter offer 8

[ukengineer58]

Hi basically I have been offered a job usual story current employer when I said I was leaving matched the offer. Some more details;
New job is smaller company so less fringe benefits
Its more responsibility which is what I want.
If my employer had been paying me this amount to start with I probably wouldn't have looked around.
I know very little about the new company except what I saw at interview
There are only three qualified engineers there
I am generally happy at my existing place but tying to drive my career forward and see if I could get also more money.
Existing is heavily into bim but the new being smaller hasn't really touched I as yet.
New is further away from home so will cost me more in travel to work in money and time.
I have verbally accepted. But not in writing.
If this had happened before I verbally accepted I may still have gone. I truly do not know what I want to do and hard a hard time Accepting first time.
Could I in any way pull out now anyway? I feel I can't even if that becomes my preferred option.
Any thought are welcome.

 

[IRstuff]

It was ambiguous if you read it too fast. I had to read it twice to get his interpretation, it hinges on "one of the children"

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[ukengineer58]

Guys maybe I misread the post. Maybe Zdas can clear up whether he was speaking metophorically or literally. I'd also like to point I meant no offence I know nothing about Zdas and was mealy commenting on the post as it read to me not as Zdas as a person, although I still believe that the follow up actions of stringing the guy along were more dishonest than what the job hunter did in that it was deliberately carried out to cause distress. The type of action being condemned. I don't see how you can have it both ways.
On a more general point there are plenty of employers advertising jobs and interviewing to satisfy procedure when they already know who's getting the job and plenty of ghost jobs advertised for months just fishing for a perfect person with no actual role available. Employers will quickly ditch someone when financially it's Better for them to do so, I doubt word is my bond holds much weight, maybe for sole owner type businesses they might try and keep you longer but having gone through redundancy process at larger companies there is no sentiment no looking at personal circumstances no thinking he turned down a counter offer two years ago. It's how the numbers stack up and their gone.
I've taken the new job as it's the best option for me. Loyalty from most companies is gone. Ethically I expect the contract to be stuck to no more.

 

[rowingengineer]

Be aware that verbal acceptance of a contract in some countries is considered the same as written.

http://www.nceng.com.au/

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

 

[zdas04]

ukengineer,
I'm just not sure what you want me to clarify. The only "children" I mentioned in my original post were the immature chooms who felt they could use me as a bargaining chip without any consequences.

Your statement that since management was not loyal to you you have no obligation towards loyalty is one of the most self-serving and damaging statements that I hear. That is like saying "someone may rob me at gunpoint someday so it is OK if I rob someone at gunpoint today". Your actions are totally under your control. Your reactions are also under your control. The actions of your management are not under your control. The era of implied lifetime engagement actually ended with WWI and was completely dead by the start of the Great Depression. Anyone who expects to be kept on when their employer does not have viable way to convert the salaries paid into profits is begging to lose their job through bankruptcy instead of layoffs. OK so we know that an employer must make a profit to be able to pay salaries, the actions that the company takes to try to ensure projected profits are up to the owners of the company. On the other hand, an employee that ignores these facts is simply stupid. You should keep your CV current. You should engage in any training available (I took this to the point of paying for it myself if my employer did not feel that it would make me more useful to him). You should engage in professional societies, You should keep an eye on the job market through occasional trips to LinkedIn or similar pages. What you should not do is say "they have no loyalty to me so I won't have any loyalty to them" while you are stealing paper clips and 3-ring binders. That mindset is simply corrosive.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat

 

[ukengineer58]

I think in general we agree on how to behave however I was as I like to do reversing it from the other side.
You seem to think you were grated badly by an applicant and somehow they should expect it to come back to bite them. Then you admit to messing them about in return. If the principles were so high why not just ignore their application.
You would have had the morale high ground if you had.
I also find you analogy I comparing doing something something illegal with doing something within a persons legal rights a tad ridiculous.
I don't expect a job for life. Likewise I don't expect any special treatment above what's in a contract. Outside of that framework both parties can do what the hell they like. For instance I it's financial beneficial, either short or longer term for a company to terminate someone's employment they will. I see no reason why an employee should not be able to judge any situation on its same merits. That exists pre or post contract within the agreed framework.

 

[tbuelna]

As an engineer that has worked for over 20 different companies in the last 25 years, I'd recommend that you graciously thank your current employer for the generous counter offer, but then tell him that you have already committed to the other company. You should understand that the damage was done when you told your current employer you were leaving. Even if you were to accept the counter offer, things would never be the same between you and your current employer.

And in the future, always make sure you have an iron-clad offer in writing from your prospective employer before quitting your existing job. Also, make sure you leave your current job on good terms. Give as much notice as possible and don't leave the company hanging.

 

[dvd]

"To thine own self be true" seems like the proper attitude in this situation. If you have realized that the decision to change employers is not the right one, it is better to notify the prospective employer immediately and let them know that you have given additional thought to the matter and determined that the decision must be reversed. I would much rather have a new employee back out before arriving than to stay for some polite period of time and then leave. Nobody wins in that case.

