adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Business

What Determines Your Worth to an Employer? The Job Market, or You?

Published

 on

Impress Your Interviewer with Your Questions — Part 1

Being paid what you’re worth is a hot topic.

 

Five anecdotal examples of how employers assess a job’s worth:

 

  1. A Vancouver-based software company pays $180,000 for a senior developer role, citing the high cost of living and intense competition for talent.
  2. A nationwide retail chain compensates its store associates according to regional minimum wage laws rather than their individual skills and experience.
  3. Even though the ideal candidate must have extensive fundraising expertise, a non-profit organization lowers the salary range for a grant writer position to accommodate the decline in donations.
  4. A rural manufacturing plant pays its production workers less than their urban counterparts, citing the lower cost of living.
  5. A consulting firm’s compensation packages for junior analysts include a base salary, bonuses, and stock options designed to attract top graduates.

 

In the same way, the price of milk, housing, or dog food varies from store to store and region to region; a position’s worth isn’t universal. What’s universal when determining the value of a position is to consider the expected return on investment (ROI) for the employee’s salary:

 

  1. Productivity: For production roles, employers estimate the candidate’s potential output, efficiency, and contribution to revenue or cost savings based on their skills, experience, and track record.
  2. Revenue Generation: For revenue-generating roles, employers predict how the candidate will increase sales, secure new clients, or expand the business.
  3. Cost Savings: For operational roles, employers estimate the employee’s potential to improve processes, reduce errors, or streamline workflows, quantifying the expected cost savings the candidate will deliver.
  4. Market Rates: Companies research salary benchmarks for similar roles in their industry and region.
  5. Affordability (cash flow): How much can the company spend on payroll? (Companies closely monitor their payroll, their largest expense, to keep it from being a “profit distraction.”)

 

These factors help employers determine what compensation will make the position worthwhile; in other words, the employee adds more value than their salary will cost.

 

Three key takeaways:

 

  1. Employers seek to maximize the ROI on their human capital.
  2. Candidates are more valuable when they’re seen as synonymous with profits.
  3. Worth (read: value) in the business world isn’t subjective; it must be proven.

 

Internet talking heads, trying to appeal to today’s prevalent sense of entitlement, advise job seekers to “demand their worth.” This advice is the cause of the dilemma many job seekers struggle with: Should I base my compensation expectation on what I think I’m worth or what the job market says the job is worth?

 

Wrong question!

 

Job seekers should ask themselves, “Should I base my compensation expectation on what I can prove I’m worth or what the job market says the job is worth?”

 

Always strive to prove what you’re worth, especially during an interview, while considering the following:

 

Evaluate the job responsibilities.

 

Expertise-intensive, decision-making-intensive, complex, or business-critical roles garner higher compensation. For instance, senior data scientists earn more than entry-level data analysts.

 

Additionally, there’s the scope and scale of the role. Directors and managers overseeing multimillion-dollar budgets or large teams are valued more highly than those in smaller managerial roles.

 

Know the industry standard.

 

Platforms like Glassdoor, PayScale, and Salary.com, as well as government labour statistics and industry association surveys, provide crowdsourced salary data you can use as a starting point. Even though the objective of proving your worth is to obtain the highest compensation possible, you don’t want to ask for compensation that’s excessively outside the ballpark.

 

Supply and demand. (a critical factor)

 

ECON 101: Supply and demand influence price; hence, roles with a limited talent pool and high demand will naturally command a higher salary.

 

The shortage of certain specialized technical skills, such as cybersecurity or data engineering, increases the cost of hiring those candidates. Conversely, recruiters and talent acquisition specialists are abundant, so employers can be more selective and offer lower salaries.

 

The employer’s budget. (the most significant determining factor)

 

Employers aren’t a bottomless pit of money. As much as 70% of a business’s expenses can be attributed to labour costs (wages, benefits, payroll tax). Much like we’re constrained by financial realities when shopping for “whatever,” employers are similarly constrained when hiring.

 

Organizational size, revenue, profitability, investor and shareholder demands, and strategic priorities are considered when determining a position’s wage. Generally, companies allocate higher compensation budgets to roles essential to achieving their key objectives.

 

Never base your expectations solely on your own sense of worth. Research industry benchmarks, regional pay trends, and the specific demands of the role. Then, be prepared to discuss and justify the measurable value (key) you can bring to the employer. Highlight your unique skills, experience, and, most importantly, the results you’ve delivered.

 

  • Grew email subscriber list from 300 to 2,000 in 8 months with no budget increase.
  • Managed 500+ customer accounts for 5 years without a complaint and got a 98% rating on reviews online.
  • Wrote 400+ informative articles, increasing organic website traffic by 21%.

 

The job market is the primary determinant of a role’s worth—not your personal assessment. (Why should employers be responsible for the lifestyle you created?) A successful job search comes down to convincing an employer that your compensation request will result in a positive ROI.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. You can send Nick your questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

Business

Transat AT reports $39.9M Q3 loss compared with $57.3M profit a year earlier

Published

 on

 

MONTREAL – Travel company Transat AT Inc. reported a loss in its latest quarter compared with a profit a year earlier as its revenue edged lower.

The parent company of Air Transat says it lost $39.9 million or $1.03 per diluted share in its quarter ended July 31.

