The kind of people who leave because they’re dissatisfied with their employer are the ones who more easilly find jobs elsewhere, and those are generally the most competent and/or in higher demand hence harder to find replacements for.
Whilst there is a subset of highly competent and in high demand people who just stick with their employer no matter what (be it because they’re highly adverse to change or just fearful), in my experience those tend to spent most of their professional career in one or two employeers and professionally suffer from the problem of “never having seen more than one way of doing things” so are IMHO (and as far I could see when I crossed paths with such people) limited in how far they can grow as professionals because they only really know one or two styles of working environment.
That said, “modern” management is short-termist and doesn’t invest in people, so they repeatedly short-change and generally shaft people for the sake of their own next bonus, in the process losing the capabilities for competitive advantage versus the competition or merely mid and long term efficiency.
None of this is wrong, however, management wants the more tenured (read: more experienced) people to move on because they’re earning more than others.
They believe, often incorrectly, that the skilled workers job can be filled in for by the rest of the employee pool, and they will just fill in the hours gap with a lower-paid newbie.
In reality, the higher paid/higher experience people are often holding things together, so when they walk out the door because you treated them like they were nothing, all hell breaks loose; often resulting in most of the team leaving.
On paper, this makes management happy, because the cost of wages goes down, but when the revenue also takes a dip because shits fucked and nobody knows how to fix it, they (hopefully) start to realize how dumb of a decision they made. Unlikely as that seems.
At a previous job, there was a fairly typical air of nobody taking about wages. I have and continue to be of the mindset: fuck that. If I’m making more than you, and you’re doing the same job, you should go get yours. If I’m making less than everyone else, I need to go get mine. If the current employer won’t pony up, then find someone who will… Anyways, as a direct result of a discussion I had at work, with coworkers, one of the longest standing employees found a better job. Good thing too. I wasn’t there for a while lot longer either (not wage related for me, but still)… It was not a great workplace.
What I’m hoping we see is that the highly skilled talent walks out, and they have to pay more to get someone similarly skilled to replace them in order to keep things running.
But that assumes these capitalist fucks learn anything at all. In my experience, few ever do.
On one hand and as you say more tenured people cost more and hence if they go, there is a bigger positive impact on the company’s bottom line, on the other hand the upper management often do know that it is highly likely to end up causing massive problems that easilly ofset those cost savings, only they expect that they themselves personally will have moved onwards to a better job by the time things blow up and “it will be somebody else’s problem”.
In fact a lot of the problems in modern management (enshittification, cutting down on support, just coasting along on previously earned brand reputation whilst cutting down on quality, outsourcing and so on) can be explained by this “the company saves money now, I get more bonus and when problems from this come due I’ll have moved to better pastures and it will be somebody else’s problem” mindset in upper management - burn the Company’s Future for immediate personal gains in the form of higher bonuses because that manager’s Future is not the same as the Company’s Future.
I don’t think most upper management are stupid, I think most are just malicious sociopaths with not a shred of Ethics and hence are knowingly playing the flaws in the rewards systems of modern publicly traded companies for personal gain.
If profits go down, shareholders will just move on to more profitable stocks.
Any publicly traded company is going to be the same… Many privately held companies will also be the same, it’s just that the shareholders will be the ones running the show… Which might be worse in some cases.
Yeah, some employers are stupid like that, but any with the brains of a hamster can see that a revolving door is costly.
Unemployment insurance for example. I can only speak to Florida, but for each new hire the company has to pay in $7,500 (this is old data, haven’t been in the payroll game for 6-years). Once that’s covered for the year, GTG. Replace that employee? Clock starts again.
Again on unemployment, if a company is getting hit with tons of unemployment claims, their rate goes up. And no, the company is not directly paying your claim anymore than they directly pay for a worker’s comp injury. The insurance pays it and their rates go up accordingly.
Anyway, I guess shit employers have figured in these costs and find that shit wages benefit them. On paper. Back to worker’s comp; Isn’t it better to retain experienced employees that know how to work safely?! We can all come up with 1,000 other examples of experienced employee’s labor being worth far more than the new guy’s work.
Every company I’ve known or worked at that paid fair wages was rock and roll in their industry. LOL, you should hear me go off about Quik Trip. Imagine making a career out of a gas station job. People do and those people make bank.
They actually want people to quit. The problem is the wrong people are quitting.
Not paying people a proper wage is such a short sight view but when all you care about is the next quarter, kind of makes sense.
The kind of people who leave because they’re dissatisfied with their employer are the ones who more easilly find jobs elsewhere, and those are generally the most competent and/or in higher demand hence harder to find replacements for.
