
Show me the salary! - pauloteixeira
http://blog.jobbox.io/common-reasons-salaries-arent-disclosed-job-offers/
======
fukupayme2
A big problem here in London is the willingness of big firms, especially
financial ones to pay market rate in all conditions. An example:

I work at an IB, doing Python/Quant development. We are presented with two
candidates to interview.

Candidate 1 is ok, has a year or two of Python but otherwise mostly Java
background. Did so-so in the algo and numerical discussions, was ok in the
problem solving categories. He was currently earning 75k and was asking for a
5k bump. HR were fine with this.

Candidate 2 was unbelievable, has authored and contributed to many open source
Python libraries, was well known in the community, did very well in the
questions, would have been an absolute asset to the team and business. He is
currently earning 50k at a Django shop. HR rejected his application as hge
asked for 70k, on the grounds that the jump was too big. Even though it was
less than the overall pay for candidate 1.

Employers suck hard sometimes!

~~~
mallyvai
Market rates are complicated, and it's not unusual for employers to do this.
For high-value people, the big guys (Google, Amazon, Microsoft) can and will
match crazy high counteroffer numbers a lot of the time. It sucks, and this
leads to the exact scenario you're describing. The justification these places
use is that, "We don't ever want to lose good people simply because of money."

The flip side of this is that it's easy to bump your market rate - just get
counteroffers. This provides the basis firms are looking for. Some people are
more ruthless about than others, of course - it can lead to the sorts of
disparity you're seeing.

In an ideal world we would have more uniform salary numbers _with transparency
around them_ , but until we get to that world, it's contingent on individuals
to put in the work to set themselves up for success.

[0] I founded [http://OfferLetter.io](http://OfferLetter.io) \- we provide
negotiation advice and career services

[1] PS - you should check out the Offer Drive
([http://offerletter.io/drive.html](http://offerletter.io/drive.html)) -
"Confidentially submit your offers. Learn if you're paid fairly." as the
tagline goes.

~~~
bjackman
Offer Drive looks interesting. You should either internationalise it (right
now the salary field only accepts numbers and doesn't specify what currency,
and there's no "country" field) or clarify that it's only for your country
(presumably the USA, but there's actually no clue about that on your site).

Brit here, wanted to take part but wasn't sure if my submission would be
meaningful.

~~~
mallyvai
Thanks for the feedback! Unfortunately TypeForm (which we're using right now)
is a little difficult on the internationalization front, but you're welcome to
input the specific unit of currency alongside the value.

~~~
bjackman
Nope, you can only input numbers.

------
Mister_Snuggles
I've got a handful of general rules around salary that tell me not to apply
for certain jobs:

\- I don't apply to jobs that don't list a salary range. This is a red flag
that tells me that the employer doesn't have the budget to pay market rates
and that applying and interviewing could be a colossal waste of time for both
of us. I get that the employer may not be willing to pay what I want based on
my experience, etc, but the salary range tells me if getting what I want is
even possible.

\- I also don't apply for jobs that don't list an annual salary. I get the
vibe, rightly or wrongly, that when you only list a monthly salary you don't
expect to keep your new hire around very long.

\- Jobs that are listed as "xx months with possibility of extension" are also
right out. A job, for me anyway, represents a huge commitment and if the
employer isn't willing to make that same commitment then I'm not interested.

~~~
johnward
I usually follow all of these. The one thing that gets me is when a recruiter
calls me up. I usually talk to them because I don't want to be a dick and you
never know they my actually be valuable one day. I tell them my salary. "oh
well this one pays about 70% of that and it's an 8 month contract. I'd like to
put you in for this". I'm not leaving a full time position for a contract
position with less pay. I might consider a contract position at about 150-200%
of my current pay.

