Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MonsieurVox t1_iy8x5d5 wrote

It's actually pretty remarkable that companies are still operating under the mindset that they can get away with 2-3% raises and not lose a lot of talent. The days of decades-long tenure at companies is mostly gone unless someone a) really loves their company/work and/or b) has no other options.

EDIT: This theory isn’t accurate, or at least doesn’t tell the whole story. Thanks for explaining, everyone!

Tangentially related, I have a theory that is often overlooked that may account for a good chunk of long employment tenure that was common in the past. After the ACA (Obamacare) became law, it forbade insurance companies from denying coverage for someone with pre-existing conditions. If I understand this correctly, it would mean that if someone worked for Company A, had their insurance, then developed a chronic condition, they could be denied coverage at Company B's insurance plan if they switched companies. Maybe that's not the case, but if it is, that would explain why so many people stayed at companies they hated or that underpaid them; they were essentially stuck there unless they wanted to go without medical insurance.

39

plantswineanddogs t1_iy96ijy wrote

In my experience it didn't work like that. When you left company A's insurance they provided you with a certificate of coverage. You could supply this to company B to show "yes this condition existed before I started with you BUT I was insured by somebody else at the time" and they would say okay and cover you. The pre-existing clause really hurt the uninsured.

18

MonsieurVox t1_iy97abx wrote

Thanks for the insight! I started working after the ACA was law so never dealt with that directly. Sounds like if someone spent a period of time unemployed and/or uninsured and developed a chronic condition during that period, that's when they were impacted.

1

terracottatilefish t1_iy95vj3 wrote

Health insurance was probably a factor, but in general if your employer offers insurance they have to offer it to everyone in the company and the insurer can’t deny them. But until COBRA, there was no option to continue coverage after leaving, so if you needed insurance you basically had to make a jump.

I think it’s much more likely that it’s a combination of a few things:

  1. there used to be real rewards for sticking with a company for decades in terms of pension and seniority. If you got a pension worth a third of your annual salary for the rest of your life after 20-30 years and you otherwise liked the work okay, there’s a real inducement to stick it out. Pensions are mostly a thing of the past now.

  2. It was harder to hire (no LinkedIn or Indeed) and people didn’t move around as much, so promoting from within was more of a thing as applicant pools were smaller and more local.

  3. the idea that you should stay somewhere for decades was ingrained in the boomer generation because it worked for them. Gen X not quite so much but it was a much smaller number of workers. And it’s kind of expected to jump around a lot in your 20s/early 30s while you’re finding a career. We’re only getting now to a point where the millennials are hitting 40 and are STILL jumping around frequently, because now optimizing long term financial security incentivizes maximizing salary and seniority over duration.

7

somdude04 t1_iy984ts wrote

Health insurance still is a factor. I have great coverage now, and have gotten predeterminations for things not-always-covered that are pretty expensive. Could I do that again elsewhere? Probably? Is it a guarantee? Not at all. Those predeterminations are worth roughly 18k a year for me, and the knowledge that future ones will be easier is another roughly 15k a year with things I know are coming. So any new job is starting out at a presumed 33k deficit on comparison, nevermind all the normal hurdles and comparisons. And good luck being able to find out detailed health insurance info pre-hire, much less individual coverage questions.

5

raouldukesaccomplice t1_iy9b431 wrote

>If I understand this correctly, it would mean that if someone worked for Company A, had their insurance, then developed a chronic condition, they could be denied coverage at Company B's insurance plan if they switched companies.

They would be denied an individual health insurance plan they tried to purchase themselves.

Group health plans offered to employees of a given company, members of a given labor union, etc, can't arbitrarily exclude specific members of that class.

3

milespoints t1_iy99sc3 wrote

I work in healthcare and this never worked like that.

If you got a new job with employer sponsored healthcare, you got it automatically with no exclusions.

The preexisting condition thing applied to individual health insurance that you purchased separately from a job.

2