521–530 of 544 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
$500K / year at year four is something entirely different than $500K / year. And that's what the OP said they were making.
How often do people get one large grant upfront, vs yearly refreshers? I was under the impression the latter is the norm.
1. There's nothing to brag about. If you pay well and you seek talent in a market where most of the time it's the workers that are in position of power you want the people to know that you're paying well. FAANG wouldn't be half as famous if the pay was mediocre.
2. There's lots of people being chronically underpaid and revealing salary ranges would cause them to revolt. Even if I'd get hired and receive a competitive wage it still highlights an issue with keeping the wage up to the market standards, which makes the job a temporary gig at best and I'd have to start applying to other companies soon enough, so why bother in the first place?
3. The company doesn't actually want an employee and is just probing the market.
4. The company doesn't have an actual number in mind (or actual hiring budget) and their offer is not going to be serious.
5. Whoever is in charge believes in some fairy tales about pay not being important or people working for passion and assumes I am equally as dumb and naive.
All in all I most likely won't consider the company if the information about pay is absent. There's nothing to gain by wasting time with the whole process only to find out the pay is mediocre and I really don't expect to be surprised by an above-average offer.
Listing salary ranges is bad for employees because it limits upside from negotiation. Like everything it's just a trade-off between capping your downside and limiting your upside.
I applied for a regular SE role and when I stated my expectations the recruiter said that this is over 10% more than the maximum. I stated that if I go any lower than that I will have no reason to switch companies. He offered some sort of a signing bonus (which was rather small) and the promise of quickly getting into a more senior role, which would put me in a higher pay range. I didn't budge.
They came back 3 days later and actually offered me the senior role, the pay I wanted and a signing bonus that was 4x what previously offered and I accepted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s OK if you’re a junior engineer with less than ten years experience but I would feel insulted if you question my credibility.
I’ve interviewed more than a few 10+ years of claimed experience engineers who couldn’t write a function to sum a list/array of integers. There are incompetent charlatans that you’re competing against and if you’re not willing to engage to demonstrate that you’re not, some will (not entirely unreasonably) assume that you might be one.
That's when I realized what should have been obvious: the less rigorous the interview, the less effective it is at keeping out unqualified folks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So really your PTO is subject to the discretion of your manager. Unlimited sounds good, but in practice, I think it is better to have ownership of your time off. I remember like 20 years ago having unlimited sick time, which in reality just meant your manager was rated on how much sick time their team burned through.
I'm a manager at a place that has "unlimited PTO"- and I've never rejected anyone's request for time off, and the only reason I do keep track of it is to encourage people to take time off. I need my developers to be at the top of their game, and that requires them to take a mental break so they don't get burned out. That said, I need to take more PTO so I don't burn out...
More anecdotal evidence: a few years back I wanted to get out of the work situation I was in. I looked around, had some interviews, had some offers. None of the postings had salary ranges, as is common where I live. My eyes, however, were set on a specific small company because I liked their product. The process was long and involved multiple meetings, a take-home problem, and stretched over 2 or so months. I was upf…
Any company with a competitive salary is willing to talk money anyway. If they don't, they don't have the budget
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So really your PTO is subject to the discretion of your manager. Unlimited sounds good, but in practice, I think it is better to have ownership of your time off. I remember like 20 years ago having unlimited sick time, which in reality just meant your manager was rated on how much sick time their team burned through.
I'm a manager at a place that has "unlimited PTO"- and I've never rejected anyone's request for time off, and the only reason I do keep track of it is to encourage people to take time off. I need my developers to be at the top of their game, and that requires them to take a mental break so they don't get burned out. That said, I need to take more PTO so I don't burn out...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
$500K / year at year four is something entirely different than $500K / year. And that's what the OP said they were making.
How often do people get one large grant upfront, vs yearly refreshers? I was under the impression the latter is the norm.
as always, the only reliable way to know what salary to expect is to be upfront about it as early in the interviewing process as possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't ask. Tell. "Hey just to ensure that we are on the same page, I am ideally looking for a minimum of $xyz/year. Is that in the range for this role ?". Then pause and wait for their response.
That's one quick way to get exactly a salary of $xyz, and with the word "ideally" in there you're admitting you'd go slightly lower.