Thanks dude.
Congrats on the new job! Congrats on recognizing that you are what is important in this equation, not your employer’s wishes.
Who cares if you cried, you aren’t working there anymore, but also, who cares if you cried, regardless. Crying isn’t weak. It is a valid response to a lot of different things.
Very sweet. Thank you.
New company laptop just got in - that makes 3 company laptops on hand. 4 if you count husband’s.
I should probably give the first one back now.
1 Like
Seems like a lot, unless you have more laps than an average person.
1 Like
LOL. I was surprised there wasn’t more discouragement regarding the counter offer than I recall traditionally. If you really are hot stuff your compensation will rise in due time and I think you are smart to chase a quant opportunity. If you really want to return to actuaryland, that should be easy enough apart from finding a role that won’t be too much of a transition. Congratulations on your decision. Maybe you have better things to do than actuarial work, but we like having you on the actuarial forum!
1 Like
This just in - I’m actually working on insurance in my new job, and not banking stuffs (…maybe later?).
The stuff you learn on your second day in, amirite.
I’ve recently learned that my new employer hired both myself and the person I was up against in the interviews (someone had to go out of their way to create a new position (for either him or I, but presumably me), and hence why I was so confused about whether or not I would be working in the “banking” sector). I suspect HR was… misled. I don’t know whether to be sad about being second choice, or flattered that they created a new position just for me.
In related news - my team is exactly 10 males, and 1 me. I take at least some comfort in knowing that most, if not all, of the dudes were hired before my current manager took the head position. That said, there is another disturbing piece of information I discovered… my male counterpart, hired on the same day as me and for the exact same position, makes 10 k more than me. (For context, he’s ASA with 6 years experience, I’m modules away from FSA and >10 years experience - not that that matters at the kind of company I work for now.)
Sexism in the workplace is real!
Did you ask for more during the hiring negotiation and they held firm?
I told them my potential offer at hire (was on contract), which was 25 k less than what they actually offered me later - I didn’t tell the new employer about the increased figure. (I was happy with the job and wasn’t interested in haggling about money).
To be fair, each of us received counteroffer + 10 k.
I’m not saying there necessarily isn’t sexism, but it can be tough to judge simply based on what you both are hired on. I think companies will generally not offer you the best they can do to start, although of course also need to be careful with how keen you are to land that specific job.
I hear you, which is why I’m not totally throwing the towel in on these guys yet.
I think it’s an interesting data point to say the least.
Yes, certainly. Clearly they’ve got deep pockets for YE 
Companies profit from the existence of systemic sexism and discrimination. Women tend to not ask for more money, or as often/as much, and by the time women get to the point they are comfortable asking for it, if ever, the damage has been done and is often irreversible.
Telling women to just ask for more money is not a solution, it is demanding them to single-handedly circumvent a system that has been designed to not fit them and not benefit them. Surely there is a better way that puts a responsibility on employers to offer equality, especially when employers do not make transparent the information on salary by age, tenure, gender, race, etc.
1 Like
Do companies actually negotiate at that point? My employer has somewhat formulaic guidelines, and while I’ve occasionally had someone I offered a job to ask for more, I’ve never raised my offer.
I’ve had very different results at different companies.
Current company did not accept negotiations with me, but did negotiate with a colleague who was hired three months after I was for an actuarial role.
I’m all for eliminating sexism/racism/etc in the workplace, but are you suggesting that the companies should somehow be forced to offer some larger amount than they otherwise would? It’s sort of fundamental to a market based system that two parties negotiate on the price of something, where in this case it’s pay.
I’m all for encouraging girls as they grow up to be more assertive in negotiating and to also go into fields that pay more etc, etc but seems hard to get away from the concept that pay is a negotiated number.
I didn’t negotiate my first job out of college, nor my first actuarial job a couple years later but I’ve largely negotiated since then. One I didn’t end up taking, they offered less than I was aiming for, I pushed them higher and we were close but then an internal opportunity came up that I went with.
The more recent job I took I didn’t truly negotiate, although discussed a bit at the start the feasibility of my desired range and they offered what I’d hoped for so I took what they offered without countering.
In my job before this I’d definitely be talking about promos/etc at each YE/mid-year (except the first, I think). Mainly around my personal goals and any areas I can improve/etc to move toward said goals, etc.
In both cases though, negotiating during (and between) performance reviews and before landing the job, I personally think people negotiate less than they should.
This is why I prefer straight commission or performance based pay. I don’t need to negotiate anything. Get out of the way and let me earn what I want. Maybe someday I’ll get into marketing at an insurance company and if I ever did that, the negotiation would be focused on performance based compensation.
Equal pay is not the only issue, although it tends to be the most talked about. Women are underrepresented in executive roles, are mentored ineffectively, and are less likely to self-promote even when they are more qualified.
But women did not create this issue, so why is the onus on us to fix it? Especially when women still have barriers to entry at the levels where these changes can be made on a policy level.
Employers have played a huge role in pay disparity. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to take a data-driven approach to salary and make market adjustments as a step toward correcting a problem they’ve contributed to.
But again, salary is only one issue.
How long should women have to be in the workforce before we can expect equal treatment and equal pay? We have been working at it for quite a while and the gap persists. How much longer should men be benefitted at our expense before they are comfortable giving up some of their pay and space? I expect that will never happen. Because perhaps one of the reasons men earn more is because women tend to earn less. Perhaps equality does not mean women earn what men already earn, and perhaps it doesn’t mean that men have to earn as little as women, but rather perhaps equality is somewhere in between.
1 Like