Salary Negotiation • Hacker News Board

Re: Salary Negotiation

#361

Post by cloudjacker » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 4:05 AM UTC

15155 wrote: post #193

apocalyptic0n3 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

> Or you could've asked their range upfront

LOLOL You'll get

"we pay market rate"

which is a ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR WIDE gulf of market inefficiency

Re: Salary Negotiation

#362

Post by bonobo3000 » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 4:18 AM UTC

JoshDoody wrote: post #3

Hi everyone! That's me you hear talking to Patrick ;) If you have any questions about the episode or salary negotiation in general, ask away! As you can probably tell, I love talking about this stuff!

Hey Josh, i have one question - how do the rules about disclosing salary change when you're talking to an external recruiter (from an agency)?

I don't quite understand who's "side" they are on - on one hand, it seems reasonable to tell them the real range i'm looking for upfront so they can narrow the search, on the other hand they might reveal that to the employer..

Re: Salary Negotiation

#363

Post by mehrdada » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 4:36 AM UTC

cheriot wrote: post #352

jkempe11 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, recruiters are in the unique position of getting to talk to tens (or sometimes hundreds) of candidates a week for any given position, and asking them all a bit about salary usually yields a workable model for the market for any given role. Some recruiters also have access to data from VCs or from other salary reports (there are a number of good institutions that run compensation surveys - access to these usuall…

Especially helpfull for engineers, the salaries and titles of H1B visa holders is public

This is actually a dangerous source to draw conclusions from. Even ignoring the qualitative bias of H1-B workers having less leverage than an average worker with easy mobility which likely causes relative wage depression in that data set, the key issue is that a significant chunk of a high salary software engineer is in equity and it rarely shows up in the labor certificate application. So H1-B data is mostly base salary and can be misleading to use when drawing a conclusion on total comp. Extra care need to be taken.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#364

Post by mathgenius » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 4:58 AM UTC

My fantasy negotiation scenario:

ME: "Ok so you are willing to pay me 200k to work 8-9 hours a day, how about paying me 100k to work 4-5 hours a day?"

THEM: "sounds awesome"

Re: Salary Negotiation

#365

Post by jeremysalwen » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 6:13 AM UTC

mathgenius wrote: post #364

My fantasy negotiation scenario: ME: "Ok so you are willing to pay me 200k to work 8-9 hours a day, how about paying me 100k to work 4-5 hours a day?" THEM: "sounds awesome"

What would be a realistic path to negotiating part time when full time work is expected?

Re: Salary Negotiation

#366

Post by kelnos » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 6:22 AM UTC

designtofly wrote: post #197

carc wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?"

I actually would suggest that, in many (most?) situations, someone may not know their value, and that's not a negative reflection on their professionalism. You can do all the research you want, but there are many situations where you can't discover enough of the company's pain points or match your skill set(s) to their needs to figure out what you are worth to them.

And even if you can do all that, there's no reason why the dollar value you put on your worth to them has to be similar to the dollar value they have in mind. You could argue, in that situation, that you may not want to work for a company that doesn't value you "properly", but I hesitate to believe that there's always (or even often) an objective version of "properly" that disinterested observers could agree on.

Having said all that, I am still not sure I buy into the idea that the best negotiation tactic is to evade (even "professionally") providing a number.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#367

Post by kelnos » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 6:27 AM UTC

eweise wrote: post #258

Tactic wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my mind not naming your number first is advise given only if you are trying to maximize the negotiation. And even then it is quite debatable. I view it instead that I am offering a service. I am well aware of what my service is worth, what my financial needs are and what amount would make me feel satisfied with what I am being paid. So I tell them that number. I also tell them that the number is only negotiable in…

I think it depends on what type of person the company is looking for. If they are looking for a leader then they will respect you more if you bargain hard and maximize your worth. If they're looking for an agreeable doormat, then they will like you more for compromising on your worth. I've found that management likes rank and file engineers to be doormats, easily compromising and agreeable. Imagine if they have to wo…

I just don't see the correlation, though. Your aptitude for being an engineering/technical leader need not be at all tied to your skill at negotiation. Those two things are very different skills. A place like HN should know that very well, as we often talk about the difference between soft skills and technical skills.

Personally I'm not a hard negotiator (though I'm willing to walk away if my -- generally not super aggressive -- number isn't met), but I tend to move myself into technical leadership positions fairly quickly when joining a new org.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#368

Post by bayonetz » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 6:33 AM UTC

gk1 wrote: post #33

vox_mollis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I'm quite aware of this fact. But he's a socially competent developer, and my point still stands about those of us who are not.

"No true scotsman." Would you prefer advice from a socially in competent developer? If I'm at point A and want to reach point B, I'd value advice from someone who went A->B (and now comfortably sitting at B) more than from someone who is still stuck in A with me.

Assuming he went from socially incompetent to socially competent. Patio11 seems very much like he is more naturally gifted than the [stereo]typical developer in this respect.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#369

Post by aubreykilian » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 6:44 AM UTC

jkempe11 wrote: post #217

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 am a recruiter and I will tell you this: you should abandon this advice, for certain. It's funny - probably the best advice anyone ever gives on negotiation is exactly the opposite of "don't name a number first." It's "anchor high." You should be anchoring to a number that is high but realistic, and negotiating from a position of strength. This is especially true for senior- and late-career individuals who have som…

Agreed. I recently switched jobs after an 8 year stint at my previous employer, and it took me many months and many recruiters and possible employers, and every single time I started from the position of "Let's not waste anybody's time, my total Cost-to-Company is xyz, benefits include zyx, if you can't beat that, then we have nothing to talk about." Yes, brutally honest, but it also at least doesn't waste anybody's time with useless phone interviews and reference checks and and and.

Re: Salary Negotiation

#370

Post by mathgenius » Sat, Jun 04, 2016, 7:29 AM UTC

jeremysalwen wrote: post #365

mathgenius wrote: post #364

My fantasy negotiation scenario: ME: "Ok so you are willing to pay me 200k to work 8-9 hours a day, how about paying me 100k to work 4-5 hours a day?" THEM: "sounds awesome"

What would be a realistic path to negotiating part time when full time work is expected?

Yeah, I don't know, hence the "fantasy" adjective. But, somewhat realistically, the cream of my day lasts on average about 4 hours (longer when i'm hot, shorter when i'm not). So this really would be a bargain for an employer.