Re:Should Younger Developers be Paid More?
by tzs on Wednesday January 19, 2011 @04:26PM
(#2121336)
I've realized another problem with the situation described in the article. Let's say I work at a company, and I have skills U, V, W, and X, and I know the company's systems in and out. I've been there for 10 years and am an excellent employee.
The company needs someone with skills Y and Z, for some new project. They hire some kid, and pay him 30 or 40% more than they are paying me. They tell me they have to pay that, because there is a lot of competition for people with Y and Z. OK, fine--although if management had done their job and figured out we would need Y and Z ahead of time, I would have been happy to learn Y and Z.
So what happens a year down the road, when that new project is done, and we no longer need Y and Z, and that kid is now doing the same work I do--but with a lot less knowledge of the company systems, a lot less experience in U, V, W, and X, and is still making 30% more than me?
Is the company going to cut his pay to match mine? That won't work--the kid will quit. Are they going to raise my pay (and everyone else in a similar situation) to match the kid's? Probably not financially viable.
They are going to have to find something to do for the prior workers at this point, or moral is going to be low, and they will probably have a lot of people leaving.
Alternatively, if Y and Z turn out to be something the company still needs a year after hiring the kid, then by that time the rest of us will probably have learned them, too, after seeing how lucrative such skills are. Do we all get raises up to the kid's level? If we are actually now doing Y and Z we'd certainly expect at least equal pay. If we aren't doing Y and Z, then we should be going to other companies that need Y and Z, and getting the big bucks.
The company needs someone with skills Y and Z, for some new project. They hire some kid, and pay him 30 or 40% more than they are paying me. They tell me they have to pay that, because there is a lot of competition for people with Y and Z. OK, fine--although if management had done their job and figured out we would need Y and Z ahead of time, I would have been happy to learn Y and Z.
So what happens a year down the road, when that new project is done, and we no longer need Y and Z, and that kid is now doing the same work I do--but with a lot less knowledge of the company systems, a lot less experience in U, V, W, and X, and is still making 30% more than me?
Is the company going to cut his pay to match mine? That won't work--the kid will quit. Are they going to raise my pay (and everyone else in a similar situation) to match the kid's? Probably not financially viable.
They are going to have to find something to do for the prior workers at this point, or moral is going to be low, and they will probably have a lot of people leaving.
Alternatively, if Y and Z turn out to be something the company still needs a year after hiring the kid, then by that time the rest of us will probably have learned them, too, after seeing how lucrative such skills are. Do we all get raises up to the kid's level? If we are actually now doing Y and Z we'd certainly expect at least equal pay. If we aren't doing Y and Z, then we should be going to other companies that need Y and Z, and getting the big bucks.