
Ten Rules for Negotiating a Job Offer - mikecarlton
https://medium.freecodecamp.com/ten-rules-for-negotiating-a-job-offer-ee17cccbdab6
======
StevePerkins
I wonder if the "game" operates somewhat differently for junior people, versus
developers with 10 to 15+ years experience?

When I was fresh out of school, at the tail end of the dot-com boom,
negotiation seemed very much central. Employers (and the third-party
recruiters working for them) always wanted me to throw out the first number,
or wanted to know what I was making at my last job. Then once I was at the new
company for awhile, people would gossip... and I'd always discover that I'd
low-balled myself. So I would leave, using the apparent market rate as my
baseline in the next search. And I simply stopped disclosing what I was making
at the previous job.

I learned that the difference between a $70k candidate and a $90k candidate is
basically just that the latter declares himself to be a $90k candidate.

However, once I crossed over the $120k line (at least in my local market) it
seemed that things plateaued and changed a bit. It's not as easy to just
"declare" that you're a $180k candidate rather than a $140k candidate. At that
level, you often start to find that you're interviewing for managerial
positions rather an individual contributor technical role.

At this stage of my career, I pretty much tell the recruiter my target (which
happens to be about 5-10% more than my current salary), and then I'm not even
wasting my time interviewing with companies that won't go that high.

Ten or fifteen years ago, I was apparently selling myself short. Today, I
don't talk about salary IRL, because I'm making significantly higher than what
I hear through gossip or see on Glassdoor.

Is this common for other experienced devs out there? Or am I selling myself
short, and probably should be making $750k for a non-managerial job outside of
the Bay Area by now? (haha)

~~~
SippinLean
> And I simply stopped disclosing what I was making at the previous job.

What's a good way of phrasing this to come off as non-combative? I always feel
awkward saying something like "I'm not comfortable telling you that
information".

~~~
Mekkanox
It's not awkward, and it's totally your prerogative for telling a recruiter
for that. If they say "well I won't work with you if you won't disclose that
info", then I'd say "thanks for your time, good luck in your search." Nowadays
there's always a dozen other recruiters who'd be willing to have a phone call
with a developer who's actively looking. Obviously, YMMV.

As a rule, I don't tell third-parties (recruiters, etc) my current or former
compensation. I ask what range the company is aiming for, and whether I'm
interested or not. I think compensation is something to be discussed only
between the candidate and the company.

Anecdotal story: I once was lowballed without my knowledge going into an
interview set up by a third-party recruiter, contracted out by the company.
They were very excited to get me in - turns out the recruiter gave the company
a number that was 25% less my current salary. The company wouldn't be able to
meet anywhere near my actual current salary, but the recruiter wanted to get a
butt in the seat by any means.

From now on, I keep that info private until I choose to disclose it.

------
andrewstuart
I've negotiated hundreds or maybe thousands of salaries.

The goal should be to find a salary that is appropriate for the employees
skills and experience level. Neither too high nor too low.

You do not want anyone to "win" the negotiation.

The idea is to find a salary that will ensure that the employee feels that
they are being appropriately paid during their employment, and will not be
browsing jobs because they feel they are under market rate. You want to
employer to feel that they have someone who is being paid at a level that
reflects the employees skills and experience and is broadly consistent with
other employees at a similar level.

Negotiating isn't a battle. It's a process of trying to find if there is
common ground.

If the employee and the employer do not find satisfactory common ground then
the negotiation should end gracefully - both parties move on.

