I know this has been talked about before- but does anyone actually make 100 percent of their market reference point ?
27 replies (most recent on top)
Yes, hired earlier this year at MRP, which had increased 4% for my position from 2019 to 2020.
High-performer at a peer, so that definitely helped.
Anyone ever got a promotion to a new title and been placed at less than 80% of MRP? I feel like this could be a bad year to get promoted.
Before the job title change, I was about 90% of MRP. After the title changes, I'm now about 105% of MRP and probably won't get a raise. You don't want to be over MRP if you are staying in your role and want a raise.
Yes 110%
Yes, even above MRP.
I give up, stupid site formatting. Check Manager Center under year end compensation and then make annual base pay recommendations. Check out the various pdfs on the right side. Lots of good info in there
Weird most of my post didn’t take...
110 mrp below meets 0, meets 0-2, exceeds 0-4, Consistently Exceeds 0-8
110 mrp below meets 0, meets 0, exceeds 0-3, Consistently Exceeds 0-6
Just note (you can find this info in the Manager Center on Teamworks), below are the guidelines for pay raises in percentages
- 110 mrp below meets 0, meets 0, exceeds 0-3, Consistently Exceeds 0-6
I'm something like 10% or something like above MRP. It happens. I've also been at the same level for over a decades and had good reviews every year. So salary creeps up over time clearly.
There are people above MRP, sure, but this is a tricky question because different business units have done different things over the years. Since people don't typically get pay cuts when their perf isn't great, that skews things, as does 'merit' increase guidance and various means of 'encouraging' certain kinds of increase recommendations. There's also regional influences that go beyond area differentials. You can pound the table all you want and say you're hiring at 80 or 90%, but if no one will take the job, guess what, you're NOT hiring at that level. Lots of moving parts in this equation. If it makes anyone feel better, I've always been a top performer and I've never come close to MRP. If I want more $, I get promoted.
wow, I guess I need to leave, I'm only at 85% of midpoint with 15 years of experience and consistently rated exceeds. I'm over 150k salary and 85% was after being promoted during the job title changes last year. I have looked at some peers and none were paying even close to what I'm making (even in my prior role) so curious on the discrepancy on here. Are those over mid in IT? Or what groups? I'm in risk WFIW, we always seem to pay lower from what I've heard from colleagues.
When I first started here a couple years ago I was $2,000 from the max for my position. It was known by HR and myself that I was ready for the next level up, but an option position at that spot was not available. So they gave me nearly max pay at the level I was hired at. I was promoted less than a year later at about 90% of midpoint of the new role.
They have documented how MRP works in the new world.
- Below 90% you are less experienced, new to role, you play a smaller scope and less complex projects in relation to others.
- 90-110% solid performer, proficient at role, well positioned in role. Scope and project complexity consistent with role
- over 110% consistently top performer, extensive experience, ready for next role. Great scope and higher complexity projects
For those making over, is your salary on the higher range (greater than 150k)? I’m on the way low end of the compa ratio and trying to figure out how to remedy that.
yes, far over
Historically, WF liked to have someone start at 80% of MRP. The concept is to grow into your role. Once you get to 100%+, one should be promoted to the next level in the job. If that is unfeasible, you should look to move to another department.
The risk of staying in a role at 100%+ is that you are too expensive for what you do. You want to be at or below MRP to be safe. Think about it this way.
Yes it happens. Similar to others here I was running around 105-110% then after the title changes I’m something like 98% for now. Had a lot of back and forth to start out at $100k flat when I was hired because that was MRP for my region and position and they wanted to hire lower. I wouldn’t worry too much about the #’s though compared to mrp. I pay closer attention to what I earn vs workload. If I feel the workload or work type exceeds the value of earnings then that’s when I ask for additional compensation or look to make employment moves.
I make about $1000 above the midpoint. I guess I s—. Before they changed my job title and pay scale I think I was at approximately 90%-95% of the top of the pay scale for my job.
Similar to @1vqz+18sYoSa4, I was below MRP until they merged and renamed job titles, and now I'm just slightly above. (Apps Systems Engineer 5 before, Software Engineer now.)
WFB loves to place you at above market value. When WFB took over Wachovia, our department was evaluated and before they took over I was at 50% then after the evaluation, I was at 120% and they were going to cut our pay. They then re-evaluated because of the backlash from the entire Dept., they re-evaluated us/me at 110% and we would be capped. I finally changed positions after a few years and had been working from home. After about 3-4 years my manager calls me up and said HR notified her that my Field Position should be a 3, not a 2...because of where I live (after 7 years) which took me from 75% market value to 95%. I had to get promoted in order to get a raise. I would welcome a package if they want to give it to me.
I am at 100% MRP after the rename of job title. Maybe I should expect lay off in early 2021...
I was at 110% then got a promotion and the new role started at 90%.
Yes. 110%. Then 6 months later they gave me a 2 and told me I better find another group. Only thing that changed was the layoff announcement.
Before i got promoted i was at 110%
Yes. If you have the skills and experience they will and do pay for it
Yes, it does happen (for me, 110%).
Yes. 105%