• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The quitting economy

entremet

Member
Good jobs were ones with a good salary, benefits, etc. Now, it's one that prepares you for your next job

If you are a white-collar worker, it is simply rational to view yourself first and foremost as a job quitter – someone who takes a job for a certain amount of time when the best outcome is that you quit for another job (and the worst is that you get laid off). So how does work change when everyone is trying to become a quitter? First of all, in the society of perpetual job searches, different criteria make a job good or not. Good jobs used to be ones with a good salary, benefits, location, hours, boss, co-workers, and a clear path towards promotion. Now, a good job is one that prepares you for your next job, almost always with another company.

Your job might be a space to learn skills that you can use in the future. Or, it might be a job with a company that has a good-enough reputation that other companies are keen to hire away its employees. On the other hand, it isn't as good a job if everything you learn there is too specific to that company, if you aren't learning easily transferrable skills. It isn't a good job if it enmeshes you in local regulatory schemes and keeps you tied to a particular location. And it isn't a good job if you have to work such long hours that you never have time to look for the next job. In short, a job becomes a good job if it will lead to another job, likely with another company or organisation. You start choosing a job for how good it will be for you to quit it.

In significant ways, the calculus of quitting changes workplace dynamics. Being a good manager now means helping those whom you manage acquire the skills that will help them to leave for a better job at another company. Good managers know this. I observed a Berkeley continuing education workshop for new managers, and one speaker described her strategies for behaving well to her team. She explained that she did this from the outset by clarifying what she understood their implicit business contract to be. She takes each new member of her team out to lunch in the week they start: ‘So I always say things like: ”You don't work for me, I work for you... My job is to make sure you can do your job well. And one day, you are going to leave this job, right, our careers are long, and we will have many jobs along the way. When you want to leave this job, I hope to be here to help you move on to this next job."' From the outset, managers say that they will help those who work under them become job-quitters – to find the next best stepping stone in their career.

https://aeon.co/essays/how-work-changed-to-make-us-all-passionate-quitters

This is a really great article and the beginning talks about the global forces that have created this quitting economy.
 

entremet

Member
For managers, the aspect of working for your employees growth is a great mindset to have. You work for them, not the other way around. You'll get much better performance.
 

Akuun

Looking for meaning in GAF
It's true that these days, changing jobs is the best way to advance your career. Companies drag their feet about giving raises and benefits so much that it makes much more sense to just move to a job that's willing to offer you those things. All of my biggest salary increases have come from changing jobs.

The thing about managers grooming people into changing jobs later sounds completely insane to me, though. It would be great if that happened, but I've never seen or heard of this mentality before. The best manager I've had has always acknowledged and accepted the idea that I may change jobs in the future, but no boss ever specifically goes out of their way to try to groom you into someone who is good enough to find a better job elsewhere. They want you to keep working for them because you're useful to them, and they don't care about raising your career - that's your job, not theirs.
 

entremet

Member
It's true that these days, changing jobs is the best way to advance your career. Companies drag their feet about giving raises and benefits so much that it makes much more sense to just move to a job that's willing to offer you those things. All of my biggest salary increases have come from changing jobs.

The thing about managers grooming people into changing jobs later sounds completely insane to me, though. The best manager I've had has always acknowledged and accepted the idea that I may change jobs in the future, but no boss ever specifically goes out of their way to try to groom you into someone who is good enough to find a better job elsewhere. They want you to keep working for them because you're useful to them, and they don't care about raising your career - that's your job, not theirs.

I don't think it's a literal thing there. It's just a shift in mindset. I have a boss like that. Besides it's harder to recruit these days and a good managers are essential in keeping and attracting new employees.

how about doing something about that
Read the first few paragraphs of the article to understand why companies don't reward loyalty.
 

sphagnum

Banned
I can't stand it. When our company got bought out, the new owners decided to place wage caps on each specific job (we never had them before). When someone asked the VP during a town hall meeting what reason they had to stay once they hit the cap if they moved up to the highest non-management position and didn't want to join management, his response was just "Who stays at a job for more than 10 years anyway?"
 