It's important to work out at the very beginning of the employment process if
jobseeker and employee are in the same ballpark on salary - it's silly and
wasteful of everyones resources to get to the end of a process only to find
out the parties expectations do not synch.

~~~
thefastlane
"Negotiating isn't a battle"

of course it is. you make this sound like there is no asymmetry, that it boils
down to two equal parties sitting down to chat over tea. that's not the case.
this is a completely asymmetrical process, where the firm really has most of
the power. they are essentially uneffected, no matter the outcome of the
negotation.

"it's silly and wasteful of everyones resources to get to the end of a process
only to find out the parties expectations do not synch"

again, you are implicitly promulgating the fiction that this amounts to two
equal parties trying to find a meeting point. it just isn't. i see how tech
companies go about recruiting. it's an assembly line. their recruiting process
is a well-oiled machine, an assembly line -- and i'm the widget on their
conveyer belt. if i attempt to get a salary that i think i deserve, and fail,
they won't lose any sleep. their well-oiled machine will continue to hum.

software engineers are a commodity to the firms we interview at. you patronize
us by suggesting otherwise.

~~~
andrewstuart
The only sort of negotiation worth "winning" is one in which there is no
ongoing relationship at the conclusion of the negotiation, i.e. certain types
of purchases/sales such as for example a house or a car.

If there is an ongoing relationship and one party "won" the negotiation then
the price is resentment and likely "evening up" by the "loser" at some point
in the future.

In many cases it is worth conceding some value to the other party even if the
other party has no leverage just because you (as the "winner") want the other
party to feel that they did not "lose" the negotiation. For example say a
potential employee asks for an extra $10K. The employer might know that the
new employee will take the job even if the $10K request is refused. But just
to ensure the new employee saves face and feels like they were valued and
listened to and did not "lose", then a wise employer might give them $1K or
$2K or some other concession instead such as a guaranteed review in 3 months.

~~~
abustamam
I totally agree with you, under a lot of circumstances. Many job-hunters/HR
reps treat the interview process as a one-time deal. Therefore, it is my
responsibility to prove my worth. When I negotiate a higher salary, it's not
because I want the extra money (though it is a factor), it's because I want to
prove to them I am worth at least that much to them (hopefully more).

At the end of the day, unless I'm a terrible employee, the employer still
profits off of me and still "wins." There might some some opportunity cost
here and there (they could have hired person B for $X less!), so from there on
out it is my job to prove that I am worth the $Y salary that I worked so hard
to negotiate. I don't want them to think about the "what ifs" of not hiring
me, I want them to see the value I put on the table.

For me, personally, I always try to do my best work, no matter how much I am
being paid (my latest contract job was $15/hour and was definitely way below
my pay grade, but I put my best foot forward regardless).

Since I know that many other people will only perform to the rate at which
they think they should perform at that pay level, that puts me at an
advantage. I can negotiate a higher salary and prove that I will always over-
deliver, thereby proving my worth.

I get a nicer salary, they get an exceptional employee, win-win.

Of course, if I end up not performing up to the price I put on myself, then
the company is not getting what they are paying for, and I'll probably find my
name on the list of lay-offs when it comes to that. Rightfully so, too.

------
vladimirralev
Quite a lot similar posts recently. The more these points are repeated over
and over again, the less relevant they are. That same advice you can find in
articles from 50 years ago. As more people are pretending to be excited about
the job no matter what and not motivated by money just to appear more
attractive it lowers the performance scores everywhere and it just doesn't
work anymore.

The most productive negotiations should be straight talk about the numbers and
terms. You shouldn't just hope the other party is stupid and will agree to
less than fair terms. When somebody brings up a number ask or explain where it
comes from and how does it compare to other numbers. Ask if their offer is
fair, something that they would take in your shoes, so that if they say yes
and later on it turns out that was not the case, you can raise the issue with
a good reason. If the other party starts to get forgetful, dodge questions or
lie - fine, you can treat them as a hostile party, but it makes no sense to
start off with deception and advantage play against your team. Especially in
startups. Big companies have moved on from this more or less anyway.

------
YZF
Generally speaking there are two kinds of negotiation situations.

One is a one-time negotiation, for example, buying a new or used car. All you
care about is getting the best price. You don't really care if you're eating
into the dealer's margins.

Second is a negotiation that is part of a long term relationship. Here you
want to exit the negotiation with both sides feeling good about it. You don't
want to jeopardize the relationship for the negotiation. You don't want to
screw the other side over.

A job offer should be a type II situation. If any of the parties approaches it
like a type I then they probably shouldn't be working together. The employee
should get an idea of what they'll be happy with and the company should pay
the employee what they'll be happy with. If the employee is approaching this
with the idea of taking advantage of the company then it basically turns into
a type I situation and the company should walk away. If a company is
approaching the future employee as a type I negotiation the employee should
walk away.

I was really excited in a previous job where I figured out what I thought I
was worth based on my current comp and some research and when I asked for that
I got an offer that was somewhat higher. That told me the company cared about
making me happy more than they cared about the (negligible) extra $$$'s. That
was all the negotiation. Both sides were happy and I was very enthusiastic on
my first day. Now in a type I negotiation I would have been able to squeeze
them for more money but this is not a type I negotiation.

Another situation where a fairly successful small web company offered me less
than I was making at the time. When I tried to get some concessions in other
areas like extra vacation time or more time working from home I was flat out
refused. Their CTO interviewed and liked me, the team liked me, they got the
CFO to tell me how they couldn't afford to pay more. They were really
surprised when I declined their offer. From my perspective they were treating
me as if they were trying to buy my car and that told me that's the way they
would keep treating me if I came to work for them.

The way I see it if you've done everything right up to this point and if both
sides are interested the offer is pretty much a mere formality. Not a starting
point for bazar style bargaining.

