Employers should prioritize retention over hiring, study suggests

Re:Employers should prioritize retention over hiring, study ... by vecter on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @06:30PM (#33337019)

At my last startup, one of our employees approached this well. This is a very summarized version, but he came to me and said: "I'd like to be paid $X. I think I deserve it and I believe I can get that salary on the open market. I don't want to negotiate on this."

We agreed and after a short discussion, we gave him the raise he asked. That he was a top performer made it an easy decision.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Employers should prioritize retention over hiring, study ... by dbish on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @06:39PM (#33337118)

Doesn’t tend to work at big tech as they have rigid very slow moving (and ill informed) HR processes that only react after they see a bunch of people leaving.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Employers should prioritize retention over hiring, study ... by derekbaker783 on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @10:17PM (#33338942)

I've seen this in non-tech (with tech workers) also.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Employers should prioritize retention over hiring, study ... by YeBanKo on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @10:52PM (#33339243)

What would be your work dynamic if you thought otherwise, i.e. they are not worth it or you can’t afford?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Employers should prioritize retention over hiring, study ... by vecter on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @11:19PM (#33339429)

In this particular case, I imagine that person would have left and found another job. They were certainly talented enough to do so. If so, there would've been no hard feelings on my end given that they're just going for what they deserve. If the reason was only because we wanted to but couldn't afford to, then I hope there wouldn't have been any hard feelings on their end either since we had a positive relationship and I would've made it clear to him that we wanted to retain him but simply didn't have the funds to.

[ Parent | on HN ]