experchange > cobol

charles.goodman (12-23-14, 12:49 AM)
We are looking to hire a senior COBOL programmer. The essential skill is to be able to maintain complicated old code. You will be the subject matterexpert on everything COBOL. This is a full time salaried position in Winnipeg Manitoba Canada. You can find the job posting on monster.ca Just to avoid the standard reply: salary is depending on qualifications between 45Kand 80K CAD.

Cheers, Charlie
Bill Gunshannon (12-23-14, 03:14 PM)
In article <ced1e8d9-1d96-4b82-b214-0afc20188d00>,
charles.goodman writes:
> We are looking to hire a senior COBOL programmer. The essential skill is to be able to maintain complicated old code. You will be the subject matter expert on everything COBOL. This is a full time salaried position in Winnipeg Manitoba Canada. You can find the job posting on monster.ca Just to avoid the standard reply: salary is depending on qualifications between 45K and 80K CAD.
> Cheers, Charlie


That's less than I make now and, being in academia, I am grossly underpaid.

Good luck with that.

bill
Vince Coen (12-23-14, 05:11 PM)
Hello charles!

Monday December 22 2014 22:49, you wrote to All:

> We are looking to hire a senior COBOL programmer. The essential skill
> is to be able to maintain complicated old code. You will be the
> subject matter expert on everything COBOL. This is a full time
> salaried position in Winnipeg Manitoba Canada. You can find the job
> posting on monster.ca Just to avoid the standard reply: salary is
> depending on qualifications between 45K and 80K CAD.


> Cheers, Charlie


Might consider this for the top rate and I can work from home and with a
35 hour week.

Otherwise and on basis of $1.8+ to the pound it is somewhat low.

Vince
SkippyPB (12-23-14, 07:04 PM)
On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 15:11:59 +0000, "Vince Coen" <VBCoen>
wrote:

>Hello charles!
>Monday December 22 2014 22:49, you wrote to All:
>Might consider this for the top rate and I can work from home and with a
>35 hour week.
>Otherwise and on basis of .8+ to the pound it is somewhat low.
>Vince


Agree with the previous posters. That rate is too low. It is
certainly a lot less than I make now for doing essentially the same
thing you describe.

Regards,
charles.goodman (12-23-14, 09:41 PM)
C'mon guys, take it easy on me.
I provided the rates to avoid the one traditional reply.

After a while at home with family and friends, I will review applicants in the new year.

Here's wishing all the regulars, irregulars and lurkers a Happy Christmas and a Prosperous New Year

---Charlie
(12-24-14, 08:15 PM)
In article <b8f172b3-f274-4d25-9902-5088f8b5fdd0>,
<charles.goodman> wrote:
>C'mon guys, take it easy on me.
>I provided the rates to avoid the one traditional reply.


This is to be read with a smile, Mr Goodman: in one man's opinion folks
have been extremely easy on you while providing Valuable Information about
the job market.

DD
Pete Dashwood (01-08-15, 12:36 AM)
charles.goodman wrote:
> We are looking to hire a senior COBOL programmer. The essential
> skill is to be able to maintain complicated old code. You will be
> the subject matter expert on everything COBOL. This is a full time
> salaried position in Winnipeg Manitoba Canada. You can find the job
> posting on monster.ca Just to avoid the standard reply: salary is
> depending on qualifications between 45K and 80K CAD.
> Cheers, Charlie


Charlie, I was interested to see the responses.

Peope saying it is a low rate and less than they make now.

But these are people who have been where they are for some time and have
established credibility. None of them are looking for a job in Canada.

You have been up front and open and it is creditable.

The point that people seem to have missed is that jobs are a marketplace.

It is pointless for people to feel that the rate for a job they have no
intention of ever applying for is "too low".

If the rate is really "too low" you won't get any applicants.

If someone is actually looking for a COBOL job in Canada and they have the
skills you need, then the advertised rate is not likely to prevent them
approaching you, if they are serious about getting a job.

Maybe a trial period gets agreed and the salary can be reviewed after the
applicant has established their worth or otherwise.

