It has been a hard day for me so please bare with me..
I was talking with someone I know and he mention a person with the job title of "Application Security Analyst"
I found thing interesting because I know the person and had no idea they knew anything about security.
So I asked what the job entailed, the reply was, making sure users had proper access to the applications they needed.
To me I would have called this a user admin role, or at least it used to be.
For my sanity I would like others to comment on this.
Thank you,
John-
Yes of course paying below market rates shows short termism, but some companies are all about the short term, which they can be as they may simply not be in business in the medium to long term.
Then there are the things that they try to retain lowly paid employees, like
a) Training contracts, where if you leave you have to pay them for the experience gained whilst working for them
b) mandating training and then arguing you need to pay for it if you leave
c) restrictive clauses that state you cannot work in the same industry for an arbitrary period if you leave
etc.
So there are measures dreamt up by HR departments to chain staff to the organisation and penalise them financially if they leave. So poorly paid staff will bide their time an in the interim they get to employ them for peanuts.
I think there are a lot of tactics that are used that are not really ethical and often outright illegal, but the employee doesn't know that so the go along with it. I believe I have it where it would deemed illegal to restrict a person from getting another position in the same industry because the previous company was basically preventing the person from making a living.
Companies have always faced the catch 22 of either you pay more for a person who has been trained or you pay less, pay for the training, and hope they don't leave afterwards. Normally better companies realize that as they train people they need to be promoted in some way in order to retain them.
John-
As with all things there is a flip side to some of the more unpleasant HR tactics.
There have been cases in many occupations were employees have won cases for constructive dismissal, having received no training, been expected perform in spite of this. The cases are normally won on the basis that the stress that this would cause is skilled occupation is entirely forseeable by the employer and therefore they have failed in their duty of care.