September 21, 2019

Lowering the Bar – How the Big 4 Can Raise Morale by Reducing Starting Salaries

Last Friday’s post by Caleb surrounding the Bonus Watch at Deloitte sparked a handful of intuitive comments from GC readers.

In case you didn’t read the post and subsequent commentary, Commenter Anon51 responded to the question “what do readers suggest firms do to retain practitioners” with the following:

1. treat every team member with respect

2. you can’t just force your team to work harder year after year with fewer people and a smaller budget

3. pay 4-7 year people more, pay new hires less, so it seems there is an incentive to working harder

4. reward your people with an extra day off without having to utilize vacation time, especially after a really busy month/audit

Point 3 is bolded because it resulted in the following comment from Guest:

“That’s a really good idea, and I’m not being sarcastic. There is no reason why new hires fresh out of college need to make $59k ($55k + $4k sign-on bonus), when they would happily work for $50k. Then, a $5k bump every year would be a reward, with maybe a higher bump during promotion years…Pay disparity is a bigger issue than actual pay.”

Well said, Guest and Anon51.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – the Big 4 are constantly in cahoots with one another with regards to hiring benchmarks. So I propose that TBig4PTB get together and reassess their starting salaries. Behold, a template for all Big Wigs to follow:

1. Decrease starting total packages (salary + sign on) by seven percent. Lower the bar from the get-go.

2. Now is the time – blame the decrease on “a firm wide strategic response to the economic risks of being a major player in the professional services industry. Unofficial response – did you see the DOW sink like the Titanic the other day?!”

3. Spread gap created by initial decrease in salary over the next two years. This will create an artificial sense of accomplishment and praise.

4. Send internal emails stressing the “increase in raises for well deserving employees.” Everyone cheers.

5. In three years college graduates will not know the difference; this “decrease” becomes a non-issue.

Guest’s comment that “pay disparity is a bigger issue than actual pay” can become a non-issue with very little effort. Is this fair or ethical? Mehhhhh. I personally think it would be a slap in the face to those of you who have busted your humps and sacrificed career and personal opportunities all in the name of KPDeloitterhouseErnstMG. But it certainly wouldn’t be the most desperate attempt made by one of the firms in recent memory.

Raising morale – hardly. What are your thoughts?

Last Friday’s post by Caleb surrounding the Bonus Watch at Deloitte sparked a handful of intuitive comments from GC readers.

In case you didn’t read the post and subsequent commentary, Commenter Anon51 responded to the question “what do readers suggest firms do to retain practitioners” with the following:

1. treat every team member with respect

2. you can’t just force your team to work harder year after year with fewer people and a smaller budget

3. pay 4-7 year people more, pay new hires less, so it seems there is an incentive to working harder

4. reward your people with an extra day off without having to utilize vacation time, especially after a really busy month/audit

Point 3 is bolded because it resulted in the following comment from Guest:

“That’s a really good idea, and I’m not being sarcastic. There is no reason why new hires fresh out of college need to make $59k ($55k + $4k sign-on bonus), when they would happily work for $50k. Then, a $5k bump every year would be a reward, with maybe a higher bump during promotion years…Pay disparity is a bigger issue than actual pay.”

Well said, Guest and Anon51.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – the Big 4 are constantly in cahoots with one another with regards to hiring benchmarks. So I propose that TBig4PTB get together and reassess their starting salaries. Behold, a template for all Big Wigs to follow:

1. Decrease starting total packages (salary + sign on) by seven percent. Lower the bar from the get-go.

2. Now is the time – blame the decrease on “a firm wide strategic response to the economic risks of being a major player in the professional services industry. Unofficial response – did you see the DOW sink like the Titanic the other day?!”

3. Spread gap created by initial decrease in salary over the next two years. This will create an artificial sense of accomplishment and praise.

4. Send internal emails stressing the “increase in raises for well deserving employees.” Everyone cheers.

5. In three years college graduates will not know the difference; this “decrease” becomes a non-issue.

Guest’s comment that “pay disparity is a bigger issue than actual pay” can become a non-issue with very little effort. Is this fair or ethical? Mehhhhh. I personally think it would be a slap in the face to those of you who have busted your humps and sacrificed career and personal opportunities all in the name of KPDeloitterhouseErnstMG. But it certainly wouldn’t be the most desperate attempt made by one of the firms in recent memory.

Raising morale – hardly. What are your thoughts?

Have something to add to this story? Give us a shout by email, Twitter, or text/call the tipline at 202-505-8885. As always, all tips are anonymous.

Related articles

PwC Equity Partner Pay Isn’t Too Shabby In the U.K.

Equity partners at PwC in the U.K. didn’t quite get the haul that their fellow equity partners at Deloitte U.K. got recently, but let’s just say they aren’t going hungry anytime soon. From the Financial Times: More than 900 equity partners, who share in PwC UK’s profits, will receive an average £765,000 for the year […]