Salary Negotiation • Hacker News Board

Re: Salary Negotiation

#191

Post by JoblessWonder » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 6:51 PM UTC

Mendenhall wrote: post #187

JoblessWonder wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is exactly what I'm saying. They are in a position of weakness. Their BATNA is losing everything they have. You don't need to be desperate, but you can't be as cut-throat.

You have valid points that I think are very much worth considering and should be. I appreciate good convo in threads like this so didn't want to come across as trying to be petty or battling your perspective. Also yes I understood your point :)

Same here. I totally agree with the fact that you should always be negotiating and don't sell yourself short by thinking you don't deserve what you are worth.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#192

Post by GrinningFool » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 6:54 PM UTC

brianwawok wrote: post #12

swombat wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is worth any intrinsic amount. The amount is relative to the work they do, the industry they're in, the state of the economy, how many other people can do that job, how many have actually applied, etc. Any salary formula is entirely arbitrary. We have a pay scale simply because it is a useful tool for conversation, not because it represents any sort of intrinsic property of the person being placed on the pay s…

> Importantly, we have no interest in trying to sucker someone into working with us if money is their primary motivation. Are you a charity doing good work with orphans? Or are you a business trying to make as much money for the investors as possible? If the latter is true, why wouldn't someone work for you with "money as the primary motivator" ? (This is not Rhetorical, I actually know nothing about your business. B…

> Are you a charity doing good work with orphans? Or are you

> a business trying to make as much money for the investors

> as possible? If the latter is true, why

> wouldn't someone work for you with "money as the primary motivator" ?

It is possible to offer a fair return on investment without having to take every possible step (ethical or otherwise) to maximize profitability.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#193

Post by 15155 » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 6:56 PM UTC

apocalyptic0n3 wrote: post #190

cortesoft wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the offer comes in way too low, you can choose at that point to give your current salary. If you gave the current salary in beginning, you can't take back that bit of information.

The last interview process I went through was three weeks and four separate meetings (1 long email, 1 online test, 1 phone interview, and 1 in-person interview). All in all, it was about 9 hours of dealing with them, plus a 2 hour round trip to their office and having to take a half day at my current job. They never asked about salary expectations and I never gave any (a mistake on my part, I believe) and when they f…

> I feel that I could have saved myself the majority of those 9 hours if I had told them my salary expectations from the beginning

Or you could've asked their range upfront, and then you could be the one disqualifying and doing the balking. This information is freely given to third-party recruiting agencies (if they use them) as well.

For me, this serves more purposes than knowing what I'll get paid. I need to know that my coworkers are well-compensated: it's a huge indicator of the quality of team you'll be working with.

Sure, it's possible that the entire team is grossly overpaid, though it's not likely. You'll find out their competency in the interview loop.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#194

Post by carc » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 6:58 PM UTC

designtofly wrote: post #181

whack wrote: post #139

I've heard this "don't name a number first" advice so many times, but personally, it never seems to work. My current comp is significantly higher compared to others with my level of experience. So when I refuse to give a number, the recruiter ends up guessing a number that is significantly lower, and making a lowball offer. I've also had many other experiences where after many hours of interviews, I find out that the…

I agree with you. I see this advice constantly parroted about, but I just cringe at the amount of work these people go through to avoid naming a number. If you want to deflect the first time the question is asked, fine. But if you have to deflect more than once, you won't come off like a professional. A professional knows their value. If you follow all of the rest of the advice, like doing your research, you'll know…

A person with some fixed 'value' X can be worth much higher to one company than some other company. In fact that is extremely common. Value is relative here so I completely disagree with your "a professional knows their value" sentiment.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#195

Post by xviia » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 7:03 PM UTC

pyoung wrote: post #148

xviia wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In these cases, though, we're relying on the employer to institute those salaries. However, the employer usually does not have an incentive to pay more if they can get the same thing for cheaper.

The employer isn't magically immune to market forces simply because they move to a transparent salary system. If they are significantly under-paying their employees, and they are not making up the difference via other benefits (shorter working hours, bonuses, etc...) then they are going to run into a lot of trouble hiring and holding onto employees. And just because a company has defined salary ranges doesn't mean em…

Except when they overcome those market forces through collusion. See: wage lawsuit against Apple, Google, and other tech Titans

Re: Salary Negotiation

#196

Post by georgemcbay » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 7:03 PM UTC

cortesoft wrote: post #188

mehrdada wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to multiply that with the probability of the companies not beating your current salary. The higher your current salary, this probability will go higher, and your interview cost will too. In effect, interviewing not being worth your time is proportional to your salary squared--not a linear relation.

Yeah, but once you get established enough (which you probably are if your salary is really high), then 95% of interviewing is you looking at the work they are doing and deciding if you want to do it, and salary negotiation. When you are good, the filtering on your part should come way before interviewing.

"Yeah, but once you get established enough (which you probably are if your salary is really high), then 95% of interviewing is you looking at the work they are doing and deciding if you want to do it, and salary negotiation. "

Ideally, but not always practically, especially as a software developer.