The bottom line is that anyone who sees the rate as being the primary
consideration is probably not going to be the best applicant. The rate IS
important but more important is for the applicant to show their committment
and to establish their value to the company, which then gets appropriately
rewarded.

I hope you find a "treasure" and reward them with challenging work,
recognition for their efforts, and a rate that the company can afford and
the applicant is satisfied with.

That way EVERYBODY wins.

Good luck!

Pete.
Pete Dashwood (01-08-15, 12:38 AM)
Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> In article <ced1e8d9-1d96-4b82-b214-0afc20188d00>,
> charles.goodman writes:
> That's less than I make now and, being in academia, I am grossly
> underpaid.


And yet you turn up each day...

I wonder why that is?

Pete
Pete Dashwood (01-08-15, 12:41 AM)
Vince Coen wrote:
> Hello charles!
> Monday December 22 2014 22:49, you wrote to All:
> Might consider this for the top rate and I can work from home and
> with a 35 hour week.
> Otherwise and on basis of .8+ to the pound it is somewhat low.


I realise you're not serious, Vince. But the point is that the rates quoted
wouldn't stop you applying.

You stated your opening position; after that it is negotiable.

Pete.
Pete Dashwood (01-08-15, 12:53 AM)
SkippyPB wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 15:11:59 +0000, "Vince Coen" <VBCoen>
> wrote:
> Agree with the previous posters. That rate is too low. It is
> certainly a lot less than I make now for doing essentially the same
> thing you describe.


And how long have you been doing it for the people you currently do it for,
Steve?

Do you remember how much you got when you first went there?

Your company, quite properly, recognise your value and pay you accordingly.
You have established credibility.

Don't suppose for one moment that what you are paid will be the rate for
someone starting in a new company.

The "market" will establish whether Charlie gets a suitable applicant or he
doesn't. It isn't just about money (or at least, it SHOULDN'T be.) All of us
spend enough percentage of our lives at work that the job we do needs to
provide more than just the wherewithal to survive. Charlie has been open and
fair about the rates he is offering to start. I suspect he will be a fair
employer.

(If he isn't, he won't have an employee very long...)

NOBODY has ever successfully bucked the market. Supply and demand determine
rates, not people's expectations.

Pete.

(BTW, I LOVE your current tagline... :-))
Pete Dashwood (01-08-15, 12:56 AM)
docdwarf wrote:
> In article <b8f172b3-f274-4d25-9902-5088f8b5fdd0>,
> <charles.goodman> wrote:
> This is to be read with a smile, Mr Goodman: in one man's opinion
> folks have been extremely easy on you while providing Valuable
> Information about the job market.
> DD


This is the first time I can remember that you didn't actually have to
provide your usual boilerplate, Doc.

It is encouraging, and, in my opinion, Charlie deserves to be cut some slack
for doing it.

Pete.
(01-08-15, 05:20 AM)
In article <ch5rnnFmmi5U1>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood> wrote:

[snip]

>NOBODY has ever successfully bucked the market. Supply and demand determine
>rates, not people's expectations.


Mr Dashwood, I recall recently expressing a viewpoint about my own
countrymen... countryfolk... fellow-citizens applying Econ 101 solutions
to Econ 201 problems.

Just as trades formed guilds so have companies formed cartels; recently
such ancients as Google, Apple, Intuit, Adobe, Pixar and others have
settled lawsuits regarding illegal collusion and interference in labor
markets.



--begin quoted text

The alleged intent of this conspiracy was "to reduce employee compensation
and mobilityh through eliminating competition for skilled labor."

--end quoted text

(perhaps unanticipated headwinds have delayed an Antipodean arrival of the
latest broadsheets)

DD
(01-08-15, 05:45 AM)
In article <ch5qmsFmeevU1>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood> wrote:
>charles.goodman wrote:
>> We are looking to hire a senior COBOL programmer. The essential
>> skill is to be able to maintain complicated old code. You will be
>> the subject matter expert on everything COBOL. This is a full time
>> salaried position in Winnipeg Manitoba Canada.


[snip]

>Peope saying it is a low rate and less than they make now.
>But these are people who have been where they are for some time and have
>established credibility.


