Demystifying Salary Information 184
Arun Jacob points us to an article in the NYTimes about online tools that can help in salary negotiations. The article concentrates on two websites — Salary.com and Payscale.com — that use different approaches to provide information on standard compensation packages for particular positions and roles. The theory is that, armed with information that was once available only to corporate HR departments, you could have an easier time negotiating your pay using a fact-based rather than a feelings-based approach.
Re:my two cents (Score:3, Interesting)
(And this is for work for a major staffing company).
Anyone else think those numbers are high? (Score:3, Interesting)
They'll just fire you (Score:4, Interesting)
I have found companies would rather hire someone who is utterly incompetent but willing to do the job for pennies and doesn't complain when they get bait switched to shitty health insurance. The types of people who have these lay down and take it attitudes are naturally people who are just morons and really don't know what they are doing. My theory is they are quiet and don't stir the pot too often because they are in constant fear of getting found out. The company doesn't care that half the work is getting done because that is harder for HR to measure than a raw starting price and capability is highly subjective. If I complain about a recent HR drone hire, the finger will often get pointed at me, with such remarks as "Don't be so hard on him..." "Have you ever considered it might be you or your department??" "What are you doing to correct the situation?". I'm sorry, I am not here to teach someone 4 years of CS that they should already know. To make it worse, the HR people saying this have no idea about anything technical, they don't understand anything that we do so going to them with a valid logical argument of why the guy they just hired is a dumbass falls on deaf ears. Try to bring any of this up to higher level management and all they can see are the good numbers from HR and how much money they are saving. Meanwhile, my shit is suffering, more work is put on me, and no one understands or let alone cares.
If you think many companies are not run this way, think again. You can usually tell a company like this from job postings. Our HR department shops for people like you would shop for a vacuum cleaner at Walmart -- they try to get the most for less. They look for whizbang things on resumes for stuff we would never need experience in or stuff that isn't relevant to what we are doing. I don't really care if someone has a masters if all they have been doing with it is designing VB forms. I really don't understand who came up with the concept for an HR department anyway, because it sucks. I would rather all hiring decisions go through the person that actually manages a team and produces a product, not some "HR Technical Specialist", which is really some moron with an HR degree who has worked for a tech company before.
So before you go up to your boss with salary figures in hand you should understand that a lot of times we don't have the capability to change anything. In the large corporations I've worked for, the manager never controls the salary and HR would always rather you quit or be miserable than risk having everyone pull those same figures and come to them, taking their precious monthly how-much-can-you-save bonus away. Many HR departments are running on the principal of separation of markets, where you don't know how much the market pays. If I was an HR manager I'd be scared shirtless of someone who quotes salary figures and can suddenly make my only bargaining point go away, I'd rather hire the no nothing guy that passes all the rudimentary hoops that will sit down and shut up and make me look good.
Ways to avoid having to mention a number, politely (Score:5, Interesting)
* I am sure we can come to something mutually satisfactory. What would you suggest?
* I will entertain any offer commesurate with my skills and experience. (I don't like this one -- concentrate on them, not you.)
Ways to counteroffer:
* That figure could be workable with a few minor modifications to the contract. Lets table it for a moment and discuss...
* I have a comparable offer in hand from another firm but would much rather work for $YOU. Does $YOU have any money in the budget to increase that offer so we can make this happen? (Note the phrasing: HR Man has an ego just like you do, and doesn't want to say "Oh no, we're poor" to justify paying you less. He works for a big, strong company for which an extra $X,000 is a drop in the bucket! Hah, take that, applicant who doubted our financial health!)
* I could quite possibly be pleased with that number, depending on the other specifics of the offer. Where does this fit into the big picture?
* I notice you have offered me a $PERK. That is not that important to me. Could we perhaps eliminate $PERK in favor of increasing my base compensation?
* I notice that you have not offered me $PERK. I am rather more interested in it than I am in my base compensation number. What level of $PERK do you think would be appropriate? (listen) That is almost what I had in mind, but keeping in mind that I am accepting a lower base compensation in return for $PERK, perhaps we could do a little better. I know $PERK is cheaper for you than increasing my base compensation because $PERK doesn't cause my total cost of employment, for example taxes, future raises, and overhead, to increase linearly like base compensation does (listen). Sounds great.
These assume that the initial offer was roughly in line with your expectations. I once got offered $30,000 and poor benefits when I was expecting a package in the neighborhood of $55,000. That calls for a firm handshake and a "Thank you for your time, we'll be in touch."
