| OT - Salary differentials [message #390200] |
Do, 18 Mai 2006 18:07 |
|
Hi all.
I think the subject line represents what I'd like to ask about.
eg.
I work in a department of a large organisation.(2000+ employees)
In this department their are;
Senior management,
Junior management. (eg project managers)
Skilled technicians
Junior technicians
I've chosen these broad categories as generic terms but in reality in
our department we are mostly computer programmers, analyst/programmers
etc.
So my question is;
Is there a traditional rule of thumb that governs salary differentials?
eg. If the junior manager (Project Manager) is earning say twice as
much as their highest paid subordinates I'd assume it might be bad
for morale/business.
Thanks.
Arthur
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390201 ] |
Do, 18 Mai 2006 18:22 |
|
Davao wrote:
> Hi all.
> I think the subject line represents what I'd like to ask about.
> eg.
> I work in a department of a large organisation.(2000+ employees)
> In this department their are;
> Senior management,
> Junior management. (eg project managers)
> Skilled technicians
> Junior technicians
>
> I've chosen these broad categories as generic terms but in reality in
> our department we are mostly computer programmers, analyst/programmers
> etc.
>
> So my question is;
> Is there a traditional rule of thumb that governs salary differentials?
>
> eg. If the junior manager (Project Manager) is earning say twice as
> much as their highest paid subordinates I'd assume it might be bad
> for morale/business.
No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other employees are
earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited in the Contact of
Employment.
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390202 ] |
Do, 18 Mai 2006 20:16 |
|
On 18 May 2006 09:07:53 -0700, "Davao" <ravenscrofta [at] yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
>Hi all.
>I think the subject line represents what I'd like to ask about.
>eg.
>I work in a department of a large organisation.(2000+ employees)
>In this department their are;
>Senior management,
>Junior management. (eg project managers)
>Skilled technicians
>Junior technicians
>
>I've chosen these broad categories as generic terms but in reality in
>our department we are mostly computer programmers, analyst/programmers
>etc.
>
>So my question is;
>Is there a traditional rule of thumb that governs salary differentials?
>
>eg. If the junior manager (Project Manager) is earning say twice as
>much as their highest paid subordinates I'd assume it might be bad
>for morale/business.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Arthur
Life isn't that simple. In my experience in the modern software
industry a junior manager could be paid less than a subordinate highly
skilled "technician". Someone with significant technical ability
essential for the company's core business may be totally unsuitable
for a management role.
In the large company I worked for project management was a skill
considered as parallel to the technical skills. Each had its own
salary banding based on experience and competence.
--
Mike Bending
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390203 ] |
Do, 18 Mai 2006 20:25 |
|
"Troy Steadman" <troysteadman [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1147969321.765867.266740 [at] j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Davao wrote:
>> Hi all.
>> I think the subject line represents what I'd like to ask about.
>> eg.
>> I work in a department of a large organisation.(2000+ employees)
>> In this department their are;
>> Senior management,
>> Junior management. (eg project managers)
>> Skilled technicians
>> Junior technicians
>>
>> I've chosen these broad categories as generic terms but in reality in
>> our department we are mostly computer programmers, analyst/programmers
>> etc.
>>
>> So my question is;
>> Is there a traditional rule of thumb that governs salary differentials?
>>
>> eg. If the junior manager (Project Manager) is earning say twice as
>> much as their highest paid subordinates I'd assume it might be bad
>> for morale/business.
>
> No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other employees are
> earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited in the Contact of
> Employment.
>
I'm not interested in what my colleague's are earning at this time.
I'm looking for a rule of thumb.
eg. A line manager at the bottom of his/her salary scale will earn no more
than
5% more than a subordinate at the top end of their salary scale.
And/or the line
manager at the top of their salary scale should earn no more than 60%
more
than a subordinate who is at the top of their salary scale.
Arthur
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390204 ] |
Do, 18 Mai 2006 20:50 |
|
Davao <ravenscrofta [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I think the subject line represents what I'd like to ask about.
> eg.
> I work in a department of a large organisation.(2000+ employees)
> In this department their are;
> Senior management,
> Junior management. (eg project managers)
> Skilled technicians
> Junior technicians
> I've chosen these broad categories as generic terms but in reality in
> our department we are mostly computer programmers, analyst/programmers
> etc.
> So my question is;
> Is there a traditional rule of thumb that governs salary differentials?
No. Not in the technical world.