~~~
coliveira
> If the employee is approaching this with the idea of taking advantage of the
> company

You should be aware that this is not possible... A company will never hire you
for a salary it cannot pay, because they know very well their numbers. On the
other hand, it is very easy for workers to be screwed because they don't know
how much the company is willing to pay for that position. The only way to get
to know how much the company can offer is to ask for a salary that is way
higher than the first offer.

------
stygiansonic
To add to point #3, (information is power), I would advise any candidate to do
research into approx. salary ranges for the type of positions they've applied
to and the geographical area in which they are located.

The author does lament the general trend of "pay secrecy" in part 2 [2] of his
previous article on how he landed a job at Airbnb[1] but it's worthwhile to
point out here. Almost any offer/salary does not exist in a vacuum but within
the context of the current salary ranges (i.e. the market) for similar
positions and also different positions.

Look at it this way: If I tell you that apples are 2 Simoleons (§) per lb, is
that a good price? There's hardly any way to know, given that I quoted it in a
fictional currency.

But if you know that oranges are 10§/lb, bananas are 5§/lb and that you can
get a job at the grocery store selling them making 20§/hour, that gives some
context to not only the prices of apples, but also the relative value of
different produce and the ability to afford it. This is the essence of a
market economy, which the job economy is an instance of.

Sites like Glassdoor and other efforts to share salary information[3] (even if
they may be subject to reporting bias) are a good way to give you more
information about the relative value of any offer, which will be another tool
in your kit for negotiation. Read as much as you can, as in my experience it
will be well worth your time.

1\. [http://haseebq.com/farewell-app-academy-hello-airbnb-
part-i/](http://haseebq.com/farewell-app-academy-hello-airbnb-part-i/)

2\. [http://haseebq.com/farewell-app-academy-hello-airbnb-part-
ii...](http://haseebq.com/farewell-app-academy-hello-airbnb-part-ii/)

3\. [https://blog.step.com/2016/06/16/more-salaries-twitter-
linke...](https://blog.step.com/2016/06/16/more-salaries-twitter-linkedin/)

~~~
gentleteblor
"information is power" <\-- amen to this. It's also important to gather
another type of information, and that's information about yourself. You've got
to be able to prove (detailed instances, dates even) how you've added value in
the past (which hopefully means you can again). You need leverage for these
negotiations and that involves knowing what you're worth and what the market
thinks you're worth (not always the same).

------
p1itopre
Given my technical background (SWE), I have found only one useful tip for
salary negotiations during a job offer: get atleast two offers and play the
companies against each other. I've found nothing else to be effective.