~~~
bhayden
I find telling recruiters my salary is a really bad idea. They then tell the
company I am applying to what my salary is, which is a really shitty way to
start off salary negotiations. I actually just don't work with recruiters
anymore due to such a shitty experience.

~~~
johnward
Yeah my new rule of thumb is to avoid telling them what I make and try to tell
them what it will take for me to leave my current position. I think I'm
underpaid so I don't want to start by telling them how underpaid I am.

------
BrentOzar
As a small business owner who's done a few successful casting calls, the
problem with this article comes down to their first answer:

> Yes, you have quantity, but what about quality? How much time will you spend
> sorting the wheat from the chaff? How much application spam will you have to
> review and dispose of? And of the relevant ones, how many under- and over-
> qualified candidates do you need to sift through because they lacked the
> vital piece of information that is a salary range?

It's easy: filter the incoming candidates based on who you want to hire. Send
your favorite candidates a simple email saying what you want to pay for that
position, and ask if they're still interested. Interview the ones that are.
(This way, you're not posting the salary number to the public, but you're
still filtering candidates quickly and respecting their time.)

If none of your favorite candidates are interested at your targeted price,
there's your answer. Either lower your standards and take one of the other
applicants, or ask all of your favorite candidates what number it would take
to get them interested. (No interviewing - you don't have the right to take up
their time until you can come up with the money - you're just asking for the
salary number they would need to even step into an interview.) When the
numbers come back, that's what it would take to hire your favorite candidates.

~~~
NickPollard
This only works if the candidates still apply. A lot of the time I choose not
to apply for roles without posted salaries, because there's a good chance I'm
either over- or under-qualified for the role. Applying to a job takes time and
effort to do properly (and it's worth doing properly).

As other people have said, you can post a range rather than a single number,
and that number doesn't have to be 100% ironclad - if a range is 5-10% out for
me, I'd probably still apply and try to negotiate - but I'm not going to waste
my time applying for jobs only to find out they're offering £50k if I want
£100k.

Check out the jobs posted here:
[http://oxfordknight.co.uk/jobs/](http://oxfordknight.co.uk/jobs/)

They all have salary ranges, many are quite broad, but it communicates quite
clearly the level that both parties should be thinking about when entering
into negotiations. So much more useful.

------
alecco
In my experience, if you are useful to the company where you are, job hopping
is the only way to a meaningful salary increase or career change. Also, when
you do a good job programming and are not an attention whore you become wall
paper.

See previous discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8940820](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8940820)

------
MikeTaylor
This is simple. I won't waste my time applying for a job that doesn't even
bother to tell me what they're going to pay -- any more than I would buy a car
without knowing its engine capacity, mileage, etc. The idea is idiotic.

So: the only people who will apply for jobs with no salary listed are the ones
desperate for _any_ job.

Are they the people you want to hire?

~~~
Iftheshoefits
There's a difference between not posting salary and not telling a potential
candidate when asked. Given that in America at least incredibly few companies
post salary ranges to the public it is a stretch (and insulting) to claim
applicants for positions with no posted salary are desperate.

~~~
randomdata
That approach is still flawed though. In a seller's market, which I do believe
the developer market currently is, the _buyer_ is the one who has to do the
marketing.

Supplying expected compensation up front is one of the best ways to market
your business to developers. If I, a developer, am making $100K and you make
it known that you are willing to pay $200K, I'm going to get excited and get
in touch with you. If I am left to assume that you are also only offering
$100K, because you "pay market rates" or haven't said otherwise, I'm not even
going to waste my time getting in touch with you.

It seems like a lot of businesses feel like they are in a buyer's market,
which comes with completely different rules, and then cannot figure out why it
isn't working for them.

~~~
Iftheshoefits
I don't disagree that posting salaries ought to be far more common than it is.

I also am not convinced that it's a seller's market. Most programmers
(developers, software engineers, whatever) are treated like second-class
citizens from the first phone screen through the "culture fit" portion of an
on-site interview.

Regardless, my point wasn't about whether companies should or should not post
salaries; it was that applicants to companies that don't ought not be
considered "desperate for any job" because it is simply a fact that all but a
very tiny percentage of jobs are advertised without said salary listed.

------
pixelcort
Would a solution to Yao's Millionaires' problem help?

[http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yao%27s_Millionaires%27_Probl...](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yao%27s_Millionaires%27_Problem)

The candidate puts in the minimum they're willing to take into one side of the
solution, and the employer puts in the maximum. Both then securely find out if
the minimum is less than the maximum, without revealing the two numbers to
each other.

The socialist millionaire solution is used in OTR, but this solution seems to
have not caught on yet.

~~~
sukilot
As a bonus, anybody who can implement the algorithm is a strong hire.

~~~
ryandrake
So, anyone who knows how to use the greater-than operator is a strong hire?

------
austenallred
We don't broadcast our salaries with our job listings because reality is how
much we're willing to pay varies candidate to candidate. Interviewing, for
example, someone with seven years experience vs. fifteen (I'm simplifying what
matters greatly for the sake of argument - years experience is the easiest
thing to put a number to) and we would pay way more for one than the other.

Maybe that's unfair, but I don't think we've ever chosen not to hire someone
because of the salary level they wanted.

