I had an interesting
conversation this week with a prospective employer. Though I avoid writing
about individual encounters in this blog — too tedious and boring for me to
recount
and for you to read — this one stood out for its sheer audacity.
Let’s backtrack a bit. I
applied to ad on CraigsList (yeah, I know, my first clue this was going to be a
bad trip) for a part-time copy editor. The ad stated — in bold capital letters — the unnamed company would only accept applicants
from Manhattan, the five boroughs and three towns in New Jersey. I’ve seen this
ad before, but this time, one of the acceptable towns — lo and behold — happens
to be where I live. So I applied. Why not? I have copyediting experience. A
part-time job combined with freelance work could net me a livable income.
Soon after, I received an
email asking for my hourly salary requirements. Now, here, I admit, is where I
screwed up a bit. The ad stated the starting hourly salary was set at between
$13-$15 per hour. Not terrible, but typically lower than my base ($20) and what
other part-time editing jobs offer. So I replied, $20 per hour.
Bad move on my part,
apparently. How dare I try to negotiate my salary? How dare I want a livable
wage commensurate with my experience and the rest of the market? No dice, said
the HR person, I hadn’t read the ad.
So, I replied that I had
read the ad, that $15 was acceptable to me, and could I speak to someone about
the position. The HR person said okay, and I sent along my number, thinking
that would be the end of it.
The next day, I received a
call from a gentleman who only gave his first name. Throughout this process neither
the HR person or this guy revealed their full name or the name of the company.
Another bad sign.
He then proceeded to rant on
me. I was asking for too much money! I hadn’t the read the ad! How tough it was
for him to train people only to have them leave for a higher paying job! (Duh!)
The atmosphere at his “agency” routinely featured yelling and screaming!
Bingo! Now I understood.
This guy was a jerk. A cheap jerk.
The worst kind.
And why would he tell a prospective employee his workplace is a screeching hellhole? If someone offered him a new job at the twice the pay, wouldn't he jump at the chance?
And why would he tell a prospective employee his workplace is a screeching hellhole? If someone offered him a new job at the twice the pay, wouldn't he jump at the chance?
People weren’t leaving this
job because of the low pay. They left because they could no longer endure a
WWF-like office environment. They left because they felt they were being
mistreated and harassed — all for pay barely above minimum wage and no
benefits. They left because he is a jerk.
Back in the dark days of the
Great Recession of 2008-10, employers routinely oppressed workers without any
fear of retribution or a mass exodus. There were no jobs, no one was hiring, so
where could they go?
Today, the job market isn’t
as tight. It’s not great, but workers have a bit more wiggle room now to find
another job for higher pay or more pleasant working conditions. Workers are less willing to work for jerks.
What this jerk failed to
understand is that workers have free will. We can, if we so choose, take
another job for a better salary. If we feel we are being abused, we can decide,
“fuck this shit,” and leave.
I actually had the gumption
to say to him that if people were leaving it wasn’t solely because of the
salary. I added that salary is something that can be negotiated between
employer and employer. He agreed, but I don’t think he got my true point. This
jerk is obviously stuck in a time warp where bosses have all the power and
workers have none. It’s not that way anymore. The power balance has shifted.
Not a lot, but enough so that workers are no longer jailed in their cubicles.
He pompously said he might consider me for the job. How
big of him! To consider me for a job I have every qualification for. I don’t think I will ever get this job. It’s not a place
where I want to work anyway. I spent 16 years abused by a nasty, raging
alcoholic and I have no desire to return to that type of an office environment.
Ever.
Honestly, I don’t expect to
be treated with kid gloves at work. If I screw up, I believe my boss has every
right to reprimand me. Outside of those incidences (which I keep at minimum),
if I treat my colleagues with courtesy and respect, I expect the same treatment
in return.
Of course, it’s his
prerogative to hire whomever he chooses and ill treat them if that is how he
wants to relate to his underlings. He can pay them whatever he chooses, too. Companies
further have the right to fire and layoff workers whenever they deem necessary,
no warning or questions asked. As someone who has been laid off twice since
late 2009, I think I have a pretty good idea who wields the hammer and who is the nail. I get it. I GET IT!
Yet it is also the worker’s
prerogative to choose a more tranquil workplace for a higher salary if such an
opportunity arises. It’s not a one-sided equation. Incomprehensibly, managers
persist in the belief that workers owe unyielding loyalty to a company while
the company owes them no such loyalty in return.
This clueless jerk whined that too many of his hires left for better pay. Yes, that is a risk any company assumes when hiring a new employee. That's why HR departments are so meticulous when assessing candidates. (Don't I know it!) Sometimes, a company and the new hire simply don't mesh. But the new employee also takes a risk — the risk he or she will be fired after a probationary period or laid off when revenues sink. Both employee and employer take a tremendous leap of faith on the first day of employment.
This clueless jerk whined that too many of his hires left for better pay. Yes, that is a risk any company assumes when hiring a new employee. That's why HR departments are so meticulous when assessing candidates. (Don't I know it!) Sometimes, a company and the new hire simply don't mesh. But the new employee also takes a risk — the risk he or she will be fired after a probationary period or laid off when revenues sink. Both employee and employer take a tremendous leap of faith on the first day of employment.
Workers chose to work for a
company, stay at a company, or leave a company for many reasons, salary being
an important but far from the only factor. How well they are treated by
management, the overall stress level within the organization (are they being
asked to do too much with little support?), and the actual work duties all contribute
to whether a worker remains or bolts.
A worker may leave for
better pay. But they could leave because their spouse relocates for a job. Or
they want a better work/life balance (whatever that means). Perhaps they want
to take their career in an entirely different direction. Guess what Mr. Boss
Man? They have every right to do that.
I think this jerk misses the
real issue here. It’s not the money, though he could pay them more. The real
reason people are leaving is because he has obviously fostered a hostile work
environment. He’s putting the blame on the wrong person — the worker who is
leaving — rather than himself and his boorish behavior.
No comments:
Post a Comment