~~~
branchless
Basically: have a real card to play that they think you might play. Companies
will empathise to the end of the earth with you about anything, however you
have to have that card.

------
pm90
This is a really good article and I would highly recommend it. In case other
HN'ers are wondering, its complimentary to patio11's posts on salary
negotiation. I especially agree with the point made at the end that it really
helps if you try to understand the employer's perspective as well. Remember
that the best outcome should be a win-win situation in which both the company
and the future employee are happy with the outcome.

I really disliked to work in places where the job was very good but the pay
was definitely not the best. The best way to fix this is to negotiate a good
pay at the start: that way you can fully focus on the exciting work.

~~~
tensor
Yes, as in a sale, if both parties walk away happy it was a good sale. I feel
there is way too much "screw the companies" attitude here.

------
imh
I don't know why, but I get really frustrated at the negative sentiment around
and apologetics for negotiation.

>I’m the first to admit that negotiation is stupid. It’s a practice that
inherently benefits those who are good at it, and is an absurd axis on which
to reward people. But it’s a reality of our economic system.

When incentives are opposed (like me wanting good wages, and companies wanting
to pay me at little as possible, all else being equal), negotiation seems like
the _only_ way to decide how to reach an agreement. Of course it inherently
benefits people who are good at it! Those benefits are the things they are
negotiating!

Instead of calling it an absurd axis to use to reach mutually agreeable terms,
why can't we accept that negotiation is how reach those terms?

~~~
HaseebQ
I see where you're coming from, and I think there are things negotiation does
well.

Negotiation allows a company to offer more (or less) than a standard wage when
a candidate genuinely offers more or less value for the same position.
Economically, that seems like a good thing, and I consider that the principal
virtue of negotiation.

But the downside is that negotiation enables candidates who are better at
negotiating to command stronger offers (because they're more charismatic, or
courageous, or just better studied in the practice of negotiating). That's
clearly arbitrary. Negotiating skill is an axis that's mostly orthogonal to
the value a candidate brings to a company. Here the public sector's system of
having fixed, publicly known wages for positions is a good one. Candidates who
are good at negotiating make just as much as candidates who are bad at it.

The question then boils down to how much of the variation in negotiated offers
can be attributed to variation value as opposed to variation in negotiating
skills.

I suspect it's weighted toward the latter. But if you think it's mostly toward
the former, then I think it's sensible to claim that negotiation is mostly a
good thing.

~~~
imh
>The question then boils down to how much of the variation in negotiated
offers can be attributed to variation value as opposed to variation in
negotiating skills.

I think this covers most of it, but it all feels like it's only one side of
the supply-demand equation. All else equal, the value to the company doesn't
change whether you are one of 100 people with your skill set or one of a
gazillion. But the wages certainly will. I think that's totally fair thing,
and we can't get it with your model of just value to the company and
negotiating skill.

------
phamilton
I stalled in comp and title for about 2 years due to an acquisition. While I
was definitely maximizing my compensation, it was a miserable experience.
Perhaps I lack the mental fortitude to not skip in to complacency, but for
those two years there was no difference between an excellent job done and a
mediocre one. After about 12 months of erring on the side of excellent, I just
gave up. I did the minimum required and got paid handsomely for it. I
eventually left and took a pay cut.

It may have been extenuating circumstances but I do wonder if I would have
been happier with less compensation and more room to grow.

That being said, the burden of preventing overcompensation lies on the hiring
manager. The candidate should push for as much as possible and the hiring
manager should make a judgement call about whether the employee will have room
to grow.