~~~
CalRobert
This is counter to a lot of advice given, but because of this I try to address
salary as one of the first questions during the initial contact I have with a
potential employer. I'm fine with a range, but if they're not even in the same
ballpark we've both just saved a lot of time. Similarly, if there's no way
they can afford me it does us both good to wish each other well and move on.

~~~
leeoniya
yes, i've had major issues with this. i know what i will and will not accept
and if my number is not something the employer is willing to pay, that should
be the first thing discussed so we don't waste each other's time.

it's very annoying to be dragged through interviews for what turns out to be a
laughable offer at the end.

~~~
LoSboccacc
once it happened worse to me, I specified my minimum acceptable price at the
first contact, went trough three interviews, then they offered 87% of what I
asked.

~~~
ovulator
Of course they did, that is how negotiation works. You don't go up from the
sticker price.

You don't say what the minimum you will work for is, you tell them what your
other offers are, then you have an auction and they have to bid up.

~~~
CalRobert
This works really well with a liquid market. It can be harder for people who
are talented in specialized professions. My wife, for instance, is highly
skilled in a very specialized skillset, but it's academic, and jobs that match
her skills come up a few times a year in the whole state. Even though the
applicant pool is small, the illiquidity means it's difficult to say you're
going to someone else. Actually, I wonder to what extent markets with very
specialized (and comparatively rare) talents are affected by this illiquidity
as opposed to mere supply and demand?

------
wallflower
It is all about the employer maintaining the power in salary setting.

Think of airlines. In the handful of times, I've asked how much people have
paid for their seat. I've gotten ranges of a couple hundred dollars in both
directions for a cross-country flight. Some of it was when the ticket was
bought. And I thought I was getting a deal on Priceline...

There are always disparities in salary. The most glaring and entrenched -
being that of males and females of near equivalency being paid different
amounts.

If all salaries were made public, you would have to equalize salaries to
prevent the fomenting dissension.

This can be done at smaller organizations. For larger organizations (think
Fortune 500), the higher-ups could not keep their larger salaries because a)
they would not be able to justify them (as much) and b) their larger salaries
may have been largely due to 'taking a larger share of the pot'.

~~~
grecy
> _It is all about the employer maintaining the power in salary setting._

I agree 100% and I've always found it kind of creepy - like giving candy to a
kid levels of creepy.

"Here is your pay check Mr. Jones - but be sure not to tell anyone how much it
is"

is _very_ similar to

"Here is some candy Jonny, but make sure you don't tell anyone else I gave you
that candy, or how much I gave you"

In both scenarios why is the "giver" trying to conceal the details of the
transaction?

Because they've got something to gain by keeping it a secret.

------
collyw
The culture of hiding salaries can only work in an employers interest. I can't
see situations where it would be in the interest of the worker (unless they
are earning silly money and feel they need some kind of "protection").

------
shanemhansen
Here's a little bit of a horror story of what happens when the reverse
question (engineer's current salary) is asked and answered honestly.
Disclosure of current salary ultimately hurts both parties.

I was once offered a position by a certain well known Las Vegas based
ecommerce company while I was living in Salt Lake and working in Park City.
They asked my current salary and I told them (like a chump). When my offer
finally came through it was for less than my current salary (ouch). I assumed
this was a really weird way of telling me "no", so I declined the offer.

I immediately got a call from their HR wondering what the problem was. When I
informed them that I wasn't going to move to Las Vegas and take a pay cut they
dug in their heels and argued that their offer was really _more_ than I was
currently making since Las Vegas is so much cheaper than Park City (as I
mentioned above, I never actually lived in Park City but that didn't seem to
dissuade them).

If I had responded to the "how much do you make?" question by telling them how
much they needed to pay me then instead of wasting everyone's time they could
have terminated the interview process or even better, made their offer without
being confused by irrelevant salary data.

At my most current job I told the recruiter right up front what my
requirements were and told her I didn't want to fly out for an in-person
interview unless we agreed on ballpark numbers. She came back with an
acceptable number (which I accepted when I later saw it on the offer letter)
and nobody's time was wasted. I also won't be job hopping for a tiny pay bump
any time soon. Win/win.

~~~
mallyvai
This is exactly the right answer - if multiple rounds of deflection fail to
work then you should state, "I expect a competitive offer to be $X".

------
mallyvai
This is exactly why we are launching the Offer Drive:

[http://offerletter.io/drive.html](http://offerletter.io/drive.html) . In
short - submit your offer and equity information, get back access to a
statistical pool showing where you stand.

A few notes on this subject from my perspective as the founder of
[http://OfferLetter.io](http://OfferLetter.io) (we provide negotiation advice
and career matchmaking to developers and other techies).

Companies also oftentimes just _don 't know_ what someone is worth, and don't
want to publicly publish numbers that are too high or low for fear
miscalibrating expectations w.r.t. large swaths of potential candidates.

0) If a company tries to play the, "What do you make?" game, it's important to
deflect, deflect, deflect and if they insist, simply state, "I expect a
competitive offer to be on the order of $X"

1) Market rates are complicated. As I've written about before, the outcomes
that people can see because of outsize startup exit scenarios means that their
market rate can be _very very_ high. Google doesn't publish this kind of info
because they _can and will match_ even crazy startup exit numbers, but don't
broadcast this for fear of screwing up expectations.

2) At the end of the day it is contingent _on the individual_ to define their
own basis and see what places are willing to offer what compensation, and how
much they are willing to budge. This is _how markets work_.

3) On a related note, oftentimes, companies will try and prohibit discussion
of compensation by saying it's confidential, or a trade secret.
Confidentiality and wage secrecy requirements in the workplace are _illegal_
under California law. The exact statue is here:
[http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection...](http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=LAB&sectionNum=232)
As we have seen repeatedly, these kinds of requirements tend to
disproportionately harm people from many kinds of non-privileged backgrounds.

And, under national labor legislation, companies cannot prohibit discussion
within the workplace.

------
solve
"Resentment"

Good call on that. Resentment is the #1 factor in practically everything in
internal people dynamics. Poor managers and founders just don't realize it
yet.

This tends to be less bad in major cities than in small towns though. Young
people, get out of the small town you're living in.

------
hippich
I spent quite a bunch of time on interviews with employers who promised to pay
above market salary to end up with an offer 30% less than i am making.

Put another way - salary is big item in job description for me - amount
employer ready to pay too often correlates with
problems/technologies/colleagues/innovations i am going to work with.

So naturally first question I always ask recruiter - how much. And naturally
most of them shy away from answering it straight.

As a result I created job form[1] and, unless it is someone's recommendation,
or i had previous relationships with recruiter, I send all of them to this
form to fill it first.

[1] [https://e.l1t3.com/pavelkaroukin](https://e.l1t3.com/pavelkaroukin)

~~~
cozuya
Do you get a lot of responses?

~~~
hippich
zero :) granted, sent there typical spammy "job opportunity" recruiters and
responded in usual way to someone who really spent some time on reading my
resume :)

------
mgkimsal
This one bugs me

"Recruiter: “Why don’t you tell me how much you think you’re worth?”"

Well... what I'm _worth_ to a company depends a whole hell of a lot on how
good they are operationally. Company A may be able to extract $500k of value
per year from my skills. Company B may only be able to extract $80k of value
from my skills. What am I "worth"? It's largely dependent on the environment
I'm operating in, and how good they are at organizing everyone's skills to
produce/extract value.

~~~
sukilot
Patio11's famous advice article includes this great point and others, IIRC

~~~
mgkimsal
At some point in one's career of working for other people, it will dawn on
most people. Came a bit faster for me when I've been working for myself.

'Hourly billing' is a perennial issue - people want to compare hourly rates on
stuff, and yet I'm typically able to get stuff done far far far faster than
many others (perhaps not the average HN reader, but def compared to many
people I know).

"What are you worth?" is, likely, only something that can be readily answered
by those in the sales arm of an organization, as it's most readily tracked and
accounted for in those terms.

------
500and4
I would argue that in London it's the fact that talking about salaries is
considered rather taboo in tech that perpetuates non-disclosure. I wrote a
post about it a while ago: [http://blog.zonino.co.uk/on-salaries-in-london-
startups/](http://blog.zonino.co.uk/on-salaries-in-london-startups/)

~~~
exelius
It's still common practice in the US not to discuss salaries. Which is total
BS because transparency on salary can only benefit the workers; the "taboo"
nature of the discussion is perpetuated by big companies who try to discourage
collective bargaining (btw, forbidding employees from discussing salaries with
their co-workers is illegal in the US - despite what your employment contract
may say).