 

[ukengineer58]

okay, 2 scenarios of 'doing the right thing', I think linked to this subject and intersting where the boundries should lie.

Number 1) you get offered a job but are currently working on a major very important scheme for your current employer. You leaving as a key player would cause major delivery issues. Do you leave (serving your contracted notice period), knowing you are leaving them in the lurch or do you need to remain 'loyal'. Partically interested in the members such as Zdas as empoyeers on if your name would be on the list of people cut out of future consideration in this circumstance.

Number 2) you move employees which obviously carries some risk. You need to serve a probabtion period. During that time the company has a reorganisation or loses some work. They terminate you. How does that sit with the scenario that the employee should stand by his word, whether implied or verbal, in addition to contract provision and the previous comments on this thread.

Be intersted how in particaular 'empoyers' either owners or management view these scenarios.

 

[zdas04]

You are the only one that cares about your career. It is yours to manage. Deciding to stay or leave a current job is part of a rational analysis. From an employers perspective there is never a good time to lose a key employee, but the employer should have thought about that before creating a salary, benefits, or work hours environment that causes people to start looking for alternatives. I had a boss once who doubled my salary the first year I worked for him, I asked him what that was all about and he said "if you are thinking about what I'm paying you, you are not thinking about what I'm paying you to think about. I want to price you out of the marketplace". It is really nice to be appreciated and that is the only time in my career that my CV wasn't current. So, in your first scenario, there was a reason you were looking, you accepted another position, you give your current employer notice and either start working on training your replacement, work on getting files current, or pack your boxes--employers choice. The only "loyalty" in this scenario is loyalty to your personal integrity.

Shit happens. It sucks when it does. But you rolled the dice when you decided to change jobs. Sometimes it doesn't work out. I haven't seen your employment contract, but I doubt it is structured like an NFL contract where they have to pay for 5 years even if they cut you. You've obligated yourself to do your best for them. They've obligated the company to pay you a negotiated amount for your labor. If the labor stops, then the pay stops. It is easy to feel betrayed or victimized in that scenario, but it is simply a bad outcome of a decision.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat

 

[ukengineer58]

Zdas, I think we are starting to agree. I wouldn't feel victimised. I only expect to be paid for the job under the conditions of the contract and to get the required notice under that contract. My point is that it works the other way as well. There is no obligation for an employee to accept a job if the contract is not signed regardless of any percieved or emotional, if you will, assumed commitment.And if the basis of that decision changes, by something in the contract wording or a counter offer then they can change their mind.
Likewise I do not work on implied terms for anything. Is it written down and confirmed? no, then it doesn't exist. That way it takes out any feelings of being betrayed etc from it. It is simply a business decision.

I think your point about salary's is a very good one and your previous boss I think has the right idea. Amazing how many empoyers bleat about not being able to find anyone good enough by merely offering the going rate. Surely all the good ones are already working for the going rate at their exiting place. Same when they lose someone they want to keep but were not paying them a little above the going to ensure they were not going to get more by moving. Intersting article I read couple of weeks ago by an employer. His first discussion at review or at interview was 'how much do you feel we should be paying you'. In his mind take the money issue away and you'll have people who will join and stay.

 

[ajack1]

To answer the two scenarios from another employers (and ex employees) perspective.

Number 1 is fine, you are contracted to give a certain amount of notice, as is the company so provided you or they do that then it is fine. Anyone who would be really difficult to replace will be on at least three months notice anyway, so that gives time for a contingency plan to be put in place. As has been said there is never a good time to lose a valuable member of a team but it happens. Any one of us could die in a car tomorrow and the world would still go on.

Number 2 is fine also, the probationary period is exactly that, the employer can let the worker go without normal procedures and the employee can walk away can also walk away. This is not as one sided as you make out, the company might have made a very tight call between to potential employees and by the one they offered the job too leaving they have lost both time and money in appointing and training them and possibly also lost the chance to take the other person on. But that is the risk from their side.

I totally disagree with your last post; a verbal agreement is actually binding by UK law. However it is so hard to prove it is hardly ever worth while pursuing. That does not make it morally right for someone who has accepted a job to now reject it, or for a company that has offered the job to retract the offer. I am not saying both don’t happen but it is not morally right.

Paying anyone double the going rate is just bad business, pure and simple. It is no different to paying twice as much as you need to for rent, office supplies or utilities it might make the person you are paying happy but it puts the company in a worse position than it should be.

 

[zdas04]

ajack1,
We were on the same page till the last paragraph. PEOPLE ARE NOT COMMODITIES. I've had employees that were worth 50 times the going rate and employees who were grossly overpaid at 1/2 the going rate. I always tried to get people's salaries at multiple of published industry averages. The guy that saw he was making 125-250% of average felt really good. The guy making 75% of average either came to talk to me or talked to a recruiter behind my back. I was fine with either. The ones that came to talk to me got the "have you contributed as much to the project as you've been paid?" talk. Some took it to heart and changed their ways, some took it to heart and left, others just grumbled until I found that they needed to be in a different role.

