Would you take a 5% paycut?

[Hondahugger]

Originally Posted by shmike

I understand your angst, especially given the circumstances.

However:

Often, in small companies, the boss will take a hit long before the employees. I have seen small business owners not take a paycheck for months to keep a company afloat while the employees had no idea.

I agree Sean, we didn't give out raises to the guys outside this year, some received an increase to minimum wage when it went up to $7.21 an hour and only one received a decrease, but he was only at $7.24 an hour to begin with.

The owner of the company explained to him that he would be more than happy to give everyone a raise and lay off 5 people, or everyone could get the same pay and everyone could keep their jobs.

Meanwhile, I do payroll, I know who makes what and I know what my boss has done to ensure equality. He has cut his pay, and things that the company should pay for, he has started to pay for it out of his pocket by not turning in receipts to me.

For small businesses, it should always start at the top. I know that when my boss retires, and the doors close here, he'll be on a boat fishing in the Keys every day and occasionally might remember that girl who used to work in his office doing the accounting while I'm out pounding the pavement looking for the next accounting office to hire me.

[wildchild]

wouldn't take the paycut, but would start looking for a new place of employment. Co is probably going on a steady decline if they start asking for volunteer cuts.

[marko138]

Originally Posted by wildchild

wouldn't take the paycut, but would start looking for a new place of employment. Co is probably going on a steady decline if they start asking for volunteer cuts.

You know damn well that the people who don't take the pay cut are the first on the block for lay offs.

[Rider]

Originally Posted by marko138

You know damn well that the people who don't take the pay cut are the first on the block for lay offs.

Not over 5%. Do you realize that it would cost the company a lot more than 5% of your salary to hire someone back in at a 5% lower salary. Advertising cost money, interviews cost money, training costs money. If a company is going to fire your ass over 5% they have far bigger problems than you know about and you better have your ass out job hunting anyway.

[marko138]

Originally Posted by Rider

Not over 5%. Do you realize that it would cost the company a lot more than 5% of your salary to hire someone back in at a 5% lower salary. Advertising cost money, interviews cost money, training costs money. If a company is going to fire your ass over 5% they have far bigger problems than you know about and you better have your ass out job hunting anyway.

Well...everyone at my company took 4%...anyone making over 6 figures took a 20% cut. I guarantee if and when we have to lay more people off it will be the ones who declined the 4%.

I had no choice. The reporters and produces, who are under contract, had a 'choice'.

[Quick281]

95% of my old salary is better than 0%.

[Papa_Complex]

If I thought that management was being sincere, I'd take a 5% cut. Don't tell my union brothers that though, or the police will find me strung up from a lamp post in High Park.

If I could take a 3% cut and have just the last guy in the door turfed though, it wouldn't bother me one bit. Waste of fucking skin.

[wildchild]

Originally Posted by marko138

You know damn well that the people who don't take the pay cut are the first on the block for lay offs.

I agree, that's why I would start looking right away.

[Leon]

no