The result compared with a profit of $57.3 million or $1.49 per diluted share a year earlier.

Revenue in what was the company’s third quarter totalled $736.2 million, down from $746.3 million in the same quarter last year.

On an adjusted basis, Transat says it lost $1.10 per share in its latest quarter compared with an adjusted profit of $1.10 per share a year earlier.

Transat chief executive Annick Guérard says demand for leisure travel remains healthy, as evidenced by higher traffic, but consumers are increasingly price conscious given the current economic uncertainty.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 12, 2024.

Companies in this story: (TSX:TRZ)

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Dollarama keeping an eye on competitors as Loblaw launches new ultra-discount chain

Published

 on

 

Dollarama Inc.’s food aisles may have expanded far beyond sweet treats or piles of gum by the checkout counter in recent years, but its chief executive maintains his company is “not in the grocery business,” even if it’s keeping an eye on the sector.

“It’s just one small part of our store,” Neil Rossy told analysts on a Wednesday call, where he was questioned about the company’s food merchandise and rivals playing in the same space.

“We will keep an eye on all retailers — like all retailers keep an eye on us — to make sure that we’re competitive and we understand what’s out there.”

Over the last decade and as consumers have more recently sought deals, Dollarama’s food merchandise has expanded to include bread and pantry staples like cereal, rice and pasta sold at prices on par or below supermarkets.

However, the competition in the discount segment of the market Dollarama operates in intensified recently when the country’s biggest grocery chain began piloting a new ultra-discount store.

The No Name stores being tested by Loblaw Cos. Ltd. in Windsor, St. Catharines and Brockville, Ont., are billed as 20 per cent cheaper than discount retail competitors including No Frills. The grocery giant is able to offer such cost savings by relying on a smaller store footprint, fewer chilled products and a hearty range of No Name merchandise.

Though Rossy brushed off notions that his company is a supermarket challenger, grocers aren’t off his radar.

“All retailers in Canada are realistic about the fact that everyone is everyone’s competition on any given item or category,” he said.

Rossy declined to reveal how much of the chain’s sales would overlap with Loblaw or the food category, arguing the vast variety of items Dollarama sells is its strength rather than its grocery products alone.

“What makes Dollarama Dollarama is a very wide assortment of different departments that somewhat represent the old five-and-dime local convenience store,” he said.

The breadth of Dollarama’s offerings helped carry the company to a second-quarter profit of $285.9 million, up from $245.8 million in the same quarter last year as its sales rose 7.4 per cent.

The retailer said Wednesday the profit amounted to $1.02 per diluted share for the 13-week period ended July 28, up from 86 cents per diluted share a year earlier.

The period the quarter covers includes the start of summer, when Rossy said the weather was “terrible.”

“The weather got slightly better towards the end of the summer and our sales certainly increased, but not enough to make up for the season’s horrible start,” he said.

Sales totalled $1.56 billion for the quarter, up from $1.46 billion in the same quarter last year.

Comparable store sales, a key metric for retailers, increased 4.7 per cent, while the average transaction was down2.2 per cent and traffic was up seven per cent, RBC analyst Irene Nattel pointed out.

She told investors in a note that the numbers reflect “solid demand as cautious consumers focus on core consumables and everyday essentials.”

Analysts have attributed such behaviour to interest rates that have been slow to drop and high prices of key consumer goods, which are weighing on household budgets.

To cope, many Canadians have spent more time seeking deals, trading down to more affordable brands and forgoing small luxuries they would treat themselves to in better economic times.

“When people feel squeezed, they tend to shy away from discretionary, focus on the basics,” Rossy said. “When people are feeling good about their wallet, they tend to be more lax about the basics and more willing to spend on discretionary.”

The current economic situation has drawn in not just the average Canadian looking to save a buck or two, but also wealthier consumers.

“When the entire economy is feeling slightly squeezed, we get more consumers who might not have to or want to shop at a Dollarama generally or who enjoy shopping at a Dollarama but have the luxury of not having to worry about the price in some other store that they happen to be standing in that has those goods,” Rossy said.

“Well, when times are tougher, they’ll consider the extra five minutes to go to the store next door.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.

Companies in this story: (TSX:DOL)

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

U.S. regulator fines TD Bank US$28M for faulty consumer reports

Published

 on

 

TORONTO – The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has ordered TD Bank Group to pay US$28 million for repeatedly sharing inaccurate, negative information about its customers to consumer reporting companies.

The agency says TD has to pay US$7.76 million in total to tens of thousands of victims of its illegal actions, along with a US$20 million civil penalty.

It says TD shared information that contained systemic errors about credit card and bank deposit accounts to consumer reporting companies, which can include credit reports as well as screening reports for tenants and employees and other background checks.

CFPB director Rohit Chopra says in a statement that TD threatened the consumer reports of customers with fraudulent information then “barely lifted a finger to fix it,” and that regulators will need to “focus major attention” on TD Bank to change its course.

TD says in a statement it self-identified these issues and proactively worked to improve its practices, and that it is committed to delivering on its responsibilities to its customers.

The bank also faces scrutiny in the U.S. over its anti-money laundering program where it expects to pay more than US$3 billion in monetary penalties to resolve.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.

Companies in this story: (TSX:TD)

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending