What should one do when the designation and salary combination is not right?

If there were only two situations first higher designation-lower salary and lower designation-higher salary, I think one should go for higher designation-lower salary. This is because if you have good designation, backed by actual skills required for the designation, then you can always compensate the lost income i.e. income lost due to low salary. On the other hand, if you opt higher salary and lower designation, after some time your salary will not move upward. This is actually a part of the age old discussion that whether one should go for higher salary or better job profile and opinion varies from person to person.

 Hi,Sulagna,

In the job market freshers are liability.Initially job seekers should not hesitate to choose either of above options.  As the time passes and one matures ,bargaining in prospective offers could be initiated. I do not think any company will like to loose the suitors.

In to days corporate world it is question of demand and supply and the negotiating skills of the candidate and HR persons ,if after joining you find this situation ,you must try for better option and leave or you will get stuck up .

This is the difficult situation one takes up a job with lower pay scale even though there is a quite lot of experience and capabilities. There would be a mismatch in salary structure and the candidate experience. Its all depends on the size of the company you work and the role they specify. , but if one opts for such a company where there is a mismatch , career is stuck.. no growth... as today even if you want to change a job at interview they will look at the CTC at first and they will keep aside the achievements and the roles/responsibilities you carry. If your experience is not matching to the current CTC , companies will look at a different angle and getting a job will become bleak, then no option but to excel yourself in the organisation you currently work

Its always the cofusion, Since its the canidate's personal thinking while taking up the job considering the talks during interview, where employer may take benefit of the best talency by paying the least possible. This could very well explained by example.

Two secatory were needed for a MD by a prominent corporate. Many applied, were short listed, many got interviewed but lastly 2 were selected from all, One was north indian and other was South Indian. Both joined on same day reporting the same boss with similar types of works and responsibilities. That continued for few months, where one day north Indian got a shock when he found that boths qualification were similar with responsibities of works similar, with the same boss, than also the south Indian was on high package. He was totally upset without any clue. Latter in evening he contacted the South Indian and enquired asking about the fact. S I explained that its common sense he is lacking where he was fixed at low package.At that juncture N I got angry but asked for to prove, where S I proved in the way that he is placing his palm on the table, give one blow with as much strength he has. N I gave one, but at same moment S I removed his palm where N I got a good impact. Than S I is explaining U should have thought first that if I remove my palm, what would be the fate of yrs. That is why....

Latter N I understood that lack of commen sense have brought less payment. After office hrs ended N I moved out of his office and started going home where on the way he met his friend a N I(2) and security officer of a industry too.N I enquired about that why his salary less than other security officers is the reason of not having common sense. The other N I(2) didn' believe and got angry. N I tried to prove on the road itself where there was no table and so he kept his hand at cheeks and asked N I(2) to give a blow, in turn N I removed his hands with a good result.

THAT IS WHAT WHERE A CANIDATE WHILE TAKING UP A JOB, ITS A CANIDATES THINKING ABOUT FOR HIS BEST TO HAVE A CHANGE WITH LITTLE INCREASE/SATISFACTION/NEED that all depends on circumstances.

ITS ONLY AFTER JOINING THE CANIDATE COMES TO KNOW ABOUT HIS FOOLISHNESS, but as human being will blame others

I think both these options are irrelevant.

When you think of a working career , think long-term ; most of us who will work throughout our careers , will have a working career of more than 30 years.

When you look back on a career spanning 30 years , what will you remember ? The two years you spent as a manager or the 5 years you had an excellent salary or what ?

What we can look back upon should be our achievements ; what did we really do which others will remember us for , which we can be proud of ?

The only thing we should look for in a job should be :

1.  How much scope does the job give me to show off my talent , calibre , potential ?

2.  How much does the job challenge me and bring out the best in me ?

The rest are all irrelevant.

In my view, it shouldn't be a problem in either of the cases as long as his role suits best for his next job.

Option1: If he suits best for the role, the low salary part can be easily patched up with same designation.

Option2: He can get the best designation with some percentage of hike too.