Don't Approach 'What You're Worth' From a Sense of Entitlement | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Business

Don’t Approach ‘What You’re Worth’ From a Sense of Entitlement

Published

 on

Racial Disparities in North America's Labour Market

More than ever, job seekers, with a sense of entitlement, are hyper-focusing on getting paid what they’re worth. Job seekers seldom consider, let alone quantify, the value of their work, which determines their worth. Hence, a candidate’s or position’s worth is calculable and, therefore, isn’t as subjective as is often assumed.

INTERVIEWER: “What salary are you looking for?”

JOB SEEKER: “$75,000 per year.”

INTERVIEWER: “What warrants you getting $75,000?”

(The interviewer wants the candidate to quantify their value to justify a salary of $75,000.)

Job seekers tend to calculate their worth based on their experience, skills, education, work history, and living expenses. The job seeker’s sense of entitlement—”I deserve a high income because life is expensive.”—blurs the distinction between how they perceive their worth and the value of their work.

Employers care little about your experience, skills, education, or financial needs. Their primary interest is in the results you can produce, which determines your value and, subsequently, how much you’re worth paying. Few job seekers quantify the impact they can have, if hired, on an employer’s business. Most job seekers don’t include quantifiable numbers (read: results achieved) on their resumes or LinkedIn profiles, which would encourage employers to want to meet them. Conversely, job seekers are comfortable conjuring up compensation figures based on what they feel entitled to.

Several years ago, I worked for a financial services company. One Friday afternoon, I met a colleague in the cafeteria. All week, he’d been interviewing candidates for a workforce manager position. I asked how the interviews had gone. As he opened his can of Dr Pepper, he sighed. “My last interview, as well as several throughout the week… let’s just say we didn’t create their lifestyle, yet they feel we should be responsible for it. I was constantly bombarded with questions asking about our benefits and compensation package. Of the eight candidates I interviewed, only two focused on what they could offer rather than what we could offer them.”

Employers didn’t create your lifestyle, so why do you expect them to support it?

A company’s success depends on profitability and efficiency, which means keeping expenses in check. For most companies, payroll is the biggest expense; therefore, every employee needs to pull their weight by delivering an ROI that justifies their salary, as well as answering the question: How does [employee] help the company reduce costs or increase revenue?

Companies don’t hire the most qualified candidates. They hire the candidates they believe will deliver the most value; hence, as a job seeker, instead of focusing on your qualifications, focus on the value you’re able to offer an employer.

Once, an interviewer asked me, “What salary are you looking for, and what will the company get in return?” I was impressed that my interviewer asked me what they were thinking without sugarcoating it. I now include this question in my interview questions. Several times, I’ve agreed to pay a candidate’s salary request based on their answer.

Your competition, many of whom are younger, hungrier, and equally qualified as you, also plays a significant role in determining your worth. Additionally, easy access to overseas labour, robotics, self-serve technology, artificial intelligence, freelancers, and third-party vendors are influencers on the fundamental determinant of wages: supply and demand.

The law of demand in labour markets works like this: An increase in wages or salaries reduces the demand for labour. Conversely, a lower salary or wage increases the demand for labour. Ironically, higher wages increase supply because more people want to work for a higher wage, resulting in a more competitive job market. This is why highly sought-after jobs—jobs with a reputable and stable company that pays well and provides good benefits—are more challenging to land than a job with, for example, a small family business.

Despite all the “legalities” quasi-imposed on employers, employers hire candidates at their discretion. Employers owe you and me nothing. A job seeker’s goal is to get hired based on their own merits and, therefore, solely responsible for proving to an employer how they’ll add value (measurable results) to their company.

A job seeker who presents a cost-benefit analysis business case—hiring is a business transaction—explaining the value the employer would gain by hiring them will set them apart from their competition. Being given a job isn’t an absolute right; it’s an earned privilege. (Before getting into the debate over “privileges,” remember you, like everyone else, have earned and unearned privileges.)

