Saw it mentioned in another thread that the MRP/midpoint is more like the max salary. Is that generally true across the bank?
I'm a recent hire and was given the midpoint on the job posting. I'm already thinking about leaving and this may just make the choice easier.
There’s no such thing as a “midpoint” and hasn’t been for years. MRP is not the max at all, I have plenty of people that are above it reporting to me. However it is true that HR built into CP&D and Comp planning formula’s that are governed by rating, budget and Comp Ratio (current salary divided by MRP.) that impact merit increases. These were soft limits in the past when we used to do Comp planning in spreadsheets and depended on LoB but often managers had more discretion on how to divide up their pool of funds. Once we moved to CP&D it all went to hard formulas that tie most lower level managers hands.
HR has had ridiculous rules governing raises for internal hires for a lot longer though and it’s a large matrix determined by current salary, old MRP and new MRP and then multiplied by a pittance of a number like 10%. Completely ridiculous that in many cases you can’t give raises to people you hire from other departments because the job categories aren’t equivalent or the person makes too much for their new role. I had tons of good candidates turn down positions because HR wouldn’t let me give them even a token bump. The old rule in banking is just as true today, you have to keep jumping around to different competitors if you ever want to make any real money.
Mid is absolutely not max. I have had roles in which I've been as high as 122% of MRP and have never been below. My peer group in my team all sits at at least 110%, and I've just hired someone above the max (which, admittedly, is pretty rare).
Comp ratio (C/R) is the fancy term for dividing your salary by the MRP. I’ve seen C/Rs as high as 110%. One hundred percent means you’re making MRP (what market research suggests is being paid for a position like yours). Most folks will be between 95-102%. Comp does make recommendations to management each year on salary increases. Management makes the final call (subject to a few layers of approval).
MRP Is basically the max. You might get a few percent over it, but you’ll never get anywhere close to max
Before joining WF, I took 5 new roles over 14 years at a competitor. I got a minimum of 10% every time, and 3 of these were lateral moves to different orgs. You take a similar move here, you will get nothing.
@oxt I've worked at a few large companies and internal hires are always at a disadvantage in terms of pay but have an easier time getting hired.
Previous company - getting a similar position would net you 5% additional pay at most. One level up would be 10-15%. These are policies set by HR and frustrated many hiring managers. During budget crunches, they would switch to internal only hiring.
If pay is important to you, I'd suggest switching companies every 1.5 to 2 years until you start hitting a wall.
Wouldn’t this be something employees could file a legitimate complaint about? More misleading data and propaganda from Wells Fargo? I know I have seen PR from Wells about offering competitive salaries to attract the best and the brightest employees. I’ve read information from/about Wells reporting they offer competitive salaries based on labor market data and surveys from government and private sources. Which salaries are they referring to? The top range which no one actually gets anywhere close to?
In reality, the mid-point is the true top range. The reported top range is a complete fabrication. I would love to see the LA Times do another article on Wells Fargo. Or have Elizabeth Warren pose the question at the next hearing. Plenty of points to look in to, but I would be very interested to see Wells be exposed regarding what they report salary ranges to be vs what they are paying in reality. Why not be honest and forthcoming? The question should be asked why we have so many long-term employees with excellent reviews who are only making the midpoint, if they’re lucky? Wells Fargo once again embellishing the truth and offering up misleading and irrelevant information. What you see at Wells Fargo is rarely what you get.
@glv op here... I'm not sure which way you meant, but from my experience MRP is very clearly an overpay and not a true benchmark.
I’m under MRP for my job code. I’ve been here just a few years, and took a role a level up 2 years ago (non-manager). Every year, I have gotten minimum 2% salary increases and between 93 to 99% of target incentive.
I have heard coworkers in the same job code complain about no increases and they are people who have been here 15 years plus, so I do think it’s possible to hit a wall.
The thing that I find very annoying is that you cannot take a slightly lateral role and get an increase the way you can at competitors, it discourages people from broadening their horizons and you get lots of people who never change their job. I am also strongly suspicious that recruiting/management is favoring external candidates over internal candidates for the small number of open jobs.
I'm at about 10% higher than MRP with barely enough YOE to qualify for the role.
Initial offer was about 10% lower than MRP. Was fairly easy to negotiate up to MRP but after that it was like pulling teeth. It needed multiple approvals. I guess market was very different back then since I recall people here saying many were hired over MRP.
Apparently there is also a ratio or some number that is attached to each person to indicate how expensive they are. Recruiter was extremely transparent during the process.
YOE seems very important in determining where you fall in the pay range.
External candidate hired in early Feb 2020.
Wells’ MRP is way off from what other large banks pay.
MRP isn't necessarily max. There are people over MRP who have been in their roles for a long time with good reviews. But once you get over MRP, any merit increase is scaled accordingly b/c theoretically if you're above the midpoint/MRP, then you're paid more vs. the roles used for the benchmark.
And yeah, in many cases people make below the midpoint.
Agree with @fgo, MRP is treated like a max. You are lucky you got mid, they offer 80% to 90% of MRP and pitch it as "room for growth." That tells you everything.
The closer you are to MRP, the less you get $ every year. They sometimes make up for it in bonus if you do a good job. I was close to MRP in last role and got decent merits but I did a good job and earned it.
Run, don't walk...run!
My manager told me they have a formula that looks at your current salary and MRP. If you are under MRP, you're more likely to see larger merit increases. If you are over, be prepared to not get much of a merit increase if any at all. Not saying this is gospel, just what I was told.
you can go over a tinge but Mid is basically max