|
|
|
|
|
|
by A4ET8a8uTh0
1558 days ago
|
|
|
I really think it varies greatly depending on your current relationship with you leadership, the company practices and so on. I think it may be healthier to see it as a game of sorts. Everyone knows the dance. No one really gets upsets ( and if they do, it is either for show or they just didn't see enough yet ). My buddy from another group just left ( following a mass exodus from that team ). The company begrudgingly offered a match only to discover that the other company offered even more as a result and refused to match it again. The absolute additional match amount at that point was maybe $5k -- small amount given what they are now forced to spend on recruiting, training and so on, but they opted to not do it despite managers' protestations. It is not a small company. They just posted near record profits. Executives just don't get the current market. Or they don't want to. |
|
|
I am not sure why "playing games" would ever be viewed as the "healthier option"
healthier to what exactly, if you have to "play games" then it seems that would be very definition of unhealthily.
I am always up front and honest with my leadership, I dont "play games", they know exactly what my target salary is for 1, 3 and 5year pictures, what my target responsibilities are, what I will not do, etc. If they can meet them great, if not it is on me to seek out an employer that can.
in the reverse I want my leadership to direct and honest with me on what I need to do to improve, or what comprises I need to make to get my target, sometime that is some kind of educational plan, or taking on responsibilities I may not exactly want, or some other factor.
I do not want to treat my employment nor my income as "a game of sorts"