Mostly employee-biased. How about employer-biased posts?
As most of the posts are about company reviews, JO advice, salary negotiations, to resign or not. Why aren't employer-biased posts longed for or should I say welcome without being scrutinized?
Sure, I've been saying to work smarter, not harder. But it feels like the generation today is more of experienced in the red flag (ie, overtime, etc.) they immediately resign and move on to the next without even giving it a fight with the management.
BTW, I am expecting to be heavily bombarded or even removed by moderators (this post). But should it always be this way? Loyalty is dead, that's full steam ahead. Yet, should we not ask the employer's perspective before saying they are at fault?
Posted Mar 24, 2023, 12:24 PM UTC
08
This is from an "employee" POV. I can't imagine being an employer. As I said on another post. Loyalty is meaningless career-wise. Ang employee ginagamit ng employer for productivity, meanwhile yung employee, ginagamit ang employer for salary. Both are using each other for their personal gain. The moment an employer realizes na underperforming yung employee, usually nagcocontemplate na yung employer na tanggalin yun. If that's the case, why can't the employee think of resigning kung hindi na fit yung company para sa kanya? Companies want employees to be loyal for no reason, para magbenefit sila without properly compensating the employees. Less than 10% of companies give increases commensurate to their employee's experience if they are already employed, so there's really no point in staying for a long time.
Also a controversial opinion na meron ako. Loyalty for the sake of loyalty should not exist. You should give loyalty to anyone that is worth your loyalty. Kung toxic company mo, cut them off. Toxic friends mo sayo, cut them off. Toxic family mo sayo, cut them off. Toxic partner mo, break up.
I think this is more due to the reason na tumataas standards ng mga newer generation, which is good IMO.
Having high standards is good. Most employers are having problems hiring because...
Then again, it's the responsibility of the "employee" to assert his/her worth within the company or any future employer. Sure, loyalty is dead. Yet it doesn't mean one should stop becoming the company's asset.
Becoming the company's asset (but being one doesn't mean you're indispensable), you gain the leverage to negotiate your terms to stay. And if not met, then it's normal for the employee to move on.
But if the same employee or applicant stays within a company for 3, 5, or 10 years but is paid below the market salary. There are two things to consider: the employee didn't assert a fair salary or the employer feels his/her salary is enough to keep him/her motivated over the years.
By now, you'd be hitting the downvotes already. But it's rare for the employer's a good employee with a competitive salary. It's always the case of the employee should be the one initiating the salary request.
The issues you mentioned in hiring is probably due to globalization. There is always going to be a better opportunity elsewhere. And in your case, there will always be better employees.
From an employee POV, why stay if you know you can earn higher somewhere else.
From an employer POV, why hire this person which is poorly skilled, when you can get good employees for the same salary.
You may assess an applicant as not worth what they're asking, but another company might think differently.
It's all about money.