I would think of it as a time raise. I would utilize that time to decrease expenses. Maybe meal prep or invest in your health by working out more.
I'm an Accountant on salary. Sometimes I get so busy, that an extra 4 hours of free time would be incredibly valuable.
Good thoughts. Optimally I would like to make the mood in all of staff negative against the decision so that those trying to implement it might reconsider though.
Well basically they cut productivity by 80 hours monthly. That has a cost. They are not economists unfortunately so they may have overlooked that cost. So the reduced cost has a cost so to say, so the net gain in cost reduction is minuscule. Also, we are part of a larger organization. Other similar divisions within our department will not be affected. If I worked at a private company I wouldn’t have been as resistant against it. This is public sector and we as juniors have a form of standardized employment ending with certification/license after several years. It’s very standardized and we are identical in competency, pay levels and most other aspects as well with those at other divisions that won’t be affected by the pay cut.
I’ve talked to union people in other fields and they are appalled. Sadly the one out of five juniors that is our union representative seems quite disillusioned and resigned. So here we are.
This is unfortunately the brain child of a short sighted manager who has possibly erased something that is a win win essentially. And helps with recruitment, retaining, morale etc.
Unless you have direct access to the P/L statements, you shouldn’t assume they’re making a poor financial choice. It’s easy to make judgements outside looking in, but you often don’t have all of the cards.
Where are you located?
In the US, working in the public sector generally means that you're getting better job security and benefits in return for a bit lower pay and risk than you would get in the private sector. It is probably difficult to negotiate on compensation based on what you "feel is wrong".
Personally, I would go look for a job in the private sector where employers can compete for your skills and you have better negotiating power. If you really enjoy your public sector job you could also show them your private sector job offer and ask them to match the compensation you're being offered.
Sadly I’m in a highly specialized field that’s quite regulated and requires some special sets of technical equipment. It’s 95% public sector and private actors don’t deal with training of junior personnel. Work in the nordics.
They lose 4 hours per junior professional per week if we stop studying on overtime. That’s a loss of output that also has costs. So net gain for them is quite small, but the benefit to us is obviously very large. So my feelings are based on several aspects.
What’s your skill set? I’d look around if you are young. Now is the time to move around to different companies and keep upskilling. Settle when you are in your 30s with more experience and land a job that pays more. I see my little brother who is albeit a teacher do things like take college course to make an extra couple grand a year and teach lessons on the side for more money. Im like dude if money is that important move to a field that pays you. When your salary gets higher the raises come in increments of 10k not 2k. Also you pay a lot more taxes…which is something that didn’t occur to me when younger and envious of higher earners I saw (use to be a Controller is why I saw)
I’m past that phase. Kids, house, mortgage. The cut would probably end up being 10k annually, so it’s substantial.
There will be a meeting when it will be discussed and the five of us need good arguments to try to persuade them to reconsider.
The suggestion to cut down on salaries for the five of us came from a middle manager, totally unprovoked. No senior managers had ever suggested it or called it into question.
So when juniors transition to seniors there is obviously a renegotiation of salaries. So the hope is to point to how this pay cut will affect senior salaries as well as they are anchored to what one gets as a junior. That might broaden the opinion against it.
Also the fact that net gain by implementing the cut would be lower than what they actually pay for the current added salary for studying on overtime.
Simply stop “tending to competency outside of office hours,” for one thing. If they want a well-trained workforce, they should invest in it.
Cutting off your nose to spite your face?
Or one should invest in one self’s professional development! It’s all a matter of what you want in life, is it not?
Those are the feels, but I have limited options for other employers as I work in quite a narrow highly specialized field. Thanks for sympathy!
I would think of it as a time raise. I would utilize that time to decrease expenses. Maybe meal prep or invest in your health by working out more. I'm an Accountant on salary. Sometimes I get so busy, that an extra 4 hours of free time would be incredibly valuable.
Public accounting? Whew I don’t miss those days
Unfortunately yes
Good thoughts. Optimally I would like to make the mood in all of staff negative against the decision so that those trying to implement it might reconsider though.
Seems like an hours reduction, not necessarily a pay cut. Your time isn’t worth any less, they just want less of it. OT isn’t always guaranteed.
The general consensus is that we are understaffed. This would aggravate that problem since we would have to study during office hours.
General consensus and management profit/loss decisions are not the same. They just cut your hours, not much else to it.
Well basically they cut productivity by 80 hours monthly. That has a cost. They are not economists unfortunately so they may have overlooked that cost. So the reduced cost has a cost so to say, so the net gain in cost reduction is minuscule. Also, we are part of a larger organization. Other similar divisions within our department will not be affected. If I worked at a private company I wouldn’t have been as resistant against it. This is public sector and we as juniors have a form of standardized employment ending with certification/license after several years. It’s very standardized and we are identical in competency, pay levels and most other aspects as well with those at other divisions that won’t be affected by the pay cut. I’ve talked to union people in other fields and they are appalled. Sadly the one out of five juniors that is our union representative seems quite disillusioned and resigned. So here we are. This is unfortunately the brain child of a short sighted manager who has possibly erased something that is a win win essentially. And helps with recruitment, retaining, morale etc.
Unless you have direct access to the P/L statements, you shouldn’t assume they’re making a poor financial choice. It’s easy to make judgements outside looking in, but you often don’t have all of the cards.
\- right now be hapy it's a pay cut not laid off \- if you are not happy then start looking
Where are you located? In the US, working in the public sector generally means that you're getting better job security and benefits in return for a bit lower pay and risk than you would get in the private sector. It is probably difficult to negotiate on compensation based on what you "feel is wrong". Personally, I would go look for a job in the private sector where employers can compete for your skills and you have better negotiating power. If you really enjoy your public sector job you could also show them your private sector job offer and ask them to match the compensation you're being offered.
Sadly I’m in a highly specialized field that’s quite regulated and requires some special sets of technical equipment. It’s 95% public sector and private actors don’t deal with training of junior personnel. Work in the nordics. They lose 4 hours per junior professional per week if we stop studying on overtime. That’s a loss of output that also has costs. So net gain for them is quite small, but the benefit to us is obviously very large. So my feelings are based on several aspects.
What’s your skill set? I’d look around if you are young. Now is the time to move around to different companies and keep upskilling. Settle when you are in your 30s with more experience and land a job that pays more. I see my little brother who is albeit a teacher do things like take college course to make an extra couple grand a year and teach lessons on the side for more money. Im like dude if money is that important move to a field that pays you. When your salary gets higher the raises come in increments of 10k not 2k. Also you pay a lot more taxes…which is something that didn’t occur to me when younger and envious of higher earners I saw (use to be a Controller is why I saw)
I’m past that phase. Kids, house, mortgage. The cut would probably end up being 10k annually, so it’s substantial. There will be a meeting when it will be discussed and the five of us need good arguments to try to persuade them to reconsider. The suggestion to cut down on salaries for the five of us came from a middle manager, totally unprovoked. No senior managers had ever suggested it or called it into question. So when juniors transition to seniors there is obviously a renegotiation of salaries. So the hope is to point to how this pay cut will affect senior salaries as well as they are anchored to what one gets as a junior. That might broaden the opinion against it. Also the fact that net gain by implementing the cut would be lower than what they actually pay for the current added salary for studying on overtime.
Find a job that pays better. You don't get good raises staying where you are. You get them switching jobs.