Still happening. Especially people working in IT in banks are getting almost nothing in bonus and no pay increase for many years. The number of jobs is significantly reduced also.

Ever since I've started working in IT, the rule has always been if you want a pay raise or a promotion, you go to a different company. Out of the four companies I've worked for in three different Midwest states, I've never worked at a place where the highest raise of anyone on my team has ever exceeded 1.5% per year. 2-3 years then get out and get your raise somewhere else.

I wonder if there's a correlation between the higher turnover of motivated professionals and the rate at which large companies get hit with security breaches. The people who are most able to move employment are the ones who often are the most competent. Even setting that aside, it takes time, familiarity with company systems, as well as competence - and security is unforgiving.

That may be, but in Charlotte at least, IT jobs at the banks tend to be on the high end of our local salary range.

If you dont mind me asking, whats the software dev salary range in charlotte?

Depends on Skillsets but it's not horrible. It's actually pretty consistent in Charleston, SC. as well. I know many devs over 100k in each field, It's not SF pay, but the cost of living is also not SF prices.

People sitting in high places benefit every where, not just banking. It pays to be higher authority, regardless of your performance. Generally because the definition of good performance is fuzzy you can always twist it to your advantage.

I remember an instance in the past where a executive organized a 'hack day'. All he did was drop in email to the company cafeteria to have a tea and biscuits arranged. The dude didn't even show up to the event. At the end of the quarter I remember him getting a neat cash reward for 'thought leadership' regarding that hack day.

And it probably wasn't even his idea, some poor underling might've given him the idea. Happens all the time, everywhere.

Not to defend the banks, but this reminds me of when a company declares bankruptcy and pays its executives bonuses. The argument is always that, no matter how flawed the executives' judgment is, it's better to have somebody doing the job than to have the executives jump ship.

I'm not sure the argument applies here, since I'm not sure how many companies were hiring executives during the time frame.

No, the real argument is usually that the executive contracts are constructed such that trying to weasel out of "bonuses" for them probably is ill advised.

I work in banking. For trader, M&A and other related positions, the contractual bonus rate is/was(?) often 100%.

A lot were fired, they hired back, then fired again. Not sure what the overall impact had been, but for the ones I know, after the crisis it has been like a continuous Christmas. Lot of cash/cheap money to buy cheap flat/houses all around, kids and early retirement at 32.