I’d never argue that any one person is worth more than another. My contention is that the value of an employee’s work, and therefore its worth, varies, sometimes significantly, between employees. There’s no denying that employees who go the extra mile, produce above the minimum expectations, positively influence their colleagues and are team players add more value to their employer than those who do the minimum. (aka, quiet quitting)

Only after you’ve established what measurable value you can bring to an employer can you begin discussing your compensation. Job hunting isn’t the place for any sense of entitlement; you must demonstrate your value to an employer—prove your worth.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

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

Roots sees room for expansion in activewear, reports $5.2M Q2 loss and sales drop

Published

 on

 

TORONTO – Roots Corp. may have built its brand on all things comfy and cosy, but its CEO says activewear is now “really becoming a core part” of the brand.

The category, which at Roots spans leggings, tracksuits, sports bras and bike shorts, has seen such sustained double-digit growth that Meghan Roach plans to make it a key part of the business’ future.

“It’s an area … you will see us continue to expand upon,” she told analysts on a Friday call.

The Toronto-based retailer’s push into activewear has taken shape over many years and included several turns as the official designer and supplier of Team Canada’s Olympic uniform.

But consumers have had plenty of choice when it comes to workout gear and other apparel suited to their sporting needs. On top of the slew of athletic brands like Nike and Adidas, shoppers have also gravitated toward Lululemon Athletica Inc., Alo and Vuori, ramping up competition in the activewear category.

Roach feels Roots’ toehold in the category stems from the fit, feel and following its merchandise has cultivated.

“Our product really resonates with (shoppers) because you can wear it through multiple different use cases and occasions,” she said.

“We’ve been seeing customers come back again and again for some of these core products in our activewear collection.”

Her remarks came the same day as Roots revealed it lost $5.2 million in its latest quarter compared with a loss of $5.3 million in the same quarter last year.

The company said the second-quarter loss amounted to 13 cents per diluted share for the quarter ended Aug. 3, the same as a year earlier.

In presenting the results, Roach reminded analysts that the first half of the year is usually “seasonally small,” representing just 30 per cent of the company’s annual sales.

Sales for the second quarter totalled $47.7 million, down from $49.4 million in the same quarter last year.

The move lower came as direct-to-consumer sales amounted to $36.4 million, down from $37.1 million a year earlier, as comparable sales edged down 0.2 per cent.

The numbers reflect the fact that Roots continued to grapple with inventory challenges in the company’s Cooper fleece line that first cropped up in its previous quarter.

Roots recently began to use artificial intelligence to assist with daily inventory replenishments and said more tools helping with allocation will go live in the next quarter.

Beyond that time period, the company intends to keep exploring AI and renovate more of its stores.

It will also re-evaluate its design ranks.

Roots announced Friday that chief product officer Karuna Scheinfeld has stepped down.

Rather than fill the role, the company plans to hire senior level design talent with international experience in the outdoor and activewear sectors who will take on tasks previously done by the chief product officer.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 13, 2024.

Companies in this story: (TSX:ROOT)

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Talks on today over HandyDART strike affecting vulnerable people in Metro Vancouver

Published

 on

 

VANCOUVER – Mediated talks between the union representing HandyDART workers in Metro Vancouver and its employer, Transdev, are set to resume today as a strike that has stopped most services drags into a second week.

No timeline has been set for the length of the negotiations, but Joe McCann, president of the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1724, says they are willing to stay there as long as it takes, even if talks drag on all night.

About 600 employees of the door-to-door transit service for people unable to navigate the conventional transit system have been on strike since last Tuesday, pausing service for all but essential medical trips.

Hundreds of drivers rallied outside TransLink’s head office earlier this week, calling for the transportation provider to intervene in the dispute with Transdev, which was contracted to oversee HandyDART service.

Transdev said earlier this week that it will provide a reply to the union’s latest proposal on Thursday.

A statement from the company said it “strongly believes” that their employees deserve fair wages, and that a fair contract “must balance the needs of their employees, clients and taxpayers.”

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

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

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

Trending

Exit mobile version