Start your own company and you can award yourself any salary you like.

Doesn’t that sound delightful?

“Well, there, fine sir. We are extending you an offer of employment with an annual salary of…oh, just fill in any number!...we think you are the bees knees. And please forgive our use of bees knees- an expression that even your grandparents though was dated..Yeee haaa”

It sounds super-snarky but I do say the line about "starting your own company" a couple of times a year to people looking for a job or to change jobs. I say it because they’ve convinced themselves they should be paid a king’s ransom but they possess zero economic justification.

(they’ve also convinced themselves that I just graduated from the 3^rd grade- and not with high honors)

What people are paid doesn’t come from some arcane formula. Like water, money/salaries will find its own level. Supply and Demand in any labor market is driving this bus. The brain surgeon makes more than the retail clerk. The lawyer who wins cases AND brings in new clients makes more than the lawyer who wins cases. The Project Manager with a long track record on getting projects done on time and at or under budget gets paid more than the Project Manager whose record is less.

I’m not sure it works in a Planned Economy but with free markets, you get paid what the market says your worth. Any monetary value is where buyer and seller agree to meet, no exceptions. If you want to get paid more, the market will let you know if you’ve earned it. Might take a while- often you’ve got to hustle. Sometimes, people will come to you and announce your worth more. Ask them what qualifies them to make this assessment. Do not accept incomplete and vague answers.

My work includes advising people on the market and what people’s compensation looks like. Too many of the people who also do what I do haven’t the vaguest idea on what they are talking about. Again, be careful-even suspicious.

Rand Finale

I normally attempt to amuse myself in these vignettes while simultaneously playing the role of Mr. CrankyPants.

This time I’m playing the role of the blown-dried newscaster tilting his head slightly to the right, that solemn and grave stare , about to do a piece on something important- directly followed by the fluff piece about a house cat that just adores watching Jon Stewart.

Years before people were discussing the nations “richest 1%”,  I commented to a friend that such a tiny fraction of the population controlling so much of the nation’s wealth cannot be a good thing.  Mind you I’ve mostly voted for Republican candidates- except the ones who insinuate that God is on their side.

My friend, far from being wealthy but a lifelong Ayn Rand Objectivist replied:  “you think so?..how come?. ..do you  think it affects you?...you think the uber wealthy affects you..or anybody, for that matter?

The guy FROZE me with that question. I had nothing.

Many years later, I still don’t know.  Let me clarify: I BELIEVE  it doesn’t affect me personally but I can’t say for sure it doesn’t hamstring this or any economic system in which it which it exists.

Like him, it is my belief that Capitalism serves the people far better than any form of Socialism.

History’s experiments in Socialism/Collectivism have ended in unequivocal economic ruin and unspeakable horrors and human tragedy. All of them. Meanwhile, for all of the talk of the unfairness of the U.S. income inequality, tens of millions of immigrants still desperately want to come here WHILE, statistically speaking, nobody ever leaves.

History, however, does not have any precedent to compare the current relationship between Capital and Labor and a disparity in income and wealth only seen before in societies with The Royal Class and peasants. 

For clarification purposes, “Labor” doesn’t just mean the middle class, the working class or the working poor. Labor are ALL people in the workforce whose income comes only from work. A Brain Surgeon who receives virtually all of his income from their work is Labor while the person whose economic output is entirely earning money from their money is “Capital”. Same question or debate has been asked the last two hundred years so we're not talking about anything new here.

However..

Extraordinary advances in productivity- much the result of incredible advances in Information Technology has made any comparisons between the past and present economic eras unusable. It would be tough to argue advances in worker productivity are a MAJOR reason for the deeper shifts in the concentration of wealth. But I still don't know if there is anything inherently good or bad about this.

If I were again asked to answer my friends question, I (again) would be stumped. My job has never been sent overseas but- if it had been- is that necessarily wrong or cold hearted? Anyone with a conscience feels for that person but is there any difference between their situation and that of the laborer flattened by the Industrial Revolution of 130 years ago? Some could intelligently argue it’s the necessary impetus for the lower-skilled worker at acquire the skills the market seeks. But others could argue that insatiable economic growth with no ceiling will always slaughter society’s weakest and most disadvantaged.

I do know with 100% certainty that the entrenched middle class/working class in the U.S.- with virtually no free time due to increased demands from work while raising a family- have a very different life than the middle classes that came before them. They are much worse off.

Now let’s go back to my co-anchor Skyler for that story about an area 2^nd grader who created a Facebook Page for Mark Zuckerberg- only to learn later that Mark Zuckerberg owns 53% of the company, has a net worth north of $30 billion and apparently already has his own page.

If it Doesn't Fit

If a salesperson, recruiter or some other total stranger colds calls you- and they describe what they're representing as any of the following: 1.) A great fit for you 2.) Amazing 3.) Fantastic- I advise you to hang up immediately. They are entirely full of shit and will be working elsewhere shortly.

These are the same people who will be "advising" you on wise career decisions because they are a SR TALENT ACQUISITION SPECIALIST (Translation: they are a new hire at some bogus Staffing company).

A Great Fit for You. Is that so? Tell me more about me...oh, wait. You don't know me, but you already know what constitutes a great fit in my work life?

Wow. Am I here right now?

An awesome opportunity, you say? How does this job inspire awe? Just the thought of the formation of the Solar System...now THAT inspires awe, the birth of a child, even the peaceful death of a 100 year old who serenely takes their last breath.

The product/job you're trying to pitch me might does not inspire awe.

I overheard this somewhat relevant conversation the other day: (With apologies to Dr. Suess). It has to do with the adjective I just used. Worth mentioning that both of these people were AT LEAST 10 years out of college.

Thing One: That is, like, sooooo annoying. I mean, like, what is he thinking?
Thing Two: I don't know. But you're right..the guy is so, like, I don't know!
Thing One: I know, right? Like, it's so awesome that his idea will be ignored.
Thing Two: I know. Tanner is such an awesome manager. He, like, has no time for that.
Thing One: I know. It's so awesome. You free for lunch?
Thing Two: I am!..want to go to that new place, Vapid? I hear it's, like, really awesome.
Thing One: Definitely!
Thing Two: Awesome!

If you're one of my estimated three regular readers, you know I loathe stereotypical salespeople. There are considerably less of them out there but not because of an evolutionary shift in consciousness. Some companies just have smartened up and realized this low intel garbage doesn't work.

But you will still get these emails and phone calls about products, services, jobs etc.

Maybe the nature of your work requires you to pick up that phone. I, personally, have never hung up on someone the way I just described. But I plan on starting because it will be, ya know, like...so awesome.

Please Don't Go..

Ask a recruiter about the repercussions of taking a counter offer and you'll likely be told that an asteroid will hit not only your home but the homes of everyone you love as well.

Fact is you can get an offer from another employer, take the counter offer from your current employer and still emerge from the burning embers that was your abode in one piece. Your job is about as safe as it was before. For most of us, your job is safe UNTIL IT ISN'T.

Your current employer will keep you for as long as they need you. As long as your exit would make life miserable for your current supervisor, they won't look for a reason to fire you.

(Wow...that's the good news)

But here's the bad news. If your current supervisor comes to have even marginal feelings about your value, they'll remember you held them hostage for more money. (and that's how they'll remember it). And if your supervisor goes elsewhere, their boss remembers what went down when you almost left.

Keep in mind, if you're earning a professionals salary and you can't quantify the revenue you bring into the organization, your less expensive replacement is out there. If this sounds like the words of a pessimist, you're shielding yourself from some painful truths.

It's a form of economic Darwinism that has always existed but has grown exponentially. Information technology has finally delivered on the increases in productivity it promised for years. In some cases, people can do your job from a desk overseas. Public companies put shareholder value over everything- including profitability. Private employers have taken note of all of the above and have a number on your back specific to the bottom line. 

A small handful of people are seemingly protected..you probably know a few. They've been at the current job for 10, 15, 20 years. They've either been designated as irreplaceable or they are THE ROCKET SCIENTISTS of playing company politics. They may not like kissing all the right asses at every turn but they like it better than the alternative: finding another job that covers their needs.