~~~
pm90
Taking a cut in salary in lieu of room to grow or anything else should be
decided very very carefully. You must really understand that you actually do
have an opportunity to grow; at the very least, you should know that its risky
and have evaluated the risk as one worth taking.

~~~
phamilton
Very true. In this case, it was actually an increase in salary but a loss of
liquid stock compensation in favor of illiquid stock options.

Overall cashflow, it was a pay cut. Median/Mode outcome, probably still a pay
cut. With extremely high variance, I believe the Mean outcome is probably a
break even.

As far as not having room to grow, I can probably sum that up in a single
word: Yahoo!

------
jrjarrett
There is an implicit assumption in this entire article:

That if you can't come to an agreeable negotiation of salary, you can walk
away from offer N because there will be an offer N+1.

Maybe in The Valley or Manhattan or Austin, but in many other places, there is
no "N+1". You don't have that implicit position of power with Company N that
Company N+1 will give you what you're asking for. Or you don't have time to
find N+1 before N-1 becomes untenable (or non-existent).

And yes, I'm talking about developer jobs.

------
freework
This whole thing seems so overwhelming. I understand negotiation is a skill
that you can learn, but like anything else, it takes a _lot_ of practice to
get really good.

In a way, negotiation is the polar opposite skill as computer programming. As
a programmer, what you do is anything _but_ negotiation. You don't negotiate
with PHP to get you code running the way you want it to. You tell it exactly
what you want it to do, then PHP does exactly that.

~~~
dasil003
You only say that because you're good at programming. I remember folks in the
computer lab trying to negotiate with _god_ for their code to run...

~~~
BWStearns
Depending on the language or tooling I sometimes still do (is undef gt or lt
0?).

------
anotherevan
FYI, This looks like a republish of his original blog post[1] that was
discussed previously[2].

[1] [http://haseebq.com/my-ten-rules-for-negotiating-a-job-
offer/](http://haseebq.com/my-ten-rules-for-negotiating-a-job-offer/)

[2]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12086876](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12086876)

------
lwhalen
Don't suppose anyone could link patio11's posts, could they? I've seen them
referenced twice now, and would love to check them out :-)

~~~
auxym
Probably these

[http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-
negotiation/](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/)

[http://www.kalzumeus.com/2011/10/28/dont-call-yourself-a-
pro...](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2011/10/28/dont-call-yourself-a-programmer/)

------
auxym
I enjoyed reading this post, as well as I did patio11's a few years ago, but I
feel that a lot of the advice applies mostly to highly in-demand workers
(read: software people). At least, so has been my limited experience.

~~~
stale2002
Well obviously it only applies to software people.

That's why it was posted to HACKER news. :P

------
dominotw
This guy is a legend!!

[http://haseebq.com/farewell-app-academy-hello-airbnb-
part-i/](http://haseebq.com/farewell-app-academy-hello-airbnb-part-i/)

------
shawn-butler
"Exploding" job offers used to target people on their 1st or 2nd jobs with
little or no experience in how the hiring process works is borderline
unethical.

~~~
hueving
A job offer is a business deal. The earlier on you learn how to do business,
the better it is for your career.

~~~
shawn-butler
So are used car deals. That's why we have lemon laws.

Getting a good deal by fraud harms everyone involved.

------
ashitlerferad
A couple of interesting talks (and article about one of them) about open
source and employment contracts:

[https://lwn.net/Articles/688451/](https://lwn.net/Articles/688451/)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-m2ozX9zO0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-m2ozX9zO0)
[http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-
meetings/2016/...](http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-
meetings/2016/debconf16/Free_Software_Companies_and_You.webm)

------
mhotchen
> A job is just a deal. It is a deal between you and a company to exchange
> labor for money (and other things you value).

This came naturally when I became a contractor. Rather than having a salary
based on market rates, I was offering the services of my own company that has
N value in a B2B deal. It does sound like an abstract point, but it completely
changed the conversation at the table.

------
wruza
This ruleset leads him to special sort of companies that "hunt stars at any
cost". If you're so precious AND have speech skill, maybe that's for you. But
maybe get less-tech, speech-oriented job then?

Most employees are just workers, not stars, and at least among my management
environment there is a simple rule: skip negotiators. If he can't tell what he
wants, we do not call again. If he said X, we do not negotiate _that_.
Negotiation is about skill and whether he will work here or not, which
position and/or responsibilities he will take. Not about salary. It is stupid
to constraint employee's living and needs, no matter if these are first- or
second-class needs. It is also stupid to not know how much you need.

