We are taking hits on pay, benefits, and bonuses on regular bases and yet I see people who say they're still happy with any/all of those. Can you please explain to me how? Are some people protected from what are supposed to be company-wide changes somehow? If so, how?
15 replies (most recent on top)
I'm satisfied. The benefits are actually better than many so I wouldn't even say they are on the lower end. I've received offers from the big tech firms and have worked at startups. Comp packages are just different with a different set of expectations. Comp is higher for SE's, as someone else points out, but you also have to expect the pressure to deliver is higher. Do you really think that free lunch and dinners are to attract people as a perk? Its to keep you in the office and productivity higher. There is a reason why long tenure at a tech firm is a lot less common than other firms. It is true that some are trying to jump their salary and that is the main cause but there is a ceiling to that and that quickly gets old and looked down upon.
Its funny, big tech firms are trying to become like old companies with a lot more consistency and stability while old companies are trying to become more like big tech firms.
I'm satisfied. Not thrilled, but satisfied. The 401k match is better than any other employer I've worked for in the past. Pay is decent. Certainly not top of the line, but it's decent.
I have a colleagues in corp risk roles and they say that WFC pays much higher than peers (JPM, Citi, BOA) for comparable roles. Many received 30-40% more for same role.
I'm on the IT side - salaries are fair (not crazy). However, I started interviewing and most large tech companies (FB, Amazon) pay 50-100% more for Software Engs.
Failed FB but accepted Amazon.
Overall I have no complaints - Wells simply cannot compete with big tech for compensation. Every other role (based on salary ranges from job families) seems at or above market.
Corp is putting together a test to see who is qualified to be in the position they are in, this will fire all the unqualifed workers here, probably be close to 80% of the workforce here,
Good luck! You better start studying now!
The one thing that rubbed me is that because I make over$100k, I have to pay more for healthcare. I think that's a crock and when lined up with weak raises this year, it's almost a net zero after-tax
/raises hand
I have no issue at all with pay and benefits. Good money, plenty of PTO and as other have pointed out, the benefits could bear better but healthcare costs keep going up so that's hardly surprising.
@oyy+1adqNXPL if your post is some sort of dig at Wells it is misplaced. It can happen at any employer but it is the fault of the employee allowing themselves to be taken advantage of.
To @OP , I am satisfied with my overall compensation package. The needs of one may not align with the needs or wants of another. Any employment is a mathematical equation with a bit of emotional fortitude thrown in for me. I personally look at base pay, raises, bonuses, retirement benefits, ancillary benefits (WFH) and compare to actual work load. I have lost nothing so far. I have actually gained things like time allocated to training. The change of quarterly 401k matching to yearly, while a loss on paper, is statistically insignificant to my portfolio and I. Even if I was no longer employed prior to the December cutoff date and lost the match entirely it wouldn’t impact my employment decisions. Based on sampling the local job market and speaking with managers about open positions I am confident I could get a higher paying position (+10-15%) than my WF slot but I know I my workload would increase by 50% or more as well as a change in benefits.
I'm making the most $ I ever have. Great pay and great bonuses. No complaints. Benes could be better, but the entire nation got hosed on benes the minute that the "affordable care act passed. Increased costs were inevitable, that's what it was designed to do. 401k match is good and appreciated. Don't think I'm "shielded" from anything, I'm just a regular employee.
I make significantly more than my peers in similar jobs at other employers. Outside of take home pay, the benefits here could be better, but they are plenty good enough for me considering my pay.
Simple we’ve been conditioned to deal with continual employer abuse of Human Resource - yes we are a resource.
A lot of folks came from a struggle of financial burden or some other burden and stay because they are wounded. If you are like that - you are worth more than this corporate cu-ko–ding.
I am satisfied with pay and benefits. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
I see your point. To most folks that have dependents, having job stability and low pressure on the job is more important than having "market" pay and more pressure.
Speaking only for myself, I'm satisfied with the pay. The benefits are too expensive but I'm lucky to be covered under my partner's union benefits.
Speaking only for myself, I'm satisfied with the pay. The benefits are too expensive but I'm lucky to be covered under my partner's union benefits.