<p><pre><code> The relative satisfaction of junior bankers matters
because Wall Street firms are slashing thousands of
more-senior jobs in a push to cut costs.
</code></pre>
Stay with the company long enough and we'll yank the brass ring out of your hand, too!
I'm starting to wonder if WSJ has a team of people upvoting it. I can't read any of it and it's not particularly noteworthy information.
Hm..<p>I worked at a bank whose shortened name rhymes with "Damn'l" that did a LOT of things similar to this article to get younger candidates and college students onto their teams.<p>A few personal examples..<p>10k startup bonuses and great pay for the mediocre tech graduates who never stay - largely because of the lack of respect they get. At the same time, I was the youngest on the team, including the college grades and got no such bonus, despite having a "higher" than theirs. I still don't really see what they were trying to do there (besides the obvious) and why..<p>At the same place I was told by my manager, "I had to step out for a phone call when representing you in bonus talks, so you're not going to get a good bonus. Sorry about that." Sure enough, I got an insulting (in comparison to my peers) bonus and not an extra dime in pay. When I quit, my boss paraphrasingly said, "You should stay because we're severely underpaying you and can increase your pay at any time." Yeah, right.<p>A portion of my work was making sure things were good during Sunday market opens...... by myself until an hour after market open when an offshore team got on. When I quit, that shift had to be handled by four people. Can't give a good bonus, my fucking ass.<p>The complete lack of empathy at places like these is mind boggling.
Is it possible that the pay packages that this article is considering 'large' are actually not that impressive any more as a result of increasing wealth inequality?<p>I don't know what pay packages are like in London nowadays. Five years ago or so my understanding was ~40-60K starting.<p>When an apartment anywhere costs 300K+ it doesn't seem as good a deal any more. It feels like the junior investment banker of the 1990s could have been considered to be on a path to persistent wealth, whereas now it's a fair bit more ephemeral.<p>Working 100 hour weeks, after the initial excitement dies down, might ultimately only really be justifiable as a path to great riches or early retirement, not an upper middle class existence.<p>Would I work 100 hours a week for ten times the amount I'd expect at 10 hours? No, you'd have to give me FU money for that, because the idea there is that I work until I'm burned out and then retire.
This sounds like older folks surprised/annoyed that the millennials aren't just going to play the game anymore...With Wall st. banks, they literally have no one to blame but themselves for pushing this model on the economy. Treat people (or their parents) like crap long enough and they will stop coming back for seconds.
Hahahaahahaha, what a bunch of horseshit. Here's what's really happening (or rather, what's not happening): Wall Street's pay grade model has turned into "Jump ship or get fucked".<p>So people jump ship. End of story. Banks don't want to give people raises, so they leave after a period of time for a new position that does give them a raise.<p>Pretty much every firm does it.