And if your comment was about my salary getting doubled, it actually went from about 65% of average to over 125% of average. Basically from a bone of contention to a steak on the grill.

The old Dilbert where the pointy haired boss says "We want the very best talent in the industry", to which Dilbert responded "But you are proud of paying below industry average salaries?", and the classic response "We want them clever but without a clue" is on point. If you want quality people, you have to pay for them.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat

 

[IRstuff]

We do pay job shoppers about ~25% to 50% more, since the job shop has to take its skim, and there's possibly some negotiation on the rates to compensate for the lack of insuramce, etc., but in the end, the company is still ahead, because it's internal contract rate is running about 3x salary, so someone coming in at 2x salary, net, is still cheaper than a full time engineer. This does create a disparity between the apparent salary, because the internal guy sees his 1x salary, while he sees a job shopper get 2x what he's getting, but that's actually not the true salary of the job shopper.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[ajack1]

We will just have to disagree on that zdas04, I am not sure how your business is run or what margins you operate on but anyone however good they are earning 50 times the going rate would be costing me a fortune. I would be intrigued how you would make money out of them.

Doubling a salary obviously depends on where you start but to end up at 125% of the market norm, I would not consider puts you in the “priced out of the marketplace” bracket. Very nice to be well thought of and nice to get the extra money but within the “limits” I would consider acceptable.

Paying people more does not make them better workers or better at their job and personally I would not pay anyone twice the going rate, if only for the bad feeling it would generate amongst others. However I would say that is assuming all other benefits are the same, if it was a contractor or someone not getting holidays or paying their own tax that is different, at least in my view.

 

[TomDOT]

Paying people more can very well make them better workers - especially if it takes them out of the "scraping by month to month" category. They no longer have to worry so much, and can focus more on the job at hand instead of barely making rent + car + student loans + food.

 

[1gibson]

Paying someone "too much" won't necessarily make them a better worker (personally I think it would) but not paying them enough will certainly hinder their desire to improve, or maintain the quality/quantity, of their work product.

Don't want to do it because it will make other people jealous? Get rid of the whiners, and then reward the ones that strive to improve because they know their employer will recognize and acknowledge this improvement by paying a higher salary.

Paying someone double the norm is another story, the justification there is retention. So if they are more than twice as good as someone fresh off the street, maybe even twice as good as their coworkers, then that is the comparison that needs to be made. If they are also twice as fast, then 2x salary plus 1x benefits package is a bargain, you still come out ahead compared to hiring 2 new people to do the rock star's job after they are out the door.

 

[zdas04]

I charge A LOT for my consulting. No apologies and every time someone has thought my hourly rate was too high, I would estimate the hours their job should cost, double it, add 50% to the inflated value (just because I could), and then multiply the new number times my very high hourly rate and present it as a hard dollar bid. I've never failed to get a bid using that algorithm and a couple of times people have told me after the fact that my bid was less than 1/4 of the big Engineering houses (and every time my projects have been completed on time, for the agreed amount, and met or exceeded the original scope). About half the difference is that I don't have to charge in 7 layers of management, but the rest is simply effectiveness. I've never done a project for anyone that their benefits were not at least 10 times what they paid me, and 100 times is more common. I've known several dozen Engineers over the years that provided similar results. Paying one of those guys twice the going rate is a bargain. I've also known far too many Engineers that paying them half the going rate was a waste of money.

PEOPLE ARE NOT COMMODITIES. We each come with our own skills, weaknesses, strengths, and body odors. An Engineer willing to work for "scale" is most likely an Engineer you don't want to hire. An Engineer with the arrogance to write his own ticket, going rate be damned, is likely to add a bunch of value.

I'm betting that even in Automotive the guy that came up with the electric starter was worth more to his employer than the guy who added a rotating hand grip to the hand crank starter.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat

 

[ajack1]

PLEASE STOP SHOUTING, IT IS RUDE. I understand added value and I also understand the sort of mark ups businesses need to make, what I cannot understand is how paying someone 50 times market rate works, maybe you could actually explain that without shouting?

If you actually look at most surveys what makes people happy is being paid a similar amount to those around them. Some people are worth more but not 100% more unless you are employing the wrong people. Again this applies to like for like, not a contractor v an employee or someone with years of experience v a new grad.

 

[ewh]

I've used the same algorithm as zdas04 when estimating time to complete tasks... seems to work out more often than not.

“Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively.”
-Dalai Lama XIV

 

[TomDOT]

ajack - you are misinterpreting the statement. It was stated the employee was worth 50x the going rate, not that they actually were being paid that amount.

With my position, I rarely get hard dollar feedback. I did get one last year - by spending at most 10 hours of my time on a problem and convincing someone else to spend $2,500 on a better (re)survey, I saved my employer over $2,000,000 they were about to spend.

If I had been paid 500x (let alone 50x) my current hourly compensation for those hours, my employer would still have come out way ahead.

Looked at another way: If I did that one thing, then surfed the internet and napped for 10 years at my current pay rate, they still would come out ahead (including overhead, et cetera.)

I do similar things fairly regularly - this was just one where I got involved late enough that there was already a bid estimate in place.