Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

>Of course, companies that turn themselves into unpleasant places to work will presumably drive away the best workers.

The hand wavy, market-will-solve-it, get-out-of-jail-free-card of our generation raises its greying head again.

A) You can only leave a firm if you have a sufficiently fluid job market for your skills.

B) Firms will be dystopian, and managers will follow the latest HR fad or mantra that infects their CEOs or competitors. "Forever criticism" will most likely make it much worse.

c) We have repeatedly shown that human beings are terrible at assessing their own inabilities, while also being influenced by non critical factors during assessments of situations. The most likely scenario - forever criticism combined with an annual review, will provide people with just the kind of data minefield to blow each other up with.

D) Tools like this are an effort to bridge a paucity of managerial experience. The solution to this is to give people actual managerial experience - i.e. identify and train managers (not leaders), or teams which can self manage.

(side note - to achieve D, you need people to work in firms long enough for the investment to be worthwhile.)

If you don't have the skills you probably don't deserve to be paid lots. So that's a non issue

"...don't deserve to be paid lots..."

Yet what people "deserve" has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what they are paid. Do you think people in negotiations sit around thinking "what does this guy deserve?" Or are they just trying to get the best bang for their buck like anyone else?

That's kind of the point - if the best bang for the buck means that you're getting paid peanuts, because despite you doing a good job, there are many others who'll also do a good job but for less money, then peanuts apparently is the going market rate that you deserve; if the best bang for the buck involves giving you a raise because it would be long and expensive to replace you, then you deserve a raise.

If you have the skills you don't even need strong negotiation skills.

You always have the ability to just get multiple offers and walk away from the worst.

I agree with your point higher up but couldn't disagree more strongly with this:

> If you have the skills you don't even need strong negotiation skills.

If you have absolutely shit negotiating skills, or don't even negotiate, you are going to be paid less than you deserve forever. You might get a few lucky offers where the initial offer is actually close to market, but more often than not you're getting an 80-90% market offer the first time around.

You combine developer pay being as high as it is, the majority of raises and promotions being based off previous salary, and compounding interest, and it's not unreasonable that no or poor negotiation could leave over a million dollars on the table over the course of your lifetime.

It's very hard for companies to do this, if you have multiple offers.

You say I've got a better offer from x, and they will have to beat or say no. You keep doing this, eventually you will reach market price regardless of negation skills.

Wrong. If all the offers are around the same, you're still right where you were.

If all offers are the same, that's a strong indicator to say that's your actual value and not anyone low balling you

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact