Schwab employees received 5% increases.
The company said the pay increase is in recognition of worker's "unwavering service to clients and each other throughout the pandemic."
29 replies (most recent on top)
@6btk
You are clearly someone that moved and don’t want to take a pay cut. I know plenty of people over the years that have moved to diff locations around the country and had to take a pay cut or receive a pay increase depending on prior location. Bottom line is the only reason a company pays an employee a certain amount is based on cost of living in that area. Plain and simple. Otherwise anyone with half a brain would find a job in NYC, Boston, etc. and jump ship to anywhere else where housing cost a third of these places. There is a cost of what each job is and then it gets adjusted for what it costs to live in that area. A company will pay you X because it costs that much to live there, not because that’s what the job pays…..not sure how this is so difficult to understand….median home for Boston is just over 825k, in Manhattan it’s almost 1 million, in Orlando it’s 315k…..
No, @5ile, it's not the same. If the company wants me to move to a more expensive area, it costs me money. If I move to a lower cost area, it costs the company nothing.
So let me ask this question, if BNYM wanted you to move from say FL to NYC or San Francisco, would you not expect a bump in pay to account for what housing costs there? Same job, same work output, would you be willing to move without an increase? Its the same thing just in reverse.
So if you're buying something on eBay, do you look at the seller's location to determine how much to pay? See how stoopid that sounds?
Never said service was different at all. Just said if a company paid you a certain amount with the understanding of work being done in a specific location and employee changes that understanding, i can understand also where the company is coming from. It the exact reason why this sh-t ho-e moves jobs to India, cost of living is so much less that save save a ton of money. Doesn't make it right, just saying it is what it is
@4mwq, you're the d-mb one ASSuming the service is different because it's being done from Nebraska instead of NYC.
Listen, never said I agree with what google said they were doing, just said that’s what I read. Someone else asked the d-mb question about location and pay. I thought it was obvious about location pay but reading here apparently not. Agreed if a company signs a deal to pay you an agreed upon amount for said work then you should get paid. However, on the other hand, if you live in say NYC and then move to say Nebraska, I also understand that a company agreed to pay for services rendered in NYC, not Nebraska. So I see both sides
Obviously, @3qfc.
But if you think about it, you have an agreement with a company to provide them with a skill and they agree to pay a certain amount for that skill. How much you pay for rent is none of their business and has nothing to do with your agreement.
Location matters because of cost of living. Average rent in NYC could be 3500 a month where rent is say 2000 in Florida. I don't know actual numbers since I don't live in either place but was just trying to create an example.
No i meant location of your residence to the office, not general location. Everyone knows they already do it site wise.. so if you live say an hour from the office, they are looking at censuses of pay where you actually live etc. At least thats what the article said. So lets say you live in Manhattan and work in NYC, your pay wouldn't change, but if you live just over the boarder in CT or NJ the pay would decrease a certain percentage. Even if the office you used to go to was the NYC building.
Why should location matter how much you get paid?
@2uok+1cCjKbhu most companies already base pay on location. BNYM has done this already for over a decade. If you move from NY to PGH, of course your salary is going to be lowered.
I read that google is lowering pays dependent on location of residence. Further away from the city of the office means a larger reduction. Starts at 5% and goes up to 25% anybody hear if it's definitely happening? If they do it i bet a lot of places follow
Google is considering it, but has not implemented it as of yet. I stand corrected.
@1tvq+1cCjKbhu name one. The only time salary is decreased for WFH is when an employee moves to a lower cost location. That's every company, including ours.
Good luck because as long as I’ve worked here (15 years) the merit pool has always been the same amount
Our EC is too busy running this bank into the ground! Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Mellon are both turning in their graves! What a disgrace!
The EC will give themselves a raise. And it will be more than 5%.
Only grade change with no salary hike.Apparently my share has been given to somebody else.
Some companies are clawing back pay for wfh staff. It’s more likely we will go that route.
who is considered senior / upper management in this place really ?
Director+ ? MD+ ?
I bet senior/upper level management got 5% or more raises.
Don't hold your breath.
Look for a new opportunity now!
LOL, the only direction the ECs are moving is to Wells fargone
Blackrock also gave all employees 8%.
Bonus is garbage too compared to our peer companies. We don't even get 10% incentive bonus when that's the minimum at our peers. Less than 10% incentive and a 1.5% merit increase....that's why many employees have and will continue to leave for other companies.
It’s a numbers game. If they did that, expect your bonus to be less that raise amount.
PNC is also bumping minimum pay to $18 an hour and giving a one time increase to all other employees already above the minimum. Google it.
But one instance doesn't create a pattern...let's see whether or not other financial companies follow.
A 5% salary increase just might keep me from testing the waters next year in seeking work elsewhere...maybe even 4%. Anything less and I'll start looking though.