|
|
|
|
|
by bboygravity
2151 days ago
|
|
> But if you're not able to account for all these factors, why not determine what an employee at a given level is worth to the company, and pay that amount to anybody who can successfully communicate & do the work, regardless of their circumstances or physical attributes? Sounds good to me. I'd be a retired millionaire at age 30 something if any of the companies I've worked for (remotely or otherwise) followed that logic. Example: I found the correct root causes of failures in an aerospace product within months. The company's own R&D team had been trying different "fixes" that weren't fixes for at least 5 years. They had spent 1 million EUR in R&D material cost alone (not counting engineering time cost). They lost multiple clients to competitors (> 15 years contracts worth millions per client) due to the malfunctioning product. After I came through the problem was fixed, tested, confirmed to be fixed and implemented within months. And that's an example of one project of a few months for one of my clients. hmmm. Maybe I should start charging differently. :D |
|
If you somehow save the company (provably), do you get to own the company? Likely not, although most of the lower employees probably would vote for that if it meant they kept their job vs. the company dissolving.
But companies can do this too: "If we hire you and you make a simple mistake and leak our database or something, do we get to charge you millions in potential damages?" At some point it goes to a court.
Maybe you just have to get adversarial and say "I can save you tens of millions and you should give me a million dollar bonus if it works, but if the bonus is not in writing, I won't give it to you".