~~~
500and4
I couldn't agree more. If we want more transparency from employers we (as
engineers) should start with being transparent with each other. I had no idea
that legislation existed in the US - that's really interesting!

------
inthewoods
My experience is it doesn't matter what you post in the job description - you
still have to wade through applications.

As for the article, I think the author lists a lot of real concerns that exist
at companies - and then sort of dismisses them as if they are invalid because
they aren't ideal. I'm sorry - but companies aren't ideal.

Let's also look at the function of job postings - from my point of view, the
goal is to get as many candidates into the pipeline as possible and then get
them qualified. I want to minimize the number of filters whenever possible.

Finally, he doesn't provide a lot of benefit from doing these actions aside
from perhaps not having to wade through a lot of resumes - but as I mentioned
above, I don't think that turns out to be the case.

~~~
runako
>> it doesn't matter what you post in the job description - you still have to
wade through applications.

One of the points in the post is that _not_ posting salary information is also
a filter. Some would argue that the absence of even a salary range filters out
the top end of candidates, leaving you with a pipeline of mediocrity.

~~~
inthewoods
That's a fair point - for myself applying for jobs (vs. being the hirer), I
more often did not apply for jobs based on stated salary range. Anecdotal at
best, of course.

------
imaginenore
Every job spam email I get that has the salary listed gets my respect, and I
immediately forward it to my friends and ex-coworkers (if the role fits).

To the interesting job spam I usually reply with the question of the salary
range, and 95% of the time there's no reply back.

~~~
logicallee
>To the interesting job spam I usually reply with the question of the salary
range, and 95% of the time there's no reply back.

have you tried giving them a call and verbally stating that you find it
interesting, _state_ why you're a match, but say that you don't want to apply
if it's outside your range. then ask if (number) is within what they would
consider? since you've pre-qualified yourself they must answer, and will be
looking forward to your application if you match.

------
Dirlewanger
And then there's the unspeakables that companies wouldn't tell someone like
Jobbox: withholding salaries allows suppresses talk about it and makes it
borderline-taboo to talk about in the workplace.

This is the status quo for many American companies unfortunately. It's an
unfortunate consequence of dealing with a highly individualistic society.
_You_ as a person are an asset and you always have to be selling yourself.
Your previous salary is seen as leverage when it comes to finding a new job.
Once you find one, you'll most likely find that salary discussion is a very
sore thumb with everyone in the workplace. I see it as competitive
collaboration that's gone cancerous.

~~~
serve_yay
But I see almost nothing written in this whole thread from the perspective of
the person who is making more than their coworkers (or believes that to be the
case). I don't want to discuss salaries! In fact, one time earlier in my
career I was in a group of coworkers who all went around and said their
salaries, and mine was 2x all of them, so I kept quiet.

My point is just that I don't think it _only_ benefits the employers.

~~~
ryandrake
Did you keep quiet because you believed you were being paid unfairly or
because you believed THEY were being paid unfairly?

If you thought they were underpaid, you were kind of doing them a disservice
by keeping quiet. Knowledge of a pay disparity within a group of similar
employees tends to help the negotiating power of those who are making less,
but does not tend to hurt those who are making more.

~~~
serve_yay
I guess you won't be a fan of this, but I don't really care if I did them a
disservice. I hate that engineers do _themselves_ a disservice by not getting
the money they can get. Though if it's any consolation, I have started talking
to my current coworkers who I know are good and who are not happy with the pay
they currently make. I encourage them to get what they can get - but I still
don't tell them what I make.

About being paid unfairly - I don't think I agree with this as a basic
concept, at least in the context of software development. They were getting
paid what they agreed to when they signed on the dotted line.

~~~
s73v3r
How do they know they've done themselves a disservice, though?

And I disagree with your assertion that signing on the dotted line instantly
makes everything fair. For one, employers have far more data on what they're
paying for the position already than any candidate. If both sides don't have
the same information, it is not possible for any agreement to be fair.

------
specialdragon
My understanding of 'competitive' salaries are that the employer doesn't know
what range they should be offering. The quickest method of resolving that is
to phone them up and go, "You've specified a competitive salary range, I'm
looking for a salary of £X for that position, if you feel that's sensible then
I'll forward my CV", at which point my CV is then updated to reflect the
amount I just specified.

If I'm applying for a job it's because what's there sounds interesting, if the
salary backs it up then brilliant. If the salary is poor then maybe I didn't
want to work there after all and that's very much their loss.

------
MatthewWilkes
I like it when they say the salary is £competitive. Presumably that's in
base36, in which case they've got loads of money.

------
amelius
I wonder what happens if test-engineer Bob finds out that there is a new job-
opening for a test-engineer in his company, with a salary that is
significantly higher than his own current salary.