RMI

Banned
salary improvement at my work is truly pathetic. I think I got less than 2% this year, with which increases in childcare costs and inflation basically means I'm losing money. I like working here. The benefits are good. The retirement plan is good. It sucks. Not only do they not do much for the salaries of people who have been here for a while, new positions are constantly under-hired (i.e. huge list of responsibilities with entry level pay), so moving to a new position within the organization is basically just a terrible idea at this point. The craziest thing about these new people they're hiring is because the pay is so low they are basically getting fresh graduates with no experience, and then managers act confused when their employees are terrible. just wtf.
 

ApharmdX

Banned
This is crazy to me. It's hard to raise a family with the constant upheaval that frequent job changes causes. Really makes me appreciate my government job- I would love more money in the open market but the stability and dependability of the work is more valuable.
 

entremet

Member
This is crazy to me. It's hard to raise a family with the constant upheaval that frequent job changes causes. Really makes me appreciate my government job- I would love more money in the open market but the stability and dependability of the work is more valuable.

Yeah. There's lot of anxiety. I do agree.
 

Linkura

Member
I've changed jobs pretty frequently- though my husband has been the opposite, and he's where we get our benefits. It hasn't been for money, though- it's been for other reasons, often because of terrible boss issues. The money has been a nice bonus, though. I'm now only working 2 days a week and earning more than I did when I started out of college at a more-than-full-time job 8 years ago.
 

Sulik2

Member
why reward loyalty when you can save the company's bottom line by hiring somebody fresh out of college for $24K with no benefits instead?

Fixed that income estimate for you.

This is crazy to me. It's hard to raise a family with the constant upheaval that frequent job changes causes. Really makes me appreciate my government job- I would love more money in the open market but the stability and dependability of the work is more valuable.

Isn't it interesting that getting married and having children is at an all time low in the millennial generation. I wonder if they are connected...
 
I actually don't think changing jobs is a bad thing. Your has to be pretty fucking good to be worth doing the rest of your life. And there really only a couple of jobs you wanna do a lifetime.
 
This is crazy to me. It's hard to raise a family with the constant upheaval that frequent job changes causes. Really makes me appreciate my government job- I would love more money in the open market but the stability and dependability of the work is more valuable.

That's where I am. I found a place I'm comfortable at where I can do good work and have some stability. That's a benefit to me that compensates for lower monetary compensation.
 

Sikowitz

Banned
This is crazy to me. It's hard to raise a family with the constant upheaval that frequent job changes causes. Really makes me appreciate my government job- I would love more money in the open market but the stability and dependability of the work is more valuable.
It's a bit different in europe. Loyalty is still worth something there.
 
Read the first few paragraphs of the article to understand why companies don't reward loyalty.

But as market value overtook other measures of a company’s value, maximising the short-term interests of shareholders began to override other concerns, other relationships. Quarterly earnings reports and stock prices became even more important, the sole measures of success. How companies treated employees changed, and has not changed back. A recent illustration of the ethos came when American Airlines, having decided that its current levels of compensation were not competitive, announced an increase to its staff salaries. The company was, in fact, funnelling money to workers instead of to its shareholders. Wall Street’s reaction was immediate: American Airlines’ stock price plummeted.

In general, to keep stock prices high, companies not only have to pay their employees as little as possible, they must also have as temporary a workforce as their particular business can allow. The more expendable the workforce, the easier it is to expand and contract in response to short-term demands. These are market and shareholder metrics. Their dominance diminished commitment to employees, and all other commitments but to shareholders, as much as the particular industry requirements of production allow. With companies so organised, the idea of loyalty receded.

Companies now needed to free themselves as much as possible of long-term obligations, such as pensions and other worker incentives. Employees who work long, and in many cases, intense hours to finish short-term projects, became more valuable. While companies rarely say so explicitly, in practice they often want employees who can be let go easily and with little fuss, employees who do not expect long-term commitments from their employer. But, like employment, loyalty is a two-way street – making jobs short-term, commitment-free enterprises leads to workers who view temporary work contracts as also desirable. You start hiring job-quitters.

