Money makes the world go round

[itiswhatitisn't]

I was out to dinner last night with two friends and a conversation topic is bothering me still.  I know it is tacky to talk about money.  And we didn't get down to salary numbers.  But I had wanted to confirm that a coworker of mine is being underpaid.  Not because I'm nosy, but because I think my company has a history of it and I want to stay on top of what is the going rate in my field.

The second friend Jane chimed in with it doesn't matter how much you make, and talked about her nieces and nephews and how excited they get when they get a letter from her.  And how that was all she needed.  The first friend, Barbara, commented about how family was all she needed to come home to. 

Now I'm not materialistic.  I don't need much and yes all I really need is DH to come home to.  But I felt like they were missing the bigger picture.  I do need money to pay for the roof over our heads, the gas to heat it, the food we eat, and gas for the car we drive to work.  I need money to pay off my student loans.  And while I don't need a lot, the mortgage company and the loan company do dictate that I need at least X amount. 

Am I being materialistic or just realistic?  I live within my means.  I'm not asking for more money I"m just saying that I need money to survive.  I'd love coming home to DH just as much if home was a cardboard box.  It would be a lot cheaper to heat 

[Sootikin]

If she didn't have any money she wouldn't be able to buy the paper, envelope or stamp, so her neices/nephew's happiness IS dependant on her earning money, indirectly.

Likewise Barabara wouldn't have a home to come home to without money either.

Money is important to everyone and it's perfectly reasonable to want to ensure your salary isn't 'slipping' against others in the same field.

[Twik]

I love my nephews dearly. I cannot, however, see any connection between that and my desire to be paid appropriately for my work. 

The people you were speaking with would probably SCREEAAAMM if their own employers said, "Y'know, money isn't everything, so no raise for you, even though you worked your tail off this year. Thanks for the extra profits for us, though."

[Maggie]

I was out to dinner last night with two friends and a conversation topic is bothering me still.  I know it is tacky to talk about money.  And we didn't get down to salary numbers.  But I had wanted to confirm that a coworker of mine is being underpaid.  Not because I'm nosy, but because I think my company has a history of it and I want to stay on top of what is the going rate in my field.

Is it any of your business if a coworker is underpaid?  I really don't think it is appropriate to ever ask salary.  There are sites on the net that say the average salary for most positions.  I'd just google one of those.

[itiswhatitisn't]

Completely none of my business if she's underpaid.  And I"ve never mentioned it to her.  But she's respected and just been promoted.  She's now two levels above me and probably doesn't make much more than I do.  She definitely didn't before.  I'm new to this company and wanted to make sure i didn't have an overinflated idea of what I was worth.  She was a good benchmark.  I wanted to make sure that my estimates were right without asking what I should be paid.

Unfortunately in my field those websites aren't specific to what we do and it changes depending on what you call our industry.

[Lisbeth]

I would have replied to Jane and Barbara, "How much my friend earns does matter because she works hard and wants to be paid what she's worth according to industry standards.  Coming home every day to a cold, dark, empty home because you can't afford better is very demoralizing, no matter how much your family loves you."

[Chocolate Cake]

But I felt like they were missing the bigger picture.

No, they aren't missing the bigger picture.  They responded like they did because it was nicer than saying, "None of your business".   In other words, theirs were not responses to be taken literally.

If you want to know the going market rate for someone with your skills, there's probably tons of info available to you on the web.

[Virg]

weber06 wrote:

"But I felt like they were missing the bigger picture."

I disagree.  There are two things at work here, and they're not necessarily related.  Money is needed as a vehicle for exchange.  Its value is in whether you make enough to live in a way that satisfies you.  Your friends were saying that the money they made was sufficient to that task.  To take your comment, "And while I don't need a lot, the mortgage company and the loan company do dictate that I need at least X amount."  It's not the mortgage company nor the loan company that determined that, unless you were made to buy a house or sign up for your student loans under duress.  Those are choices you made, and to satisfy those choices you need to earn enough to keep up with those debts.  Others may choose to live with less, and they'd need accordingly less, or more and they'd need to earn more money.  I think this is the point of your friends' responses.

