Lots of folks work on contract, not on salary. It’s easy to net out less money when expenses go up and your client isn’t sensitive to it. Should you get paid a higher rate when that happens?
I work as a contractor for a company and I have a pretty good setup. However, my expenses have grown and I feel it’s time to ask for an increase in my contract rate.
I spoke to my immediate supervisor who said, “You will have to talk to my manager. If you were to say that you have another offer, the company would be likely to increase your rate to keep you. The manager would have something to go on to get approval from his boss.”
Now, I didn’t really care for this because I’m not going to lie. I do not have another offer, and enjoy working for this company.
I spoke to my husband and told him I wasn’t too enthused to go my boss’s boss and lie to get a higher rate. He said that I should just tell the truth and be myself. I smiled, because that isn’t the problem. Schmoozing someone who I may lose respect for — that is the problem.
What would you do?
I agree with you. Do it honestly. But that means being ready to show the boss’s boss a brief analysis and business plan. Showing how your expenses have grown is good… but what’s really good is showing how you contribute to the bottom line and how you will help with the company’s success. In other words, show a benefit to the company for the extra pay. It’s a healthy thing to sit down and work this out now and then. You might be able to figure out new ways to be a better worker who contributes more to the business. That’s what work is all about.
If you can’t figure out how to increase your value to the company in exchange for the higher rate, get your boss to help you out — or the boss’s boss. Try this: “I don’t expect you to pay more unless I can do my job in a way that adds more value to the business. Can we talk about the company’s objectives? It would help me to understand where the opportunities are to boost profitability. I might be able to offer ideas on how my job could return more on the investment.”
You get the idea. Nonetheless, the expenses argument might work by itself because it is valid… Use your judgment… but don’t stop thinking about were you fit in the profitability equation.
Hey, guess what? The recession is creating a boom for “career resource sites” like HotJobs, Monster, Indeed and others. People are “flocking” to these web sites in record numbers.
No kiddin’, Dick Tracy. And desperate rats will gnaw off their own legs trying to escape pain.
eMarketer Digital Intelligence tells the story in a new report, Consumers Flock to Career Sites, but gets so excited about big-percentage traffic spikes that it doesn’t bother to ask, Do these career sites actually work?
The answer is, No. eMarketer does its clients and audience a disservice when it merely counts the rats. For the sad truth, turn to the CareerXroads 8th Annual Sources of Hire Survey. Go to page 19 and read the top paragraph. CareerXroads bears witness to all the gnawed-off legs. The big job boards don’t work.
But the media hungrily pick up the Job Board B.S. because there’s so much of it being delivered by “research firms” like eMarketer.
The big job boards remain and continue to be a waste of time and a national disgrace. But suckers are born every minute in Human Resources departments, and yes, Virginia, rats do indeed gnaw off their legs just as job hunters flock to the job boards without asking does this shit work?
Thanks to Mike Urbonas for sharing this “… my ass!” moment…
Mike Stankus, sales guru over at STM360, did an informal survey asking, Does work need to be your top priority? It seems Jack Welch thinks it does, and lazy-ass women who don’t give it all up for the corporation deserve what they get.
Stankus quotes Welch: “There are work-life choices, and you make them, and they have consequences.” (Jack Welch’s stock is lookin’ more like GE’s…) Then Stankus comments: “He [Welch] was referring to women who take time off to have/raise a family, basically saying that you can’t get to the top if work is not your top priority.”
But the juice in Stankus’s post is a tasty little informal survey he did. Read the results for yourself. The question he posed: “Would you hire someone for a critical sales/sales management position if they told you work was NOT their first priority?”
Yeses outnumbered nos 5 to 1. Are there just a lotta politically correct managers out there who — unlike Welch — would kill off their companies just to be nice to employees?
Shucks, no. I think there are just lots of managers who realize that 20 hour days don’t translate into more success. Cave men worked longer and harder rather than smarter. They still do. Give it all up for Jack, my ass!
We covered a related topic a few years ago in the Ask The Headhunter Newsletter: Maverick Women Fire Back! (One of my favorite oldies but goodies.) The best I can offer Jack’s acolytes is this: Those lazy-ass women are the canaries of the corporate coal mine… they know when it’s starting to get stinky around the old cave-man clubhouse. But these canaries know enough to leave for better company. (There’s consequences!)
The age barrier is something we’ve discussed before. Some employers look at a resume, see lengthy experience, judge the candidate as “over qualified” and toss the paper into the circular file. Dumb, dumb, dumb… but if that’s you we’re talking about, what can you do?
A reader asks The Forum:
Career professionals are telling older and more experienced people that have been “workforce-reduced” to remove information from their resume that makes them look over-qualified. (For example, shorten the work history, take off any graduate degrees unless needed for a particular job, omit industry-specific credentials.) Many experienced professionals are looking for an edge when applying for lower-level jobs and seem to be taking such advice. The goal of reducing the information on the resume is to get to the interview and then sell yourself to the hiring manager.
How do HR professionals view candidates that try to look less experienced? Do you think that this approach is a valid way to get to an interview? Thanks!
Should you mung your resume to… ahem… appear younger, less experienced and less intimidating to an employer? You guys go first… but I can’t wait to dive into this one. (And if you work in HR, what do HR professionals think of this approach to getting an interview? And why does HR avoid “over-qualified” applicants? Is less better? Do “career professionals” really tell people to devolve to get hired?? Can you be too good-looking, too smart, too experienced, too willing to take a lower salary? What is this world coming to?)
Your job interview is almost over. You want to stand out, to be memorable to the hiring manager, to close the deal, to get an offer… What should you say?
That’s the topic of the August 4, 2009 Ask The Headhunter Newsletter. (You don’t get it? Then you… don’t get it… So get it. It’s free.)
If you missed the newsletter, I’ll post my suggestion about this baffling challenge. But first I’d like to hear from you: What do you say at the end of your job interviews to cinch the deal?