~~~
vkjv
He asks for his salary to be re-aligned with industry standards and in many
cases they will oblige.

In most cases, businesses are reasonable. They aren't going to volunteer to
pay you more out of the goodness of their heart, but (most) of the time it
doesn't hurt to ask. Just don't go threatening to leave if they don't.

~~~
MagicWishMonkey
If your company doesn't appreciate enough to pay you market rate unless you
explicitly ask for it, you're better off finding a different employer.

~~~
ryandrake
I've never, in 15+ years of employment, ever seen a company that will increase
your salary simply to square you with market rate. It's always "here's your
cost-of-living" increase (which is based on your current salary). Or, "You're
doing a good job, here's a raise" (which has nothing to do with market rate).
They will, however decrease your salary as market rate goes down.

~~~
MagicWishMonkey
I've never seen it happen, either, which is why I tend to jump ship every
12-24 months.

I really don't understand why companies are so nonchalant about employee
retention.

------
shanemhansen
I'm not too concerned with companies not listing salaries because I think a
job posting isn't actually a posting for a job. It's really just a way to let
me know that a company has certain needs. They may fill that position with a
senior developer, or a junior developer. Quite often there is currently one
person wearing many hats who needs to hand off responsibilities in one area.

However I've found I get the best results by stating my salary requirements up
front.

------
Vinod_Chandra
In India, We have launched a site to promote salary transparency!

KitnaDetiHai.in (coincidentally means the same as show me the money in Hindi)

The site has gone viral in top bschools in India.

The idea was born out of the thought, just for a simple mobile purchase or for
a meal, we compare prices and reviews to get the best deal. Whereas for one
year of blood and sweat, when HR says this is the best in the industry they
are no accurate sites to refer to ask for a fairer deal.

How do I trust the HR words, when one of her prime KPI is also how much money
she could save for the company while rolling an offer out.

I would be happy to hear feedback from you folks!

p.s. In Glassdoor I can post as CEO of Apple, there is no authentication and
why the data is so inaccurate, whereas in KitnaDetiHai after initial search
its a compulsory LinkedIn Login to search more and even after that Machine
Learning Algorithm's are used to identify outliers. If found so the user's
access is removed and he cannot be a part of community at all.

Another Incentive here for users to enter right salaries is, we will suggest
jobs which 1\. Match hiked up no's from current salary. 2\. Also fairly
matching skills of the job against skills listed/endorsed on LinkedIn.

------
brendangregg
I'm sure these reasons happen, however, the most common reason recruiters
don't talk salary to me seems to be that they know it is below market, and
want time to sell all the other benefits. I treat it as a warning sign of a
very low salary.

It also often wastes everyone's time. After going through multiple rounds of
communication, the salary is finally revealed: often way too low, even after
hearing about the benefits.

Other recruiters will talk salary early, and those jobs are usually the ones
that pay well.

I don't waste time (mine and theirs) talking to recruiters who don't share
salary information (expectations or ranges). There's a major tech company that
needed my expertise (systems performance), for whom I never got past the
recruiters because they wouldn't talk salary. (After several months, I don't
think they ever filled that role.)

This all doesn't matter much to me now, as I'm at Netflix and very happy.
Netflix does talk salary expectations.

------
xivzgrev
I think a big reason people get into poker is Expectation of negotiation.

If employee talks first, the number can only go down.

If the employer talks first, the number can only go up.

It's unfortunately wide spread. I wish we lived in a world where people saw a
fair offer and accepted it without automatically asking for more (employee)
less (employer). If something's not fair then fine negotiate, but I think
people negotiate even if an offer is fair to "win" or "its expected" or
"everyone else would". So employers come in below budget and employees are
hesitant to give salary numbers.

Heres a good post on it:

[http://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/183/does-the-
fi...](http://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/183/does-the-first-person-
to-mention-a-number-in-a-salary-negotiation-lose)

~~~
solarmist
Vinnyroe's anecdote at the end of his answer is EXACTLY why people negotiate
what's a fair offer is almost completely (within 10's of thousands of dollars)
SUBJECTIVE. I've had places where if I had mentioned a number first I'd have
lost more than $10k off my salary. Honestly many times I do accept the salary
offered because it was above the range I was expecting (although nowadays I'm
better calibrated to my area... Well, I hope so).

