> I hinted about what my decision would have to be if these accomodations couldn't be made
I don't hint because it's too confusing. I try to very politely offer options, where one option is me looking for another opportunity. It's not as though it's a secret to either party that's always an option.
I wouldn't hint either, but because at best it puts you in an incredibly vulnerable position.
First, it indicates that you're willing to look for a new job, which decreases opportunities at your job. Maybe that means being passed over for larger projects, since they're less certain if you'll be there through the entire project. Maybe that means not receiving ongoing training, because they're uncertain that they'd benefit from it. Repeat this over a longer period of time, and your list of accomplishments comes short, because you've been denied opportunities.
Second, it opens you up to retribution. The USA has at-will employment, meaning that you can be fired at any time, and have no legal recourse for it. It can be for any reason that isn't explicitly prohibited, or can be for no reason at all. Looking for a new job is much less stressful when you already have a job. If you indicate that you might look for a new job without already having an offer, you could end up doing a more stressful job search while on a countdown to bankruptcy.
Third, even if you have an offer letter, it still isn't a position for effective bargaining. The employer could agree to the raise, wait a month until your offer expires, and then fire you.
I hate that it's a game that needs to be played. I hate the deception, and wish that there could be smoother transitions instead. But so long as the power disparity exists between employer and employee, you should never hint that you're looking for a new job until you are announcing your resignation, and you should never accept a counteroffer after having announced it. Maybe that would be different in a system with stronger unions or better protections for workers, but that isn't the system we're in.
>I wouldn't hint either, but because at best it puts you in an incredibly vulnerable position.
First, it indicates that you're willing to look for a new job, which decreases opportunities at your job. Maybe that means being passed over for larger projects, since they're less certain if you'll be there through the entire project. Maybe that means not receiving ongoing training, because they're uncertain that they'd benefit from it.
I probably used to think this way too but I think it's somewhat foolish now. Unless you have a highly unusual contract or employment situation (usually involving family), there is always an implicit threat that you can leave. These "maybe" hypothetical opportunity carrots being dangled in front of you (and by you) just aren't relevant. You can literally say: "give me the training for this position and then put me on that project, or I'm taking an offer from your competitor and in two weeks I'm out."
edit: "and give it to me in writing with a guaranteed 6 months of pay subject to me meeting expectations" (if this is somehow illegal I'd be surprised).
I mostly agree with the above rationale, though I am skeptical about your first point. Having other options, in my view, is a strength. If a company can't put together something comparable to your alternative, it probably is time for a change.
I agree with your point. Marketability is the best job security. You should always be testing your worth to your firm and others. Maybe your company undervalues you -- be prepared to move on. Or, your market value might be lower than you think -- time to push yourself to enhance your value proposition.
Employer might not have even known quitting was on the table if there is only a hint. Be bold and direct to reduce miscommunication and you'll be the one standing with integrity.
To be specific about what my hint was, I said "it doesn't make sense to me that the company would be willing to lose me over letting me go down to 4 days." I'm fairly certain my point came across clearly, but my guess is that he thought I was bluffing.
Or ... instead of being 'bold and direct' and assuming that 'you are the one with integrity' ...
... try letting them know your position tactfully, and be reasonable by trying to understand your own demands in context, with eye on both industry norms and norms within the company, and creating a good outcome for both sides.
And dispense with this 'integrity' moralizing.
Much like young CEO's trying to nego with VC's, hiring managers and companies do this day in and day out, they see it all, moreover, they have a different set of objectives, which you have to respect and build them into your consideration.
It's definitely a good idea that they know you might have competing offers, or that you are strongly considering moving on, but those are things you definitely don't want to browbeat them over. A simple, tactful acknowledgement is good enough. I would recommend having a quick chat in-person about it. And stay away from hard lines or antics.
The grass is always greener on the other side, wherever you go it'll be great for 6 months and then you'll discover a bunch of things you don't like ... while there's definitely a lot to be said for moving on, sometimes I think that grinding is definitely under appreciated.
This is a bad idea. Never tell an employer you might leave until you have an alternative option. This only gives them an opportunity to look for an alternative to you.
Middle managers in particular get paid in large part for "drinking the kool aid". They might honestly not realize that their subordinates might see other companies as a viable alternative since so much of their self worth is tied up in this one particular company.
I don't hint because it's too confusing. I try to very politely offer options, where one option is me looking for another opportunity. It's not as though it's a secret to either party that's always an option.