So, basically, short-term quarterly report capitalism led to a suboptimal regime where no one is loyal, and skills don't stay within the company
 

Akuun

Looking for meaning in GAF
I can't stand it. When our company got bought out, the new owners decided to place wage caps on each specific job (we never had them before). When someone asked the VP during a town hall meeting what reason they had to stay once they hit the cap if they moved up to the highest non-management position and didn't want to join management, his response was just "Who stays at a job for more than 10 years anyway?"
That sucks. From a shitty manager's perspective, experienced people leaving is actually a good thing for them, because then they can hire another guy at the base salary rate and make him do your job. Wring that guy out too, then repeat when that guy leaves. In a super shortsighted way, that saves them money.

All the expertise and knowledge that left with you, and the cost of all the fires that will inevitably result from replacing an experienced employee with a new one? Shitty managers don't know or care about that.

My old job was like that. They went through people in my role like nothing, but apparently they don't seem to care. Oh, and they never gave raises ever, the biggest "bonus" I got from that job was a small shopping mall gift card, and they actually didn't even know how to give performance reviews until I asked for one. When they finally put one together (cobbled together from co-op review papers) and I asked about salary, my boss literally shrugged at me.

You bet your ass I left that fucking shithole pretty quickly after that.
 

Rootbeer

Banned
It really sucks. There is no loyalty, but it's because companies don't want to reward loyalty.

Best way to get higher pay is to jump jobs. I'm getting about ready to do it again myself.

There's also a mindset (right or wrong) that you have to keep advancing yourself, and to do that you have to fight against stagnation, which is best achieved by moving jobs. Lots of examples of this being perpetuated. Not long ago I saw a Casey Neistat video where he outright said anyone staying in a job for more than two years is wasting opportunities away, and he actively encourages people under his employ to move on after that threshold.
 
One thing I'll never get about job jumpers is how they can keep doing that and still be happy. It's not fun to switch jobs, it's worse than moving. Changing jobs can be exhilarating in a way, but it's overshadowed entirely by the stress and inconvenience. It also robs you of the reward of being a part of something that you invest yourself in more than just about any other aspect of your life. It's a shame that it's rewarded the way that it is.
 
Where were these articles 2 years ago ...

Unemployment is too low right now. Thats why people feel so comfortable leaving their jobs and can make more at the next one. Companies can either pay more than they want to for experienced quality employees from other companies .. or they can pay the same amount for one of the dregs from the final 4.5% of society that somehow cant get a job until unemployment is so low that people are forced to hire them. Poaching is always cheaper.
 
My wages were pretty much stagnant for the 6 years (my longest career tenure so far) i was at one of my former jobs. stuck at like $50,000-ish, with tiny raises every year even with a greatly expanded role and literally telling my boss that I could get double the salary elsewhere but being refused.

I left, under great pressure to stay. 4 years and 3 jobs later I'm in a much higher position, at a way better company, making almost 3x that. I NEVER would be making this much and be this happy if I stayed. I have recruiters calling me weekly. For me, job security is knowing I can go out and get another job should they decide to "streamline operations" or whatever.

I always remember, most employers are not loyal to you. when push comes to shove, you are expendable and can be laid off no matter how good you are. I wish loyalty meant something. I don't believe it does, in my experience.

cynical yes. but based on real world experience so far.
 
Being a good manager means supporting your team and helping them develop. That's not the same as helping them quit though. You should be thinking about your succession plan and finding new opportunities for your best employees to give them incentive to stay. You should be preparing them for their next role in your company - not some other company.
 

Nevasleep

Member
It's a bit different in europe. Loyalty is still worth something there.
Not in my industry, still higher salary and promotions if you move. Although my last place started giving some rather large raises because they had been under the market rate and losing their best techs.
 

br3wnor

Member
It’s true and very relevant in today’s economy. Long gone are the days where the goal is to stick with one company for 30 years and have a nice retirement package. Since it’s mostly 401K’s now, you don’t have much incentive to stick around long term if other opportunities arise out there that pay better or give you more professional development opportunities. I have a state job now, but had 2 jobs in the past 2 years, quitting both of them to get to where I am now. Ultimately doubled my salary but also understand that I’ve reached a bit of a ceiling given the type of law I practice, it will not transition into the private sector easily so I hope to stay here long term. Throw the pension in and the longer I’m here the more I’d hurt myself in retirement by leaving before it vests (20 years).

