WHAT IS YOUR SKILL SET WORTH?

[Davefinan]

To me , the bulk of what he charged should be for the pressure he was under with all of the engineers were hovering over him while he is trying to concentrate on the problem.

 

[RemCharger]

To me , the bulk of what he charged should be for the pressure he was under with all of the engineers were hovering over him while he is trying to concentrate on the problem.

I was working on a car under the hood and the customer gets right in there with me and goes " making any headway??" The co worker beside us says " THE ONLY HEAD IN THE WAY IS YOURS"

 

[eldubb440]

labor rates go up incrementally........

if you watch.......
if you help.......
if you worked on it before........

not a joke, lol?

 

[kiwigtx]

I must put my hourly rate up....I don't get many complaints. That's the advantage of working in places where not many would dare to walk in to.

In fact only one slow payer so far.....maybe I shouldn't have started helping him given that his previous job was probably in a Call-Centre.

 

[RTDaddy]

My go to statement after fixing problems, devising work arounds for failed computer controls, or figuring out how to keep running and or what to do with thousands of pounds of molten iron in the foundry after equipment failure: "It didn't take an engineering degree to figure that one out." Almost always got a grin from my plant manager, a degreed engineer.

 

[MarPar]

In fact only one slow payer so far.....maybe I shouldn't have started helping him given that his previous job was probably in a Call-Centre.

 

[mmissile]

I don't work for other people......so, priceless.

 

[kiwigtx]

I bought one of these on Temu....pretty close to my rates

 

[71SandbugCharger]

Because I like to investigate, and because I have ChatGTP5 professional (which uses everything for information), and becuase the GE story seemed to be the same, but different $$ and days to diagnose; I had to ask GTP if the story was true (I also wanted to create a LinkedIn post from it):

Short answer: TRUE… with a big asterisk.

The famous “Steinmetz chalk mark” story is based on a real event, but the viral retellings you see on LinkedIn (including the one you posted) are highly dramatized, embellished, and in some cases flat-out fictionalized.

Here’s what’s true and what’s not.

​

✔ Charles Steinmetz really did consult for Henry Ford.​

Steinmetz—already a legendary electrical engineer—was indeed brought in to diagnose issues with Ford’s massive generators. He worked on multiple consulting engagements for Ford Motor Company in the 1910s–1920s.

✔ Steinmetz really submitted a bill for​

This part is historically documented.

Most accounts agree the real invoice said something like:

• “Making chalk mark: $1”
• “Knowing where to make the mark: $9,999”

The dollar amounts vary depending on the retelling, but the sentiment is legitimate and was recorded in contemporary sources.

✔ The core message—expertise vs. time—is accurate.​

Steinmetz was famous for solving extremely difficult electrical problems quickly because of deep knowledge in AC theory, rotating machinery, harmonics, and transient phenomena.

​

The “5 minutes vs. 5 days, 50 engineers” bit​

There’s no historical documentation that Ford’s engineers spent five days failing before Steinmetz arrived, nor that he solved it in five minutes. The real issue likely took hours or days of analysis.

The “I just need a chair, a notebook, and silence” scene​

This is embellishment added later to make the story cinematic.

The specific “1920 generator outage” story structure​

There’s no primary source describing a dramatic factory shutdown where production halted and Steinmetz saved the day with one chalk mark.


It might have happened, but no reliable engineering or historical paper documents it this way.

The source you referenced (“Inspiring feats… Engineer of Engineers”)​

That AllAboutCircuits article is accurate about Steinmetz’s life, but it doesn’t claim this chalk-mark incident happened in two days.
Your viral story and the AAC article share a theme—Steinmetz solving hard problems quickly—but AAC doesn’t tell this particular chalk-mark anecdote.

---

​

True event:
Steinmetz billed Henry Ford $10,000 for a generator diagnosis, justifying it with something like “knowing where to mark it.”
Ford questioned it; Steinmetz itemized it; Ford paid the full amount.


False embellishments:
Most of the framing—five minutes, five days, hand-on-generator silence, dramatic reveal—is creative storytelling added in later decades.


So the story you quoted is based on a real truth, but the details are fictionalized.

---

Why this matters (and why it spreads)​

These stories endure because they capture a timeless leadership principle:


You’re not paying for minutes of labor.
You’re paying for decades of mastery.

 

[Detective D]

To answer OP's question: it depends who you ask.
Times are different in the midwest. There is this ever growing concept that if you don't have turnover in your company, you will never see new ideas and you will miss out on new employees that want to work harder to prove themselves. Tenured employees are stagnant, don;t want to change, don't want to grow, don't have new ideas and expect to be paid more than new hires, messing up budgets.
No, I am not kidding, this is what modern mangers think, and pretty sure this is part of what HR is schooled on or at least gets force fed from every third party staffing agency while simultaneously being too detached from reality to comprehend a business that makes money by filling open positions may have an alternative motive for telling you that turnover is good.

Ever wish that one old guy you used to call or talk to about something was still around? It could be on how to do something, what parts you need, how something works... those old guys got to know their stuff by working on something in an industry for decades.
The modern concept is that old guys are stagnant, over paid, and won't be adaptable to change.

How much is my skill set worth? Half again what I earn right now. I will have to go to a new company every 5 years to get that though, as they each have to learn the hard lesson that experience costs money. The problem is, once they learn that lesson? They revolving door the people that learned it to another place and then that organization forgets and has to start all over learning the same lesson. Don't want to move every 5 years? Better be fine accepting you will earn 40% less than you could.

It is not the 70's, 80's, or even 1990's anymore. People used to complain loyalty is not valued. Well we moved past that! Not only is it not valued, it is seen as a detriment and should be actively punished until the person leaves!

So next time you call somewhere and the guy that answers doesn;t know WTF you are talking about, and you miss that old guy that did, you can thank the revolving door policy modern managers and HR think is the cat's ***. Look at all the money they saved hiring that unqualified youngster, they can do the same job for less and surely they will bring fresh ideas in! In reality, they do half the job and are getting paid as much or more than the old guy, and after some time of having a frozen wage they will leave too.

As time goes on, the new workforce has no sense of permanence. Not in their work, not in their employer, not even in there home. Maybe it stems from the lack of home ownership, or the garbage wages that are two decades behind inflation, but the newer workforce jumps ship for a 2% increase and the company they left thinks it's an opportunity, not a loss.