A large complicating factor of the whole "when to start talking about required salary numbers" is the fact that in computer software development no matter how established you are you are still often expected to do some ridiculous multi-day dance of interviewing to separately prove to n number of people that you can actually string code together (even if there's already ample evidence to prove you can, such as successfully shipped applications at prior jobs, repos full of open source code written, etc).

Interviewing for software jobs is (still) just incredibly broken in ways that make waiting to talk about salary until a later time a very dangerous game.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#197

Post by designtofly » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 7:05 PM UTC

carc wrote: post #194

designtofly wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you. I see this advice constantly parroted about, but I just cringe at the amount of work these people go through to avoid naming a number. If you want to deflect the first time the question is asked, fine. But if you have to deflect more than once, you won't come off like a professional. A professional knows their value. If you follow all of the rest of the advice, like doing your research, you'll know…

A person with some fixed 'value' X can be worth much higher to one company than some other company. In fact that is extremely common. Value is relative here so I completely disagree with your "a professional knows their value" sentiment.

I don't understand your argument. I never said any value is fixed. Of course a person's value changes from role to role and from company to company. Part of doing your research is understanding the pain points for the company and the value you bring by fixing those pain points.

If you disagree with "a professional knows their value," what are you arguing? That "a professional doesn't know their value?"

Re: Salary Negotiation

#198

Post by 15155 » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 7:06 PM UTC

mehrdada wrote: post #159

zenlikethat wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As another poster noted, the best way to resolve this is to ask the recruiter up front what the salary range at play is. If they still won't disclose, you have to make a calculated risk based on how much you like the org and how much they seem likely to offer.

Yes, and many savvy recruiters would make you make the calculated risk anyway. Note that at that stage, the recruiters are highly incentivized to say or allude to "we can beat everyone/are competitive" without saying a number and make you interview with the company at the beginning of the process (with various excuses, including not having the authority to talk about actual numbers and that decision being prorogued t…

> many savvy recruiters

Again we must discern between "internal recruiters" and recruiting agencies.

Reputable third-party recruiting agencies will not play this game:

  - They know their clients.

  - They know how prior placements have been compensated.

  - They only get paid if you get placed.

  - They have 10 other companies they might be able place you at with higher likelihood.

"Internal recruiters" should be seen as any other adversarial negotiator: hopefully in a weaker position.

"I've got 3 other offers on the table right now, my time is extremely limited. I am sure you can understand: I cannot afford to waste time on unsuitable roles. What is the top-end of your range for this position?"

And really, you need to know what you are worth, or this number is meaningless. Once they've dropped the top-end of the range, you can give an ultimatum: "Match and exceed companies A, B, C." or "I would be willing to take a risk and go down this interview track, but understand from the onset: your top-end is at least $xx,xxx lower than I would consider. Furthermore, I do not wish to be the most well-compensated employee on my team, which might detract from my desire to proceed."

Re: Salary Negotiation

#199

Post by 15155 » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 7:13 PM UTC

mehrdada wrote: post #179

zenlikethat wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution to this is easy: don't bother with that uncooperative recruiter. Remember, we're talking about trying to jump from one high paying job to a higher paying job here, so why bother with uncooperative recruiters? They need you much worse than you need them.

I agree. Following that recipe, you decide on ending the phone call with a nice, but uncooperative about blurting out a number recruiter who claims they can be competitive. Now the question is this: if you are willing to blow off the whole process anyway on that call, why not at least try giving them a number and give them a chance and see if they would beat it?

> why not at least try giving them a number and give them a chance and see if they would beat it?

If it's obvious that the recruiter is uncooperative or that the role isn't prestigious/top-tier, this is exactly what one should do.

The reaction to blowout numbers may just surprise you, and perhaps not for the better..

In my life I've been more upset by a lack of resistance in negotiations (of any kind) than immediate supplication, because it invariably means: "I could've done better, my appraisal was wrong"

Re: Salary Negotiation

#200

Post by theli0nheart » Fri, Jun 03, 2016, 7:14 PM UTC

whack wrote: post #139

I've heard this "don't name a number first" advice so many times, but personally, it never seems to work. My current comp is significantly higher compared to others with my level of experience. So when I refuse to give a number, the recruiter ends up guessing a number that is significantly lower, and making a lowball offer. I've also had many other experiences where after many hours of interviews, I find out that the…

I tend to agree with you as well. I think in a market where a given role is undervalued, you might get a better salary by "fishing" a little bit and letting the company guess. But software engineering is a highly valued profession and employers aren't likely to shortchange a good engineer. IMO playing these games can just seem unprofessional.

You're best off naming a range, with a stretch goal, and giving a little bit of context to the person asking. E.g., "I'm looking for $150-180k, but I'm interviewing with a few other companies, so anything in addition to that would really put this role at the top of my list. I'd really love to work for you, so I hope we can find something that works for the both of us."

Notice how there's an implied "+ $X" in there. That X-factor can make all the difference and with this approach you don't come off looking like someone who's just playing games.