If I was solely in the private sector though I’d be bouncing around as much as possible because the possible raises you get from new employers usually dwarf what the current employer is willing to give you (unless you’re on partner track or something). Employers have absolutely no loyalty to their workers and will drop you the second it makes financial sense, people sticking around at companies due to their own sense of loyalty while passing up better outside opportunities are doing a disservice to themselves.
 

efyu_lemonardo

May I have a cookie?
A recent illustration of the ethos came when American Airlines, having decided that its current levels of compensation were not competitive, announced an increase to its staff salaries. The company was, in fact, funnelling money to workers instead of to its shareholders. Wall Street’s reaction was immediate: American Airlines’ stock price plummeted.

This makes my blood boil.
 

Deepwater

Member
(some) companies don't like developing employees because it takes time and money and it's hard to justify on a financial statement despite the decades of empirical research on management and HR practices that show the net positives.
 

Sotha_Sil

Member
I got a 10% raise this year, but none last year so it evens out (kinda). Thankfully I get a healthy amount of per diem and bonuses to supplement my salary.
 

Akuun

Looking for meaning in GAF
One thing I'll never get about job jumpers is how they can keep doing that and still be happy. It's not fun to switch jobs, it's worse than moving. Changing jobs can be exhilarating in a way, but it's overshadowed entirely by the stress and inconvenience. It also robs you of the reward of being a part of something that you invest yourself in more than just about any other aspect of your life. It's a shame that it's rewarded the way that it is.
It's mostly because it's a better alternative to staying in the same job. It's not that switching jobs is fun, but in some cases, changing jobs has a better chance of making you happy when compared to staying at a job that clearly treats you like shit and is basically banking on the notion that you're too scared/miserable to look for work elsewhere.

If you like your job and your job treats you well, I can see the sense in staying there for more than a few years and putting a personal stake in the job's cause. I did that for my previous job... and then one day I was laid off without warning because of financial reasons that were outside my control. Went from a job where I had been working for years, liked both the work and people, and then within an hour I was out the door, sitting in my car and wondering what the fuck just happened.

For most people, their jobs are paychecks and they have no personal stake in what their company does. Most workers are are treated like entirely disposable tools by employers that constantly give them as little as they think they can get away with. These employers try to bully and shaft their employees just enough to make them think it's not quite worth quitting. There's no sense in staying loyal to a company like that. Since you know that your current job has absolutely no way up, you might as well try to at least look for something better so that you at least have a CHANCE at something nicer than what you have now. It's better than milling around forever at a job where you know you will only be more miserable the longer you stay there.

As for contributing to a cause, a company's cause is not your cause if the company treats you like disposable trash. Internalizing a company's cause in those cases is just a way for the company to get free overtime and personal sacrifices out of you because they know you care. If a company treats you like that, you're not a valuable contributor to the company - you're fuel to be burned for someone else's fire.

If you're working an interesting job doing something you care about at a company that treats you well, that's excellent. You have a very rare blessing in life, and you should treasure it. But for most people, work isn't that nice, and in those cases it makes sense to keep job hopping in the hopes that you'll find something better.
 

entremet

Member
(some) companies don't like developing employees because it takes time and money and it's hard to justify on a financial statement despite the decades of empirical research on management and HR practices that show the net positives.

Any links. I'm curious.
 

Ron Mexico

Member
I'll have to find the link, but there's been studies based on the cost of a new hire to replace regrettable turnover. Some ungodly price that outweighs the cost of retaining a good employee. Edit: conservative estimates are 1.5x the salary when measuring lost productivity, recruiting and training

The bottom line of it is just that--the bottom line. Hiring newer, cheaper and less experienced sounds like a good plan in the short-term from a shareholder perspective, the lack of foresight in the knock-on effects is what's going to create the real issue. Of course, that will be answered by more short-term solutions all the while ignoring the big picture.
 
