A reader writes:
I technically make a fair but low salary at my entry-level job, and although I’m not slacking off, I’m certainly not pushing as hard as I could. I easily go over my quota, and I’m confident I can do more – even the work of two people – without overburdening myself. I like the work and I’m pretty good at it, but I’m feeling pressured to find a new job because that salary isn’t sustainable.
Our team is understaffed like everyone else at the moment and it takes some time to onboard a new employee. If I could, say, earn half of someone else’s salary on top of my current salary, I would be able to make as much money as I want and I think (though I could be wrong here) that they would get the deal. Let’s say I make $35,000 per year, and so hiring a new person will net an additional $35,000 plus their hypothetical benefits. If they paid me half my current salary, I could do the work of two people for $52,500, and that would cover my needs.
This is something that seems like it could be mutually beneficial, leaving aside social conventions and defined salary ranges. Is there some way to propose this gracefully, or should I just abandon the idea outright?
At the same time, I completely understand if there are any questions regarding the wisdom of taking on such an assignment. I know the work and my skill level, but before reaching out about anything I would do some more specific evaluation to see if it would actually be acceptable to do so.
What you want to propose sounds extremely logical, and yet companies will almost never do it.
Some of them doubt that you will In fact Taking on the work of someone else’s job. Sometimes that skepticism is needed, because in practice it may mean you do the basic things the other person does but no extras and they miss out on the benefits of having two minds instead of one to see problems (and come up with ideas, take initiative, etc.). You might think it’s a fair compromise if it saves them from having to hire someone else, but there are legitimate reasons for managers to be uncomfortable about this.
Sometimes, they may also be concerned about coverage: right now if you’re out, there are
They may also be concerned about your ability. Maybe you’re right that you can easily do both jobs now, but they don’t know if this will be sustainable long-term – if, for example, the workload of either position changes, or if something changes on your end (such as a new commitment that takes a lot of your energy out of work and leaves you with less bandwidth).
And sometimes a manager can figure out that what you’re proposing will work just fine. as long as you are still employed thereBut if you leave, they will need to hire two people to replace you and it will be a battle for them to get that number back if they leave it now.
Other times, none of those concerns play out and they simply object to the idea of structuring payment as you describe, thinking they are getting paid for your time and if you can do X job. And Job in 40 hours, this is your current salary. In that case, they are more likely to remain open RaiseBut not one that is structured as half the pay of any other position.
Ultimately, this is probably the most effective way to propose it: saying that you think you could take over most of the work of another role, saving them from having to hire someone else and, if you did, would they consider increasing your salary to reflect this? You could propose a one-month experiment so both parties can see if it works. Of course, the risk in doing this is that they may decide to add most/all of the functions of that position to your role without a substantial salary increase. But if you’re planning on giving up extra pay for any time, it may be a risk you’re willing to take.