I believe these are people who are 'senior COBOL programmers... able to
maintain complicated old code... subject matter expert(s) on everything
COBOL' and they offer their expertise after decades of experience.

>None of them are looking for a job in Canada.


Offers such as Mr Goodman's might be a reason why none of them is doing
this.

[snip]

>If the rate is really "too low" you won't get any applicants.


Compare this with 'if you pay peanuts you'll get a monkey'.

>If someone is actually looking for a COBOL job in Canada and they have the
>skills you need, then the advertised rate is not likely to prevent them
>approaching you, if they are serious about getting a job.
>Maybe a trial period gets agreed and the salary can be reviewed after the
>applicant has established their worth or otherwise.


I've studied enough statistics not to gamble frequently, Mr Dashwood, but
there's a wager to be made that the Human Resources Division of the
company looking for a programmer might have objections to that strategy.

>The bottom line is that anyone who sees the rate as being the primary
>consideration is probably not going to be the best applicant. The rate IS
>important but more important is for the applicant to show their committment
>and to establish their value to the company, which then gets appropriately
>rewarded.


This is a beautiful sentiment. Others might comment on how their own
experience lends credence to it or not.

DD
Pete Dashwood (01-08-15, 01:50 PM)
docdwarf wrote:
[..]
> --end quoted text
> (perhaps unanticipated headwinds have delayed an Antipodean arrival
> of the latest broadsheets)


Whatever the reasons, I didn't know about this. Thanks.

It is disgusting.

But, they didn't get away with it....NOBODY has ever successfully bucked the
market. :-)

Pete.
Pete Dashwood (01-08-15, 02:34 PM)
docdwarf wrote:
[..]
> but there's a wager to be made that the Human Resources Division of
> the company looking for a programmer might have objections to that
> strategy.


Why would an HR Department object to something that promotes the interests
of the company and ensures the right people are recruited and retained?

Recruiting people is a very expensive business. And (the right) staff are
the company's greatest asset. It needs to be done positively and well.

If the HR Department are devoid of imagination and flexibility then it's
time for a reshuffle in HR...

> This is a beautiful sentiment. Others might comment on how their own
> experience lends credence to it or not.
> DD


As always, my posts are based on my experience. This is a fence I have sat
both sides of and I see the landscape on both sides of it.

Negotiation is an important part of doing business. (I hold pieces of paper
in this, one from an American institution of some small repute).

Nothing trumps the Market, not even HR. It really doesn't matter whether
they like it or not, if the Boss likes it. If someone is an excellent fit
and the Boss decides "I need this guy" there is no reason at all why a
review of the remuneration cannot be held after an agreed and fair interval
that gives both sides a chance to see how it goes.

The essence of negotiation is not "How do I rip off the opposition", it is
getting something that is fair to all concerned and of mutual benefit. If HR
get in the way of that then they get overruled.

To be fair, I have not worked extensively in the US and when I did it was by
a handshake with people I knew and trusted.

But I HAVE worked extensively in many other places and you can tell a "good"
company within 10 minutes of being there. In places where there is
enlightened management, employees are glad to be at work and it shows. Yes,
I have worked alongside people who only get out of bed for the money and so
they can wage a constant war of "us" and "them", and generally bring down
their colleagues and themselves. These are the ones who nurse their
grievance at being "underpaid" (instead of getting more skills and changing
jobs) and I have worked alongside Managers who see the staff as simply
cannon fodder and have no interest in their welfare within a working or any
other context. These are the guys who get constantly passed over for
promotion and don't understand why.

I've spent 50 years in the IT industry and I have seen good and bad and know
the difference. I also know what makes the difference.

Charlie posted openly and honestly. These are indicators of a "good" manager
rather than the opposite. Instead of a bunch of people who have no intention
of applying for the job, whining about the "low rate", it would be
refreshing to see someone acknowledge that there IS a job that looks like it
could be "interesting" (to the right applicant.)

Now I need to get back to work... I actually have a job which I enjoy very
much, but then, I always have had. (and every time I promise myself to stop
doing it, there seem to be people who don't want that to happen...:-))

Pete.

Similar Threads