It's mostly because it's a better alternative to staying in the same job. It's not that switching jobs is fun, but in some cases, changing jobs has a better chance of making you happy when compared to staying at a job that clearly treats you like shit and is basically banking on the notion that you're too scared/miserable to look for work elsewhere.

If you like your job and your job treats you well, I can see the sense in staying there for more than a few years and putting a personal stake in the job's cause. I did that for my previous job... and then one day I was laid off without warning because of financial reasons that were outside my control. Went from a job where I had been working for years, liked both the work and people, and then within an hour I was out the door, sitting in my car and wondering what the fuck just happened.

For most people, their jobs are paychecks and they have no personal stake in what their company does. Most workers are are treated like entirely disposable tools by employers that constantly give them as little as they think they can get away with. These employers try to bully and shaft their employees just enough to make them think it's not quite worth quitting. There's no sense in staying loyal to a company like that. Since you know that your current job has absolutely no way up, you might as well try to at least look for something better so that you at least have a CHANCE at something nicer than what you have now. It's better than milling around forever at a job where you know you will only be more miserable the longer you stay there.

As for contributing to a cause, a company's cause is not your cause if the company treats you like disposable trash. Internalizing a company's cause in those cases is just a way for the company to get free overtime and personal sacrifices out of you because they know you care. If a company treats you like that, you're not a valuable contributor to the company - you're fuel to be burned for someone else's fire.

If you're working an interesting job doing something you care about at a company that treats you well, that's excellent. You have a very rare blessing in life, and you should treasure it. But for most people, work isn't that nice, and in those cases it makes sense to keep job hopping in the hopes that you'll find something better.

That's reasonable. I'm more referring to the job jumping as a principle, or a normal way of participating in the work force.

One thing I've noticed in hiring for my department (software developer) is how ill equipped a lot of applicants are. It's like they aren't really learning anything during that year or two at each job, almost like they get hired then hide for as long as possible then rinse/repeat. Sometimes we'll go a year or longer before finally filling a position.
 
At least in my experience, loyalty isn't always a valuable asset from an IT-industry perspective. If you're stayed at a company for 5+ years, there's a very good chance that your skillset has atrophied and that you're only really familiar with one way of doing things. As a contractor who recently was converted to a permanent employee, I've seen this time and time again. You'll get people who vastly overestimate their skill set because they've operated within the confines of a single company for so long that they can't imagine anything else. Moving around gives you perspective that you simply can't get from the outside looking in.
 

McBryBry

Member
I went from part time to full time after working here for 2 years. Went from 10 to 10.79 hour. Yeah loyalty doesn't do much.
 

gatling

Member
Loyalty isn't always a good thing, at least in Information Technology. If you're stayed at a company for 5+ years, there's a very good chance that your skillset has atrophied and that you're only really familiar with one way of doing things. As a contractor who recently was converted to a permanent employee, I've seen this time and time again. You'll get people who vastly overestimate their skill set because they've only operated within the confines of a single company for so long that they can't imagine anything else. Moving around gives you perspective that you simply can't get from the outside looking in.

This is really a good point. I had a roommate in IT that had a huge network around the city at various corporations. They all seemed to rotate every few years for pay increases. If they never talked to each other about their industry I'm sure she would've stagnated in a job she was in for 5 years at a previous company. She said it was hard working for a brokerage firm catering to crazy (probably more wealthy) people on stockroom floors while she was still struggling.
 

Akuun

Looking for meaning in GAF
That's reasonable. I'm more referring to the job jumping as a principle, or a normal way of participating in the work force.

One thing I've noticed in hiring for my department (software developer) is how ill equipped a lot of applicants are. It's like they aren't really learning anything during that year or two at each job, almost like they get hired then hide for as long as possible then rinse/repeat. Sometimes we'll go a year or longer before finally filling a position.
I work in IT too, but in documentation. I have a similar experience interviewing people in that a lot of people just aren't very well qualified. I think it's generally hard to find someone good.

I actually see it in the opposite way in terms of job hopping, though. While there are people that you describe who just try to coast for as long as they can before being forced to move (and those people definitely should be avoided), there are other people who are good specifically because they've had a lot of different jobs, and people who are bad because they stayed at the same job for too long.