If there was an objective way to determine then people and companies would be
much happier not negotiating for the most part.

------
S_A_P
So I am in the early stages of starting a consulting business. Currently this
business is just me, myself and I, but at some point I want to bring in and
mentor junior people. I've kicked around a few ideas around salary and one of
them is to tell them what I want to pay them first thing, up front. Hey, this
job pays X dollars. If we move past that, then I will work to see if there is
a skill/personal fit. This is as yet unproven, but my thought is you can set
expectations, get the haggling out of the way first and then try to end up on
a positive note instead of trying to play nice and then play the salary game.

~~~
exelius
It's a little easier to do this in professional services -- you know pretty
much what you can bill that person out for, so you know what you can pay them.
Employee pay has a pretty direct contribution to margins (and to revenue).
This is not the case in most industries - adding an employee does not add a
predictable amount of revenue in most cases.

------
gambiting
I work in the games industry in the UK and if there is any greater secret than
the games we work on, it's definitely our salaries. NO ONE will even mention
how much they make, and that's because the industry pays much worse than
anything else. I was even openly told in the interview that yeah, they know
that this position pays 10k(GBP) less than a similar position anywhere
else,but it's the games industry so that's what is it. And that's with one of
the largest games studios in the world. If I didn't love what I do, I would
have left ages ago.

~~~
lione
To be fair, isn't the games industry one of those industries where lower
salary is one of the tradeoffs for a "fun" job? I mean so many young coders
want to go into the games industry to make games and do what their passionate
about. The majority of them realize that being underpaid and overworked isn't
their cup of tea, and that they are more likely to be working on the next
Super Street Sweeper instead of Halo, but those that remain tough it out
because it's their dream/ambition in life and they hope that they can put
their name and effort behind a big game. The supply for games people
outstripes the demand by far, so they can pay lower rates.

~~~
gambiting
Everything you said is true, and that's exactly why I am here. I get to work
on one of the biggest games of 2015, but the financial hit I am taking for
having a "fun" job is huge. And the demand/supply is a problem,but I think
it's overplayed. Like I've said, I work for one of the largest studios in the
country, so there is a thousand people applying for every junior position we
have, but we have some intermediate/senior positions which we can't fill for
at least 5-10 months now.

~~~
crpatino
The problem with senior positions being that older people have usually seen
better and saner than you can offer, so your recruit pool is limited to
within-industry pouching?

~~~
gambiting
So logically.....if there is less supply for the senior positions and there is
a problem filling them, why isn't pay increased for these positions?

~~~
lione
Because like every other company on Earth they don't want to pay more?

------
mwanamayi
Like the point of view. I find that many companies really neglect corporate
culture and feeling of belonging when it's decisive for productivity. The
salary example shows this well as instead of cooperating, it's already about
"confrontation, strategy and often times disappointment at a very early stage
with your employer. Probably why I've always had it hard with Corporate
culture. Work has to be passionating, whatever the reason.

------
andrewstuart
The salary isn't a predefined amount that is a secret. It's usually a broad
range, negotiable to skills and experience. Usually jobseekers have an idea if
their market value and can and do name the salary they re looking for. Often
there's some movement up or down to get a final deal in place.

So the entire premise that there is a defined salary and it's being kept
secret is flat out wrong.

------
mau_rs
Totally disagree with the final conclusion. In a market where people
(specially technical people) are in need and advertising inviting people to
living on to the edge, makes Jr. Developers, Jr. Designers, Jr. Business
person, think that they are more Senior than Junior. So trust me, they will
apply cause they have nothing to loose.

------
endergen
I don't agree with the assertion that listing filters out candidates on the
low end. I think many dillusuonal, overly ambitious, and financially desperate
under qualified candidates apply hard for salaries way above their
last/current salary.

~~~
ryandrake
Correct. There is pretty much no incentive not to try to punch above your
weight class. If it was common for employers to list salaries on their job
boards, I'd spend an hour each day applying for every job that pays more than
I make now. There's literally no down side.

~~~
seestheday
Opportunity cost and the potential of leaving a good company for a potentially
toxic work environment are two bad outcomes that I can think of off the top of
my head.