~~~
GabrielF00
I'm really curious what sort of company you work for (industry,
small/medium/large, and country).

------
sb8244
Enjoyed this read. The part that really stuck out to me was the exploding
offers section.

IBM performed interviews at my college weeks (or more) before anyone else was
even hiring. After doing the interview process and getting an offer, they
wanted an answer within 2 days. Obviously I told them that this wasn't going
to work, and they basically said it was too bad. A few months later, I got a
call asking if I was still available (wasn't at this point). Be prepared to
walk away in a negative situation like that, it says a lot about the company.

~~~
fuzzywalrus
Agreed, exploding job offers is a great term for this.

------
Mendenhall
Well reasoned post that I agree with many points. I had said in a previous
thread and would add here, never forget you are the one in control and never
be desperate.

------
mobiuscog
So when you're doing an initial phone interview and they say

"So what is your current salary, and what are you looking for ?"

What are you supposed to say ? Just stay quiet ? Mutter something about not
being able to tell them ?

I'm all for negotiation, but it seems that every situation I find myself in,
doesn't really lend itself to the described pattern.

~~~
Tomrn
My line is always "salary is something I'd discuss in a face-to-face
interview".

If they push just apologise and say you're not comfortable discussing your
salary over the phone.

~~~
mobiuscog
Thanks. That seems a fairly reasonable way of addressing it.

------
zerooneinfinity
Am I missing out if I don't try and negotiate higher salaries or raises? I
usually feel like what I'm being offered is fair but then again I wonder if
I'm being cheated out of money. Like they are offering something low expecting
me to request something higher.

~~~
pm90
You should really read patio11's article on it, but the short of it is that,
yes, you should always ask for more. The simple reason being that they won't
rescind your offer but might give you more, since they planned a salary range
for that position.

~~~
dtemp
Especially if you ask for a _little_ more. I had friend once who asked for _a
lot_ more and they rescinded the offer; because they (probably rightly)
figured the two wouldn't have a long relationship together if it's starting
like this.

------
kelukelugames
The intro to this article is great. One of the reasons to avoid negotiating is
because it's scary. All of us are smart people and can read tips on the
Internet but it's hard to follow them it. Having someone in your social circle
guide and coach you helps.

------
Taylor_OD
I'm a big fan of Haseeb's writing. Looking forward to part two.

------
staticelf
Great tips and tricks because I suck at negotiating (trying to change that)
and am currently looking for a new job which I have to get pretty hasty (since
I'm moving for other reasons).

------
impossiblegame
Rule #11: Disregard rules 1 through 10 if you're a woman, because negotiating
your job offer will hurt your career trajectory. Even HBR agrees:
[https://hbr.org/2016/04/women-who-dont-negotiate-their-
salar...](https://hbr.org/2016/04/women-who-dont-negotiate-their-salaries-
might-have-a-good-reason)

~~~
staticelf
Except what you are saying it total BS and you didn't even bother to read
either the article you linked to NOR the study. A comment such as yours
doesn't really belong.

That is given that that study is the exact fact, but it is indeed mostly a
study based on polls which I would say is not exactly hard evidence.

------
onkarshedge
Thanks for sharing. How to negotiate a salary hike during appraisal ?

~~~
chrisbennet
Companies usually have some sort of "rules" that make getting meaningful
raises (more than say 3%) "impossible" to keep employees from negotiating
meaningful raises. I'm done with that phase of my career but when I worked as
an employee, I found it was just easier to move on to another company when my
salary fell too far behind my market value.