The other part is getting paid "what you're worth".  Describing someone as underpaid is really a subjective thing, and can only be determined by the person being paid.  For example, I earn noticeably less than others doing the same job I do, but that's a choice I made.  I don't have to work excessive overtime, I'm not on call day and night, I have a short commute and I work in a small office with a delightful lack of office politics, so I accept a lot less money than Corporation X could pay me.  Am I underpaid because I land well below my peers in pay scale?  I don't think I am because there are a lot of things that figured into my decision beyond the paycheck.

In short, I don't think you're being materialistic, but at the same time you should recognize that money holds different levels of importance for different people, and your friends' responses reflect that truth.


KeenReader wrote:

"I would have replied to Jane and Barbara, "How much my friend earns does matter because she works hard and wants to be paid what she's worth according to industry standards.  Coming home every day to a cold, dark, empty home because you can't afford better is very demoralizing, no matter how much your family loves you.""

My response to that would need to be wondering whether it matters to your friend, not to you.  If she's happy with things as they are, then industry standards may not be part of her morale.  I fully understand weber06 wanting to know her coworker's pay scale so that she can be sure she's on grade, if that's important to her.  But on the other side, I'm with Jane and Barbara in that they can be happy with what they've got, even if it's not what weber06 would be happy with.

Virg

[Lisbeth]

Virg, the problem is that Jane and Barbara sidetracked the conversation and did it in a rather condescending way at that.

As you say, everyone has his/her own standard of living.  However, the fact that Jane and Barbara can get by on so little does not mean that the amount weber's co-worker is paid is unimportant.  It was important enough to weber to want to find out if it was (whether or not it's her business), and she was asking for statistics, not sentimentality. Whether or not they can be happy with what they have has nothing to do with weber's co-worker's financial situation.

[Twik]

You know, I don't think that conversation would EVER have happened in a group of men. While a well-mannered man might object to giving his exact salary, most men would consider the following exchange:

"I'm wondering if X is being paid adequately, based on the work she's doing and general standards in her area."

"Well, I find my emotional life and relationships very satisfying. Too bad everyone is so materialistic."

to be a complete non-sequitur.

Basically, most men feel that there's no inverse correlation between their work lives and emotional lives  - that increasing one means a decrease in the other. And most of them would feel that whether or not they NEED the money, they deserve to get paid according to their skills and efforts.

People still wonder why, after all these years, women get paid so much less then men. It is not, I think, so much that they lose time to family issues - it's that they don't feel it's nice to ask for equal pay. They see their employer not as a business, but as a relationship. Of course, the employer is usually happy with this arrangement, right up to the point where the woman expects the employer to reciprocate in some way in return for her sacrifice.

[Twik]

Describing someone as underpaid is really a subjective thing, and can only be determined by the person being paid.  For example, I earn noticeably less than others doing the same job I do, but that's a choice I made.  I don't have to work excessive overtime, I'm not on call day and night, I have a short commute and I work in a small office with a delightful lack of office politics, so I accept a lot less money than Corporation X could pay me.  Am I underpaid because I land well below my peers in pay scale?  I don't think I am because there are a lot of things that figured into my decision beyond the paycheck.

Unfortunately, I think you must admit that, considering the things you don't/won't do, you are NOT doing the exact same job, and therefore should not expect equal pay to someone living in a higher-cost area, doing extra overtime and travelling constantly. If you had a colleague who did exactly what you did, with exactly the same skills, working exactly the same hours, would you refuse to ask your employer for a raise because "I don't care if we're not paid on a fair and equal basis, because I don't really need it"?

My response to that would need to be wondering whether it matters to your friend, not to you.  If she's happy with things as they are, then industry standards may not be part of her morale.  I fully understand weber06 wanting to know her coworker's pay scale so that she can be sure she's on grade, if that's important to her.  But on the other side, I'm with Jane and Barbara in that they can be happy with what they've got, even if it's not what weber06 would be happy with.

I'm wondering where in the original post it said that the women were paid less than weber06 and her friend? It's not uncommon for the well-off to scorn the concerns of those with less as "materialistic". (One of my bosses spent some time complaining to me how lucky I was to not have to make payments on a house and a Lexus at the same time, while the company owner lets us know that raises will be small this year, while talking about how expensive his private golf course is getting.)

[Bijou]

Sounds like maybe they haven't had the first hand experience of being unable to meet their needs.