I'm not saying you shouldn't try to better your position, but saying that
there isn't a possibility of a downside is not fair.

------
serve_yay
It could backfire - if I saw a salary stated on a job ad, I would consider it
firm. So it it was too low I wouldn't even consider applying, when perhaps
they would have been willing to work something out with me if I did.

~~~
randomdata
The figure need not be set in stone. If they find nobody responds, they can
keep upping the price until they get what they are looking for. If they do
find someone happy to work for them at that lower level, then everyone wins.

As a farmer, this is pretty much how we sell our crops in most cases. The
buyer posts how much he is willing to pay, and if I like what I see, I make
the deal. If I don't, I wait and hope the price goes up to something that
matches my expectations. Sometimes someone else will sell for less and that
never happens.

------
dennisgorelik
\----

[http://jobbox.io/](http://jobbox.io/)

This webpage is not available

\----

You should redirect users to [https://www.jobbox.io/](https://www.jobbox.io/)

------
logicallee
Guys, there are countries where the candidate is expected to state their
salary and not the company. The thinking is that the candidate is the seller
(i.e. receives cash) and the company is the buyer (i.e. pays cash)!! We can
use an ISO99-standard car analogy here for their thinking:

Think of the candidate as the salesman of a car (themselves), and the employer
as the buyer of the car, who wants to use it for something.

Then this actually makes perfect sense. Doesn't the seller usually list their
price rather than the buyer? (who keeps their range a secret, or even has a
much wider range as they have a choice of cars.)

It would be like walking into an auto showroom and the seller (get your mind
around this: in the analogy the job candidate is the car/salesperson, but
selling themselves rather than a car) asking the shopper to state how much the
shopper is willing to pay (shopper = employer in this case, since employer is
the one paying, and has a choice of 'cars'). Or at least state a range.
Shopper (=employer) don't have to do it - you can ask what the cars are going
for first.

Who is at more fault: if a car salesperson refuses to tell you what the cars
are going for (job candidate doesn't say how much he or she will work for) or
if a buyer refuses to tell you what they have budgeted (the shopper doesn't
say how much they're willing to pay, and just wants to see some cars.)

Like all ISO99 car analogies, it's quite a good one, in this case because in
fact the buyer and seller both do have a range, i.e. the buyer can consider
different prices, and the seller can often be flexible within a single car.

Also there is another reason not to list salary ranges: absurdity. We can
conceive of a buyer of a car, given certain circumstances such as a new well-
paid job they _must_ drive to or near, but being broke after a period of
unemployment, considering everything from $500 to $50,000. It's conceivable,
depending on the terms involved, for this particular purchase ("hire"). But
that is a range of two orders of magnitude.

Sound absurd? A one-person startup might hire someone from an intern salary
all the way through six figures, even doing similar things (if not much has
been built), depending on age, experience, whether any of the salary can be
deferred, who they can find, etc..

You don't need much imagination to realize that a cofounder salary range is:
$0-$100K salary, 0%-50% equity.

With a little imagination, that range actually _widens_ considerably, but I
don't want to make your brains explode. (With negative salaries or much higher
than 50% effective equity, etc.)

It's all on the table.

If you don't want to interview for positions outside of your salary range,
here's a thought: 1) call up whoever posted the advertisement and tell them
you don't want to apply if it's far outside of your salary range. tell them
what it is - you don't even have to identity yourself. if it's outside their
range they'll tell you. 2) (I don't really recommend this.) Send your CV (your
car or house brochure) with a price range.

It's somewhat rude, sure, but I guarantee it's better than not letting 100
employers see your resume/CV at all, because you've filtered them out based on
a lack of listed salary and refuse to take even 5 seconds to drop an email
with an attachment.

The line "Expected salary: ___" is guaranteed to filter out anyone whose
budget is _less_. On the other hand, you might filter out people whose budgets
are more or people who consider this very rude, and forward.

~~~
sukilot
That only works if you are selling a standardized service. In reality, your
work product is very much a function of the environment you work in.

~~~
logicallee
yes, you're right, especially in America, corporate jobs are standardized, and
it's more common for the employer to have a standard set salary offered.

I was just describing the point of view common in some other countries, in
which case the employee is expected to come up with their requirement and
state it. Neither one is correct or incorrect. (And both have real-world
analogies - for example, auctions, which can also be an analogy for the job
market in that there's only 1 of specifically you, where bidders have to offer
an amount rather than the seller saying how much something costs.)