Skills kind of stagnate over time if someone works the same job for too long, because they get good at one thing in a given environment, keep doing that thing for the rest of their time there (like making updates with each release of existing software) and then they just stop learning after that. It leads to a set of skills that aren't varied and don't necessarily transfer very well once they try to change jobs. Maybe that guy with 10 years of experience only knows how to do things one way, only knows how to use one tool, and has no idea how your company does things because he's never seen it in his life. Worse, that person may be resistant to how you do things and try to push back on you when you try to adopt more modern practices that his old job never did. On the other hand, a guy who has hopped over several jobs spanning 2-3 years each has a better chance of having some experience with your company's tools and practices from at least one of those jobs. Stuff like that.
 

Deepwater

Member
Any links. I'm curious.

The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Turnover, Productivity, and Corporate Financial Performance

An increasing body of work contains the argument that the use of High Performance Work Practices, including comprehensive employee recruitment
and selection procedures, incentive compensation and performance management
systems, and extensive employee involvement and training, can
improve the knowledge, skills, and abilities of a firm's current and potential
employees, increase their motivation, reduce shirking, and enhance
retention of quality employees while encouraging nonperformers to
leave the firm (Jones & Wright, 1992; U.S. Department of Labor, 1993).
 

NandoGip

Member
Blame the employers who try to keep their workers earning the same amount while inflation continues over every day goods

If you keep the same salary year over year, you are actually getting a PAY DECREASE
 

Calm Killer

In all media, only true fans who consume every book, film, game, or pog collection deserve to know what's going on.
Been here for 12 years and plan to retire here. Treat your people right and you keep people. Pay doesn't factor into as much as people think.
 

Deepwater

Member
At least in my experience, loyalty isn't always a valuable asset from an IT-industry perspective. If you're stayed at a company for 5+ years, there's a very good chance that your skillset has atrophied and that you're only really familiar with one way of doing things. As a contractor who recently was converted to a permanent employee, I've seen this time and time again. You'll get people who vastly overestimate their skill set because they've operated within the confines of a single company for so long that they can't imagine anything else. Moving around gives you perspective that you simply can't get from the outside looking in.

Loyalty is valuable if companies motivate their employees to develop and learn new skills. You'll see many large companies like Google will actually allocate workhours to each employee to work on their own personal projects (within the context of the company) and several companies (including the large IT org I work for) will pay for you to go to things like conferences.

IT reinventing it self every 2-3 years isn't a new thing, but what can you do if your company has you working on the same 2-3 systems/apps for several years and wont let you take time off work (or pay for it themselves) so that you can go do professional development stuff?

Edit: I will also say that MANY IT orgs have a shit documentation system and their developers will build apps with messy, unannotated code that is impossible for someone new to the company to parse and figure out. So you might've had a developer who built and worked on this system for 4-7 years in like php but then they either retire or leave so the new developer who only knows like Python and java has to figure out their messy code and it just becomes a huge time and money sink for companies.
 

Dazzler

Member
The only way to get ahead nowadays is to job hop every few years. This article is spot on

Loyalty is no longer rewarded by most companies
 

br3wnor

Member
I went from part time to full time after working here for 2 years. Went from 10 to 10.79 hour. Yeah loyalty doesn't do much.

That reminds me of when I worked at Rite Aid right after graduating college. I started part time, was promoted to full-time Assistant Manager once I graduated, this was 2009 and the economy was cratering so I thought $10 an hour wasn’t too bad. I got to live another year in the town I went to college in and overall it was one of the most fun years of my life (college partying w/out the classes/grades) but as I approached the 1 year mark my boss said to look out for my raise. Finally the paycheck comes with my new raise and I see the wage per hour: $10.33. I worked every week, literally never called out sick once, made sure the store was in good shape, opened and closed, etc. basically did everything you’d expect a good assistant manager to do, and that’s how they rewarded me.

A thirty three cent raise, they couldn’t even be bothered to make it an even number like $10.50 or something. I started looking for a new job right away and w/in a half year had left for something else. Now I wasn’t gonna stay at Rite Aid forever, but once I realized they had no respect for me and my contributions, it made my decision to leave that much quicker.
 
Top Bottom