I’m an 8 year data center network engineer who recently broke 100k for the first time. When I got asked my salary requirements I actually only asked for 90k as my highest previous salary was 80k with lots of travel, then I found out they gave me 100k because it was the minimum they could pay someone in my position. I’ve read before about people making crazy salary increases (150%-300%) and am wondering if I played it incorrectly and how I could play it in the future. I plan to stay with my company for the next few years and upskilling heavily and am eyeing a promotion in my first year as I’ve already delivered big projects by contributing very early. I’ve progressed from call center/help desk/engineer etc (no degree, just certs) so my progression has been pretty linear, are people who are seeing massive jumps in pay just overselling their competency and failing forward? Or are there other fields in IT like programming/etc that are more likely to have higher progression scales?
I’ve been in leadership for a number of companies now. I’ve only had one manager actively tell me it was of no consequence to them. They retracted that after two good applicants, one with 6 jobs in 6 years was in the mix. Personal experience and gut, but it tells me you are in the minority.
Sure. Six jobs in six years is a red flag for me too. But 8 jobs in 12 years I don’t blink at.
A few short tenures on a resume just means a few lousy or cheapskate employers. I see that often enough in great candidates that I don’t weigh it in very much.
But yes, to your point, a resume with nothing but short tenures makes me think this person has been getting fired, or can’t be satisfied.
Ahh good way to put it. “Nothing but” is a way to describe where I see anxiousness.