Re: 问一下,起薪80K,要多少年才能到120K? - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

国际科技财经博客移民网络热点娱乐民生时事公众号

Redian新闻

>未名空间

>Working - 上班一族

Re: 问一下,起薪80K,要多少年才能到120K?

Re: 问一下,起薪80K,要多少年才能到120K?# Working - 上班一族

n*m2004-08-12 07:08

1 楼

起薪80K,三四年到100K是比较正常的.
THEN
IF 被开除了,
就要后退一两万了.
ELSE IF 跳槽了,
估计一下就是120K了.
ELSE IF 继续混,
DO;
IF 升职
120K IN ANOTHER 3 YEAR
ELSE
PREPARE TO BE LAID OFF
END;

w*i2004-08-12 07:08

2 楼

If you are a good employee, in the first 5 years of your career, expecting, by
average, 6% raises a year is realistic. Then at the end of the 4th year, you
are at $101K. Anyone achieve this should be proud of him/herself, it is
possible though.
At the same rate, at the end of 7th year, you will be at $120. This is more
difficult to achieve than the first 4 years.
Sounds like you are talking about high cost area. If you live in a low cost
area, once you get to $100K, the growth will be much slowe

【在 n**m 的大作中提到】

: 起薪80K,三四年到100K是比较正常的.
: THEN
: IF 被开除了,
: 就要后退一两万了.
: ELSE IF 跳槽了,
: 估计一下就是120K了.
: ELSE IF 继续混,
: DO;
: IF 升职
: 120K IN ANOTHER 3 YEAR

M*r2004-08-12 07:08

3 楼

Why aren't you at your old company? Is your current company giving you higher
raises?
In general, I say anything is POSSIBLE in the private sector. There are no
strict regulations and rules as working for a government. If you are good, you
get better raises. Luck also plays in the equation.
But one thing for anyone trying to maximize their income to know is that the
higher you get paid, the more likely you get laid off. You will be seen as a
high cost in the management eyes. If you are really go

g*f2004-08-12 07:08

4 楼

because the current company offers higher salary.
i think the risk how likely we might get laid off is not neccesarily
proportional to how much you are paid. My opinion, it is more propotional to
the fact how important your job is to the whole company.
For example, in consulting, if i am a manager, and i have all the big clients
on my hand, even i was paid really really high i am not afraid that they will
lay off me, since losing me means losing more money.

higher
you
not
return

【在 M****r 的大作中提到】

: Why aren't you at your old company? Is your current company giving you higher
: raises?
: In general, I say anything is POSSIBLE in the private sector. There are no
: strict regulations and rules as working for a government. If you are good, you
: get better raises. Luck also plays in the equation.
: But one thing for anyone trying to maximize their income to know is that the
: higher you get paid, the more likely you get laid off. You will be seen as a
: high cost in the management eyes. If you are really go

M*r2004-08-12 07:08

5 楼

Even simpler:
High risk => more important => more pay
This means:
High risk => more pay
Against your statement of risk and pay are not always proportional. I was
trying to point out that you missed why something is more important.
BTW, <> means not equal to me. None of the three equal to each other. It is a
causal relationship between them.

same
for
always
money,
an
propotional to

【在 g**f 的大作中提到】

: because the current company offers higher salary.
: i think the risk how likely we might get laid off is not neccesarily
: proportional to how much you are paid. My opinion, it is more propotional to
: the fact how important your job is to the whole company.
: For example, in consulting, if i am a manager, and i have all the big clients
: on my hand, even i was paid really really high i am not afraid that they will
: lay off me, since losing me means losing more money.
:
: higher
: you

g*f2004-08-12 07:08

6 楼

my point is: more important => more stable
important could be risky, but not necessarily risky
plus, you are using my previous job as an example, which i don't see the
point either. Getting annual raise is just a policy by a company, i don't see
companies with higher raise are more risky. that is why i got confused too.

【在 M****r 的大作中提到】

: Even simpler:
: High risk => more important => more pay
: This means:
: High risk => more pay
: Against your statement of risk and pay are not always proportional. I was
: trying to point out that you missed why something is more important.
: BTW, <> means not equal to me. None of the three equal to each other. It is a
: causal relationship between them.
:
: same

M*r2004-08-12 07:08

7 楼

For the short term you are right, more important job like having a big client
leads more some stability. However, the risk is long term. If you lose your
client, it is hard to replace and you will more likely to lose your job. I am
talking about long term risks here.
In the business world things change fast. One quater someone book a big deal
with you, next quater he may de-book it.
Also, raises are not based on policies. They are guidelines. No company will
guarrantee your a raise. The more mon

【在 g**f 的大作中提到】

: my point is: more important => more stable
: important could be risky, but not necessarily risky
: plus, you are using my previous job as an example, which i don't see the
: point either. Getting annual raise is just a policy by a company, i don't see
: companies with higher raise are more risky. that is why i got confused too.

g*f2004-08-12 07:08

8 楼

i don't see that as a risk, in fact, i see that as an opportunity and
challenge -- the better job you are doing, then more your client could trust
you, and the more likely they would ask you for their next project.
if the afraid to lose something will prevent you from taking bigger
responsibilities, you will never be able to enhance yourself.
you used a more appropiate word "guidelines", yes it is not guaranteed. but
that does not mean company with higher raise should be more risky. also,
in my

【在 M****r 的大作中提到】

: For the short term you are right, more important job like having a big client
: leads more some stability. However, the risk is long term. If you lose your
: client, it is hard to replace and you will more likely to lose your job. I am
: talking about long term risks here.
: In the business world things change fast. One quater someone book a big deal
: with you, next quater he may de-book it.
: Also, raises are not based on policies. They are guidelines. No company will
: guarrantee your a raise. The more mon

M*r2004-08-12 07:08

9 楼

Opportunity is a positive way to look at risk. Every risk is an opportunity,
even gambling. Not long ago I took an OPPORTUNITY at a slot machine to win $30
bucks in Vegas, but avoided the RISK to lose handreds at a blackjack table.
But seriously, I am not saying risk is all bad. I use the negative term,
because I want to focus on the negative effects, instead of just look at the
raise, the opportunity and importance of the job and paint an all good
picture. That's why I said, as long as you unde

【在 g**f 的大作中提到】

: i don't see that as a risk, in fact, i see that as an opportunity and
: challenge -- the better job you are doing, then more your client could trust
: you, and the more likely they would ask you for their next project.
: if the afraid to lose something will prevent you from taking bigger
: responsibilities, you will never be able to enhance yourself.
: you used a more appropiate word "guidelines", yes it is not guaranteed. but
: that does not mean company with higher raise should be more risky. also,
: in my