Re:my two cents (Score:5, Interesting)
I've heard this a lot, and I'm genuinely curious: has anyone ever actually done a study to figure out how going first affects negotiations and haggling? It shouldn't be too hard, at a minimum, to set up a small experiment in which person A has something that's worth about $5, person B actually has $5, tell them to trade, and then observe how going first or second affects the average result.
You can't always trust folk wisdom, and such an experiment, or carefully conducting a survey, seems so straightforward that I find it hard to believe no one's done it before.
Re:They'll just fire you (Score:1, Interesting)
Never again will I work for a company with over 200 employees, unless I'm consulting. At least then I should be compensated for it.
Re:Easy formula (Score:3, Interesting)
Less of a raise doesn't mean a 'no' but it decreases the odds, along with a load of other factors like prospects, travel times, and that kind of thing.
If you don't ask, you don't get :)
Re:"Web Developer" (Score:3, Interesting)
So we're talking about roughly 20% of managers here, right?
I've seen a lot in my industry (software development) which seems to contradict your "enlighted manager" theory:
The truth is, salary negotiations are business decisions. Salaries are not raised because managers are highly sensitive, enlightened, moral beings which based their decisions on concepts such as "fairness" - they are raised because an employee who brings more value to the company than what he/she is being payed is unhappy about his/her compensation and will probably leave if that isn't addressed.
From the point of view of any manager (sensible or not), the ideal employee is the one that gets payed a low salary and is happy with working there.
Employers that don't know they're being payed shit compared to the rest of the industry will stay content and not ask for a salary raise.
Employers that do know they're being payed shit compared to the rest of the industry will become unhappy at the unfainess of their situation and demand a salary raise.
Naturally, from the point of view of the bottom line (keeping costs down and margins up) it's beter for a manager that employees don't know the real value that the industry is willing to pay for their work - this is why this kind of site is bad for any manager: it impacts their bottom line.
Re:I care a lot (Score:3, Interesting)
Advertising, maybe - but I got the information I wanted, for free. If I had wanted a big pack about how to raise my salary, how to argue about it, etc etc etc, I had the option to pay for it, but it definitely wasn't compulsory.
Information Hoarding. (Score:3, Interesting)
Let's imagine what would happen if everyone's salary information suddenly appeared on their office door or cubicle wall. The uprising that would follow would be interesting and justified. The company doesn't want you to know that you're paid less than the other guy, who's slack you've been picking up for the last two years. The company figures it's a wash anyway: they probably don't like overpaying for mediocre performance either, but they have you so it averages out *to them*.
Suddenly informed, you now have the advantage of knowing that you're underpaid just within the company, apples to apples, by 25%. The company can no longer average it out: it has to cut the loser's pay or bump yours, if it chooses to continue averaging it out.
If the loser doesn't like the pay cut, separation makes it easier to average it out. And the playing field is truly level.
-BA
Re:my two cents (Score:2, Interesting)
-M
Re:my two cents (Score:2, Interesting)
"How much were/are you making at your last/current job?"
Mentioning numbers (Score:3, Interesting)
You're mostly correct. Normally, an applicant should never specify a salary or salary range during the interview process (above all, do not do it during a preliminary "phone screen"). Your objective should be to obtain an offer, and then negotiate salary. The reason for this is that before you have a firm offer, salary demands can only hurt you--the interview process exists to weed people out, and a high number can kill your chances at this point, while a low number will not help you. (Nobody wants to hire a cheap idiot...well, almost nobody.) Turn aside questions about salary by saying things like, "I really think this is the perfect job for me, and you are the kind of employer I've always wanted to work for. Salary is only a small part of the picture--many other factors will enter into making a decision to accept a potential offer from you". Yadda yadda yadda.
The picture changes completely when the prospective employer makes you an offer. The employer is now committed--you have successfully sold yourself as a desirable employee: they want you, and you know it. You will never be in a stronger position to negotiate than you are in those magic 5 minutes just after you obtain an offer, but have not yet accepted it. Unless the offer is obviously a generous one, ask for whatever you want--go a bit high to give yourself some negotiating room. I have never had an employer withdraw an offer at this point, but you should avoid being unreasonable or appearing greedy. Thank them for their offer, act flattered that they want you, and give some reasons for why you need and deserve more money than they proposed.
The problem I have run into lately is that I'm at a point in my career (or careen) where my salary has gone much higher than the average for people who do what I do. Several times, I have gotten to the offer stage, and found that what the employer wanted to pay was completely out of the ballpark. Going through a job search and interview process is time consuming and exhausting; I really hate to waste my time by pursuing a job that I'm not going to be able to accept, but the few times I've broken the "no numbers" rule have had exactly the effect one would expect--an abrupt cessation of interest on the part of the employer. I would really like to find an answer to this dilemma...anybody out there thought of a good one?