Whilst there is a subset of highly competent and in high demand people who just stick with their employer no matter what (be it because they’re highly adverse to change or just fearful), in my experience those tend to spent most of their professional career in one or two employeers and professionally suffer from the problem of “never having seen more than one way of doing things” so are IMHO (and as far I could see when I crossed paths with such people) limited in how far they can grow as professionals because they only really know one or two styles of working environment.
That said, “modern” management is short-termist and doesn’t invest in people, so they repeatedly short-change and generally shaft people for the sake of their own next bonus, in the process losing the capabilities for competitive advantage versus the competition or merely mid and long term efficiency.
None of this is wrong, however, management wants the more tenured (read: more experienced) people to move on because they’re earning more than others.
They believe, often incorrectly, that the skilled workers job can be filled in for by the rest of the employee pool, and they will just fill in the hours gap with a lower-paid newbie.
In reality, the higher paid/higher experience people are often holding things together, so when they walk out the door because you treated them like they were nothing, all hell breaks loose; often resulting in most of the team leaving.
On paper, this makes management happy, because the cost of wages goes down, but when the revenue also takes a dip because shits fucked and nobody knows how to fix it, they (hopefully) start to realize how dumb of a decision they made. Unlikely as that seems.
At a previous job, there was a fairly typical air of nobody taking about wages. I have and continue to be of the mindset: fuck that. If I’m making more than you, and you’re doing the same job, you should go get yours. If I’m making less than everyone else, I need to go get mine. If the current employer won’t pony up, then find someone who will… Anyways, as a direct result of a discussion I had at work, with coworkers, one of the longest standing employees found a better job. Good thing too. I wasn’t there for a while lot longer either (not wage related for me, but still)… It was not a great workplace.
What I’m hoping we see is that the highly skilled talent walks out, and they have to pay more to get someone similarly skilled to replace them in order to keep things running.
But that assumes these capitalist fucks learn anything at all. In my experience, few ever do.
I suspect it’s a mix of both.
On one hand and as you say more tenured people cost more and hence if they go, there is a bigger positive impact on the company’s bottom line, on the other hand the upper management often do know that it is highly likely to end up causing massive problems that easilly ofset those cost savings, only they expect that they themselves personally will have moved onwards to a better job by the time things blow up and “it will be somebody else’s problem”.
In fact a lot of the problems in modern management (enshittification, cutting down on support, just coasting along on previously earned brand reputation whilst cutting down on quality, outsourcing and so on) can be explained by this “the company saves money now, I get more bonus and when problems from this come due I’ll have moved to better pastures and it will be somebody else’s problem” mindset in upper management - burn the Company’s Future for immediate personal gains in the form of higher bonuses because that manager’s Future is not the same as the Company’s Future.
I don’t think most upper management are stupid, I think most are just malicious sociopaths with not a shred of Ethics and hence are knowingly playing the flaws in the rewards systems of modern publicly traded companies for personal gain.
We’re in end-stage capitalism now, not even the longevity of a business matters next to shareholder profits.
If profits go down, shareholders will just move on to more profitable stocks.
Any publicly traded company is going to be the same… Many privately held companies will also be the same, it’s just that the shareholders will be the ones running the show… Which might be worse in some cases.
Ah, the Dead Sea Effect. Ever a learning opportunity.
You think these golden parachute fucks are going to learn ???!?
Hilarious.
Yeah, some employers are stupid like that, but any with the brains of a hamster can see that a revolving door is costly.
Unemployment insurance for example. I can only speak to Florida, but for each new hire the company has to pay in $7,500 (this is old data, haven’t been in the payroll game for 6-years). Once that’s covered for the year, GTG. Replace that employee? Clock starts again.
Again on unemployment, if a company is getting hit with tons of unemployment claims, their rate goes up. And no, the company is not directly paying your claim anymore than they directly pay for a worker’s comp injury. The insurance pays it and their rates go up accordingly.
Anyway, I guess shit employers have figured in these costs and find that shit wages benefit them. On paper. Back to worker’s comp; Isn’t it better to retain experienced employees that know how to work safely?! We can all come up with 1,000 other examples of experienced employee’s labor being worth far more than the new guy’s work.
Every company I’ve known or worked at that paid fair wages was rock and roll in their industry. LOL, you should hear me go off about Quik Trip. Imagine making a career out of a gas station job. People do and those people make bank.
Most states only give unemployment benefits if you’re let go, not if you quit in most circumstances.
That’s the same in more… Socialized employment insurance.
We have government EI here in Canada, and if you quit, unless it’s for a very good and provable reason, you’re getting denied.
… In some cases if you’re fired with cause (eg, stealing) you’re also ineligible. You have to basically get downsized to get a payout.
Yay capitalism.