> eg. If the junior manager (Project Manager) is earning say twice as
> much as their highest paid subordinates I'd assume it might be bad
> for morale/business.
A junior manager would probably not have access to salary details. A
line manager who is involved in decisions regarding in hiring will.
Other non-management staff should have no access to salary details.
You may well find some technical staff, especially if they are
contractors, earning far more (I mean 2 .. 5 times) than their permi
colleagues doing similar work, and more than their manager.
Axel
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390207 ] |
Do, 18 Mai 2006 22:09 |
|
On 18 May 2006 09:22:01 -0700, "Troy Steadman"
<troysteadman [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other employees are
>earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited in the Contact of
>Employment.
No sensible firm should attempt to control its employees in such tight
restrictions. And certainly a firm that enforced such a restriction
on a valuable employee would be an absolute idiot.
Jim.
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390210 ] |
Do, 18 Mai 2006 22:16 |
|
On 18 May 2006 09:07:53 -0700, "Davao" <ravenscrofta [at] yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
>So my question is;
>Is there a traditional rule of thumb that governs salary differentials?
Nope, a heirachical system like you've described is suggestive of a
very inflexible company, most companies are not like this, especially
in the software industry, where it's pretty required that you reward
ability and not all developers are created equal.
>eg. If the junior manager (Project Manager) is earning say twice as
>much as their highest paid subordinates I'd assume it might be bad
>for morale/business.
Not if they were worth that... Look at value not differentials.
Jim.
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390212 ] |
Do, 18 Mai 2006 23:01 |
|
Jim Ley <jim [at] jibbering.com> wrote:
> On 18 May 2006 09:22:01 -0700, "Troy Steadman"
> <troysteadman [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other employees are
>>earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited in the Contact of
>>Employment.
> No sensible firm should attempt to control its employees in such tight
> restrictions. And certainly a firm that enforced such a restriction
> on a valuable employee would be an absolute idiot.
It is a standard term when contracting. Mainly I suspect to stop people
realise how much the agent is ripping them off.
Axel
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390217 ] |
Fr, 19 Mai 2006 12:09 |
|
On Thu, 18 May 2006 21:01:24 GMT, axel [at] white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
>Jim Ley <jim [at] jibbering.com> wrote:
>> On 18 May 2006 09:22:01 -0700, "Troy Steadman"
>> <troysteadman [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other employees are
>>>earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited in the Contact of
>>>Employment.
>
>> No sensible firm should attempt to control its employees in such tight
>> restrictions. And certainly a firm that enforced such a restriction
>> on a valuable employee would be an absolute idiot.
>
>It is a standard term when contracting. Mainly I suspect to stop people
>realise how much the agent is ripping them off.
Sure, it's a standard term, but it's still a sign of a poor company.
Jim.
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390220 ] |
Fr, 19 Mai 2006 13:03 |
|
Jim Ley wrote:
> On Thu, 18 May 2006 21:01:24 GMT, axel [at] white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
>
>>Jim Ley <jim [at] jibbering.com> wrote:
>>> On 18 May 2006 09:22:01 -0700, "Troy Steadman"
>>> <troysteadman [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>>No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other employees are
>>>>earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited in the Contact of
>>>>Employment.
>>
>>> No sensible firm should attempt to control its employees in such tight
>>> restrictions. And certainly a firm that enforced such a restriction
>>> on a valuable employee would be an absolute idiot.
>>
>>It is a standard term when contracting. Mainly I suspect to stop people
>>realise how much the agent is ripping them off.
>
> Sure, it's a standard term, but it's still a sign of a poor company.
I rather doubt whether it's even a legally enforcible term.
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390226 ] |
Fr, 19 Mai 2006 14:47 |
|
It's normal good hr management practice [and observes the protection of
sensitive personal data too] to assume that personal salary information
is kept absolutely private and confidential, but it was always my
experience that many employees will share and compare such info.
amongst themselves inevitably, however much 'management' discourages
this and whatever any formal contractual terms say. AFAIK, so long as
eg antidiscriminatory employment law is observed, it's all down to
supply and demand anyway, although as much transparency as is
appropriate as regards salary bandings; pay reviews etc. is just good
business practice in order to prevent the staff as a whole becoming too
p***d-off regarding pay and benefit issues [aka 'felt-fair' basis]
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390246 ] |
Fr, 19 Mai 2006 19:54 |
|
Jim Ley <jim [at] jibbering.com> wrote:
>>Jim Ley <jim [at] jibbering.com> wrote:
>>> On 18 May 2006 09:22:01 -0700, "Troy Steadman"
>>> <troysteadman [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other employees are
>>>>earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited in the Contact of
>>>>Employment.
