no shortage of threads here or reddit or elsewhere: "new guy got hired and they;re making 10k more than me and I've been here 5 years" and the like.
there is a reason jumping every 2-3 years gives a better raise than sitting in the same job.
Your mistake is to assume that you (being there 5 year) is doing your work well and over the expectations, becoming an important piece to your team. Important enough that your manager wants to secure you as part of the team. Maybe you are just average. Regardless of being 2, 5 or 10 years there.
I guess that can happen. I suspect in the majority of cases, you keep your shitpay even if you become a supremely efficient pillar.
Employers are not friends, they're businesses who thinks like psychopaths, so manage your expectations and get as much money as you can from them. You need them but they need you, so get the juice and move on when it gets hairy.
It was identified as a stupid idea from the start but I was curious what kind of concessions it involves. Like you cant just call a useful method anymore, it has to be known what it costs precisely given the exact work load.
It didn't take long for my mind to be blown by the completely insane overhead. Counting consumption of system resources is consumption too! While exact calculation is not very complicated every step of the way I felt tempted to just estimate it. Sorting out micro transactions in a secure way???...
Eventually I got distracted by the parallels with our society. Job agencies here charge 95% of the salary earned but the administrative overhead hardly ends there! The real cost is hidden in the estimated stuff. After all the taxes and subsidies are calculated someone at the tax office has to repeat the calculations. In some almost fixed percentage of cases mistakes are made and it takes judges, lawyers, law makers, lobby groups. Tons of expensive transactions along the way.
Before you can even get to work there are licenses, permissions, diplomas, certifications, health and sanity checks.
If your job is to dig holes one would think it involves little more than a pair of good boots and a shovel. End of the day you want a shower, a good meal, a roof over your head and some guarantee you don't have to dig holes the entire year round. (We are mistaken to think people in poorly paid grunt work are interested in trying to make ends meet.)
If you have just 20 people digging holes their performance becomes extremely measurable. They know exactly how good they are at their job. Rewarding them involves such an enormous clusterfuck of fuzzy params which may accumulate to 10 fold their salary (or more!) that their performance becomes irrelevant to their reward. The cost of accounting for it would be much larger than the cost of poor performance.
What we can do is reward their boss or their supervisor. We do that to maintain the illusion that every bit of overhead needs to be there. It is all there for a reason ofc, it is a legacy system slowly migrating from manual paperwork to automation.
You could have a very simple government app like Uber so that those who dig holes may dig holes. Customers and hole diggers can review the quality of the holes themselves. Contractors can use the API to have expensive fast holes, cheaper slow ones, an all you can eat rate or a hybrid between the 3.
But that is not going to happen, in stead we build machines to dig the holes, deploy even more administration, engineers, designers, repair shops etc lots of complicated skills required and the hole diggers can get social support while looking for other work which involves even more circus of estimates portrayed as measurement.
Some sub set of the bean counting is incredibly important and their work makes modern society what it is. Don't ask me to measure it tho.
Simplicity has its appeal. We could build monasteries where each monk maintains 1 module. If it worked for kung fu why not for array sort?
You're willing to go the extent of accusing people you never met nor have any idea who and how they are of being incompetent at a job you don't even know just to preserve your cognitive dissonance.
> Important enough that your manager wants to secure you as part of the team.
Straight out of college I worked at a place where they handed me a 1 year contract where I was paid below market rate. When I was reaching the end of my contract I asked for a meeting to review my salary. I had a meeting but it's outcome was a firm "we want you here but we will only offer you the same pay". I sat on that and on the day before my auto renewal would kick in I handed my resignation. I was immediately pulled into a meeting with my manager where they promply offered me over 20% pay hike.
Do you honestly believe I only gained importance the moment I resigned? They were the same people who said a few days earlier in no unclear terms I was not getting a raise.
The most ridiculous aspect of your unfounded personal belief is this idea there's this universal performance evaluation law where every manager and every boss is binded to hand over rigorous pay adjustments reflecting anyone's performance, and that there is no such thing as being exploited. Back in the real world, the whole economy revolves around people trying to get more value while paying less, and there's a almost universal pressure to not only eliminate any kind of leverage from employees but also make them perfectly replaceable cogs in their machine. You are pressured to not discuss salary with your peers, let alone other employees. You get what you are paid, and you should feel happy for it. If you work hard that just means your boss is getting more returns over his low investment.
For sure I assume that everyone did their homework and found a great company to work. That's the step 1! The step 2 is to be the best version of you. That's the most important factor on your salary, assuming the step 1!
Good luck
Edit: we've asked you more than once before not to post like this. If you don't want to be banned on HN, we need you to heed these warnings.