For an overwhelming majority of the labor force: you're a free agent. There's some upside to all this. Figure out what's best for you because the entity that is your employer is in a constant state of doing just that. The bright side is if you're good at what you do, you'll earn comparatively more money in this market of bidders for your services than you would have staying at the same job in an earlier generation.

Whining and Dining

I've been far too busy complaining about the weather to do much of anything lately- that includes writing blog posts.

Oh, sure, the New England winter has been affected by the Earth somehow being blown off its axis, pushed 30 million miles further away from The Sun but whining about it does nothing but make you and others more miserable.

I'm pretty sure the world of business keeps chugging along, despite it all.

For my estimated 3 regular readers, I plan on writing much more in 2015. More about business and the business of hiring. I think it likely I'll win the multi-state lottery at some point this year so-fair warning-my posts will then veer solely towards attempting to amuse myself.

Now its time to get back to telling people I barely know that the 7 feet of snow in 4 weeks plus daytime temperatures previously only observed during Mars evenings will surely mean the end of me.

The Tree

Nick Corcodilos advises people and companies on hiring and interviewing. If there’s someone better, I don’t know who it is.

“Let’s talk about the work that you need done”.

Nick advises that all employment interviews should start with this one question and the many things that will follow in asking that one question will be more than enough to determine if the candidate is the right person for the job.

Instead, candidates get asked irrelevant and idiotic questions about what type of tree they would be (if, ya know, they were a tree). There’s dozens more equally inane interview questions and they’re published online, in books, on public restroom walls, etc.

Someone also decided a long time ago that asking candidates “where do you see yourself in 5 years” was brilliant. I think it’s a lazy, default question that reveals nothing about the candidate except if they're prepared to give you a rehearsed answer to that worn-out question.

Why not get right to the point as to why you’re in a room together in the first place? All of the other visceral and intangible stuff will soon present itself, none more important than “Is this a person I can work with?”

There are other reasons why hiring and interviewing can drag out for way longer than necessary but none more than a terrible interview methodology.

So...if you were a dog, what type of cat would you want to be?

Or..

We need someone to profitably grow this organization from $3 million in revenue to 4.5M in the next 18 months. What are your thoughts on how best to do this?

Follow the Duck

Just know who’s cutting the check. Follow the money, as investigators like to say.

Swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck- then it’s probably a…you know how this one ends. Too often, what’s obvious to one person is a mystery to another.

Here we’ll talk about you getting a call from a third-party recruiter. I call them headhunters because that’s what they are- that’s what I am and I have ZERO problem with that word.

A headhunter gets paid- AND ONLY GETS PAID- when a placement occurs. And they get paid by the company doing the hiring. Seems simple enough.

Any reputable headhunter who contacts you is an agent working on the behalf of one or more employers in your industry. Again, seems simple and obvious but it’s neither if you’re new to how this works.

Even the most honest and credible headhunter (oxymoron?) will not tell you this and not because they’re hiding information. This presumption is made for three reasons: 1.) The professional being contacted by the headhunter has almost always changed jobs before and they’ve talked to a recruiter before 2.) The professional being contacted by the recruiter is not being asked to pay for anything 3.) A good headhunter who contacts you knows they only have seconds of your time. Unless you request it, an education on the process will not be part of the dialog.

If a headhunter tells a candidate that they are unequivocally working on the candidates behalf- that's horseshit. Though the recruiter is financially incentivized to get the candidate all that they want in changing jobs, it’s the hiring employer that cuts the check.

What’s the takeaway here? Not entirely sure because of my penchant for drifting off into tangents- but I'll give it a whirl.

Just know that changing jobs will involve- directly or indirectly- the discussion of money. If you’re considering leaving your current job and money has NOTHING to do with it, just know that the subject is going to come up come up anyway.

Similar to water finding its own level, money ALWAYS finds its own level and drives virtually everything in any for-profit enterprise.

Idealism often dislikes that- and that’s fine. But it’s delusional to ignore it.

Just know that business is business and you don’t need to compromise anything- including your ideals. If your ideals come into direct conflict with something that’s driven by money or fiscal policy, you have a tough decision to make. Refuse to talk about it, refuse to reveal anything about your requirements or history- or just acquiesce to the reality of the subject matter.