>>> No sensible firm should attempt to control its employees in such tight
>>> restrictions. And certainly a firm that enforced such a restriction
>>> on a valuable employee would be an absolute idiot.
>>It is a standard term when contracting. Mainly I suspect to stop people
>>realise how much the agent is ripping them off.
> Sure, it's a standard term, but it's still a sign of a poor company.
Which company? The agent... they are mostly a shower of crap anyway.
That is with whom the contractor has his contract... nothing much to do
with the actual people he works for who do not realise how much the
agent is raking off.
I came across this once... as I was about to change positions between
companies (very connected companies... the change involved my desk
moving 10') I nearly lost my job as the agency started asking
seriously astronomical fees per diem. I got together with the people
in the 'new company' and we decided no increase in charges so they
would pay the same amount as had been paid to the agent but directly
to me... almost doubled my earnings.
I also remember talking to another agent in England and asking him what
percentage the agency took... 'that is a matter between us and the
clients'... oh ok then is you can't be straight with me, plonk.
Axel
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390259 ] |
Sa, 20 Mai 2006 12:59 |
|
axel [at] white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
> Jim Ley <jim [at] jibbering.com> wrote:
>>> Jim Ley <jim [at] jibbering.com> wrote:
>>>> On 18 May 2006 09:22:01 -0700, "Troy Steadman"
>>>> <troysteadman [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>>> No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other
>>>>> employees are earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited
>>>>> in the Contact of Employment.
>
>>>> No sensible firm should attempt to control its employees in such
>>>> tight restrictions. And certainly a firm that enforced such a
>>>> restriction on a valuable employee would be an absolute idiot.
>
>>> It is a standard term when contracting. Mainly I suspect to stop
>>> people realise how much the agent is ripping them off.
>
>> Sure, it's a standard term, but it's still a sign of a poor company.
>
>
> I also remember talking to another agent in England and asking him
> what percentage the agency took... 'that is a matter between us and
> the clients'... oh ok then is you can't be straight with me, plonk.
>
> Axel
I am always suspicious of companies who, when they advertise for staff ask
for "details of current salary" yet won't say what they are offering.
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390358 ] |
Mo, 22 Mai 2006 20:09 |
|
"Ronald Raygun" <no.spam [at] localhost.localdomain> wrote in message
news:wChbg.71827$wl.8111 [at] text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Jim Ley wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 May 2006 21:01:24 GMT, axel [at] white-eagle.invalid.uk wrote:
>>
>>>Jim Ley <jim [at] jibbering.com> wrote:
>>>> On 18 May 2006 09:22:01 -0700, "Troy Steadman"
>>>> <troysteadman [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other employees are
>>>>>earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited in the Contact of
>>>>>Employment.
>>>
>>>> No sensible firm should attempt to control its employees in such tight
>>>> restrictions. And certainly a firm that enforced such a restriction
>>>> on a valuable employee would be an absolute idiot.
>>>
>>>It is a standard term when contracting. Mainly I suspect to stop people
>>>realise how much the agent is ripping them off.
>>
>> Sure, it's a standard term, but it's still a sign of a poor company.
>
> I rather doubt whether it's even a legally enforcible term.
If you have a discrimination clam you can force disclosure.
So no, it isn't enforcable.
tim
>
|
|
|
| Re: OT - Salary differentials [message #390359 ] |
Mo, 22 Mai 2006 20:11 |
|
<axel [at] white-eagle.invalid.uk> wrote in message
news:Eg5bg.301522$8Q3.9370 [at] fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Jim Ley <jim [at] jibbering.com> wrote:
>> On 18 May 2006 09:22:01 -0700, "Troy Steadman"
>> <troysteadman [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>No sensible firm allows its employees to know what other employees are
>>>earning. Discussion can be specifically prohibited in the Contact of
>>>Employment.
>
>> No sensible firm should attempt to control its employees in such tight
>> restrictions. And certainly a firm that enforced such a restriction
>> on a valuable employee would be an absolute idiot.
>
> It is a standard term when contracting. Mainly I suspect to stop people
> realise how much the agent is ripping them off.
I can only recall having it in a contract once.
It was with the worst bunch of shysters that I have
ever worked though.
Should I see the clause in a contract again it will
ring alarm bells, and unless I am desperate I will
walk away.
tim
|
|
|
