101–110 of 544 posts
I think they should post salary minimums instead of a range - that huge range is just eye candy. Oh, but not enough people will be interested at the minimum? Then your minimum wasn't good enough and isn't actually the minimum.
A range is a minimum, plus more.
I think they should post salary minimums instead of a range - that huge range is just eye candy. Oh, but not enough people will be interested at the minimum? Then your minimum wasn't good enough and isn't actually the minimum.
It's way worse than that. I recently had the displeasure of reading one of the dumbest thread of comments on a linkedin post because the job description did exactly that: mention the minimum salary.
It was a job post for a "seo and social media manager" position which can mean a lot of things, can mean everything and can mean nothing, depending on many factors (eg: company size, number of customers). The (minimum) pay was 20 k€ (south europe).
Everybody was looking at the number, no one had even considered it was the bare minimum and that maybe the original company was looking for some 20-something fresh out of high school, which no particular set of competencies.
Agree in principle. My approach would not be quite that categorical/binary though, for couple of reasons 1. Sometimes salary ranges are wide enough to not be meaningful - i.e. 80-200k 2. When I'm in the hiring manager role these days, there are roles for which I have limited to no flexibility; but also roles for which I have or can fight for flexibility for the right candidate. If I post e.g. (random numbers) 100-120…
It is always meaningful for a labor seller to know the lower bound.
We just went through a large hiring cycle. We posted two versions for every job posting- one with salary ranges and one without. The ads performed equally well in regard to total responses with the better candidates responding to the ones without salary ranges. And... before you say, perhaps your salary ranges were bad, they weren't. Our salary offerings are very aggressive to the developer's benefit. In my opinion,…
This is bad analysis. Employees will already self-select based on pay.
I would bet you real money right now that if you polled employees as they left the company what their future salary is going to be, the majority will be making more.
We just went through a large hiring cycle. We posted two versions for every job posting- one with salary ranges and one without. The ads performed equally well in regard to total responses with the better candidates responding to the ones without salary ranges. And... before you say, perhaps your salary ranges were bad, they weren't. Our salary offerings are very aggressive to the developer's benefit. In my opinion,…
> And... before you say, perhaps your salary ranges were bad, they weren't. Our salary offerings are very aggressive to the developer's benefit. In my opinion, salary is a sign of respect from you employer.
What's your hypothesis for why they performed worse? If I saw a listing for a job I wanted, for which I was qualified and had a salary range within my target, you'd better believe I'd apply for it. The Occam's Razor explanation is that the listed ranges were below more experienced candidates' expectations for the position.
The salary ranges are largely meaningless though? Equity compensation for good tech roles is like half or more. Also, levels.fyi has most salary information you could need.
Equity compensation has meaningful value for a small minority of roles (i.e: at liquid companies) so for the majority of job seekers, salary is the compensation.
This is true. I respond to most recruiters now that I won't even talk to them without a salary range. And then they send it right over.
I personally find that 90% of the responses I get to salary requests are: "I would love to chat to you on the phone about this on the phone with you!" "How dare you ask me that, you should be thankful for me even writing to you with this incredibly vague offer in the first place." I tried responding to ~20 recruiters with a copy-pasted question about salary, and none responded with anything even close to a salary ran…
The salary ranges are largely meaningless though? Equity compensation for good tech roles is like half or more. Also, levels.fyi has most salary information you could need.
Sure it may not be total comp but if I see a range of 120-160k I'm not going to apply when my current base 180k.
The job I have now and am happy with, I would not have applied for if the "official" salary range had been published. What ultimately sold me were intangible things that I only discovered after being in a conversation with them. And it turned out there was enough other flexibility for things to fall into place. The range is often a leaky abstraction anyway. As a hiring manager I've wanted flexibility for the right ca…