Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Talking About Money

kalzumeus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 412 posts

Re: Talking About Money

#111

Post by emodendroket »

marktangotango wrote: post #9

>> Most important takeaway about salary negotiation, by the way: disclosing a previous salary is almost always against your interests because it pegs your new salary to that plus 5% rather than your value to the new firm minus a discount, which is a brutal mistake I had a phone screen with an HR drone once (Cerner Inc. to be exact \waves) part way thru she asked me my current salary. I declined to provide that inform…

As a software engineer in the current market you have the luxury of not dealing with such people, so don't.

Re: Talking About Money

#112

Post by thruflo »

L_Rahman wrote: post #33
saryant wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re 2), you should make sure your salary is at market-level and more or less ignore equity. Chances are you'll be let go or the company will collapse before it's worth anything. If you have a reasonable salary, equity is just a cherry on top, but if an employer tries to get you to trade cash today for a startup lottery ticket, say no. This is especially important early in your career given the time value of money. An…

Excellent point and I will heed your advice. I'm well aware that: a. Startup equity is a lottery b. As an early employee and the accompanying biases, I'm especially ill equipped to judge it's value. With that in mind, I'm negotiating salary first. Equity with a vesting schedule is something I would treat purely as an incentive for continuing to stay with the company and not as a replacement for salary.

This sounds very sensible. I would note though that equity % points are much easier to negotiate early on. If you have an opportunity to secure options at a low valuation now, even with a great big cliff / vesting term, take them in case the company is a success and use the cliff / vesting to persuade the current owners that it's a win win.

Re: Talking About Money

#113

Post by qzcx »

civilian wrote: post #75
marktangotango wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, one might think so, but this was the CEO in question[1]. Edit, and so far as bluffing, could an employer legally ask for W2's to verify? [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/05/business/stinging-office-m...

They can't legally ask for proof, no. Bluff away! (I'm not a lawyer and this does not constitute legal advice.) I did a small bluff to try it out, just 5k above what I was making. The recruiter was surprisingly skeptical! I know I've done an good job of bumping up my salary in a short amount of time, but it was kind of off-putting to have him question it.

Don't let their skepticism thrown you off. It is just another technique to low ball you.

In my own interviews going out of collage, I was told by peers about the offers they were making. I got asked what I was expecting to get by employers and told them around $80K because thats what my peers were getting and I consider myself to be on pretty equal ground with them and most companies scoffed at it. But then I got an offer of $95K and then they had to raise their own offers up to match. Its a ridiculous process to go through.

Re: Talking About Money

#114

Post by 15155 »

dkrich wrote: post #59
calcsam wrote: post #23

"Salaries are not just internally transparent at Japanese megacorps but so predictable that any middle-class adult in central Japan can accurately predict my salary history. I mention this partly to say that salary transparency by itself does not guarantee happy outcomes for employees." Yes. Salaries at Buffer might be transparent but also quite low.

Yeah, I actually prefer a lack of transparency. I fully recognize the right of others to discuss salaries openly and support their ability to do so. However, I think aside from benefiting companies, a lack of transparency around salaries benefits those who are good at negotiating, whereas complete transparency helps those who are not good at negotiating. If for example, you know company X's highest paid software deve…

Correct.

Transparency benefits the company for this exact reason.

There is a non-zero cost (headache, dollars, what have you) in leaving an organization. This means that salaries can be at market rate, drift below, and people still may not see enough value to leave.

Good negotiating means you will always see market rate or above. Transparency means salaries will drift below market rate until someone deems you worthy of a bump.

Buffer salaries are outrageously low: for that reason alone, I would never advise anyone to work there.

Re: Talking About Money

#115

Post by StavrosK »

civilian wrote: post #75
marktangotango wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, one might think so, but this was the CEO in question[1]. Edit, and so far as bluffing, could an employer legally ask for W2's to verify? [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/05/business/stinging-office-m...

They can't legally ask for proof, no. Bluff away! (I'm not a lawyer and this does not constitute legal advice.) I did a small bluff to try it out, just 5k above what I was making. The recruiter was surprisingly skeptical! I know I've done an good job of bumping up my salary in a short amount of time, but it was kind of off-putting to have him question it.

I just say "I'm looking for $X" when asked, then it's not even a bluff.

Re: Talking About Money

#116

Post by acveilleux »

nostrademons wrote: post #66
Nicholas_C wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a similar experience with a recruiter. I asked why and she couldn't come up with a compelling answer, she just said "That's just how it is, we need your salary." She escalated it to her manager and he pulled the same. I eventually complied but not without telling them I didn't ever receive a good reason and it makes zero sense and I couldn't see how it would do anything but hurt me. Funny enough I ended up gett…

It's a pretty strong signal that they want people who won't negotiate and aren't assertive. In some businesses, it's just counterproductive to hire an assertive employee: the business processes are in place, the command structure is well-established, and they just need bodies to fill places in the org chart. If it's one of those companies and you're one of those people, getting hired there will likely be painful for…

That sounds an awful lot like many healthcare IT behemoth. They mostly need bodies to bill them out by the hour keeping seat warms, conference line/room busy and to act as a buffer.

Re: Talking About Money

#117

Post by radicalbyte »

tptacek wrote: post #88
throwaway90000 wrote: post #48

> (Most important takeaway about salary negotiation, by the way: disclosing a previous salary is almost always against your interests because it pegs your new salary to that plus 5% rather than your value to the new firm minus a discount, which is a brutal mistake, particularly in the years of your career where natural growth in capabilities/experience/the market/etc causes you to bring vastly more to the table with…

If you tell HR "I won't tell you what I made last job, but I'll tell you what I want to make", then you're basically following most of Patrick's advice. If you can lie convincingly, lying might be an effective negotiating strategy. Lying convincingly here generally involves you knowing as much about the job market as employers do, though, and that tends not to be the case: employers talk to 10 people for every 1 hire…

In the current market you don't need to lie: just get multiple offers.

Also, you can use recruiters to your advantage. Give them much higher salary demands (i.e. 20-50% higher than your current wage). They'll come back to you if they find someone willing to pay. If they question you, then the reason you're expensive is your specialist skill-set.

Re: Talking About Money

#119

Post by 15155 »

dkrich wrote: post #106
chralieboy wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> However, I think aside from benefiting companies, a lack of transparency around salaries benefits those who are good at negotiating, whereas complete transparency helps those who are not good at negotiating. This is exactly why salaries _should_ be transparent. Skill at negotiating salaries, unless you are an agent, is not a relevant skill. If you are an engineer, for example, the company should not be rewarding o…

I disagree. If engineers are notoriously bad at negotiating (which we probably are), the solution is to improve that skill, not to seek to avoid negotiating in any form or fashion. The idea that you can willfully eschew any responsibility for asking for what you want (which is really what a negotiation is) and still get it, is both self-defeating and naive. The reason lawyers/agents/salespeople are good at negotiatin…

Those who can negotiate far exceed those who cannot.

A corollary: those who know their worth also far exceed those who don't.

Totally agree with you.

Re: Talking About Money

#120

Post by JoblessWonder »

eli wrote: post #52
marktangotango wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, one might think so, but this was the CEO in question[1]. Edit, and so far as bluffing, could an employer legally ask for W2's to verify? [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/05/business/stinging-office-m...

IANAL, but I don't see why that would be illegal. There are very few things that it's actually illegal for an employer to ask about. (Though it would obviously be a bad idea to ask a candidate about their status in a protected class, it's not technically illegal to ask.) That said, this is a bad idea because it would scare off plenty of people who aren't bluffing about their salary (like me). And there are already em…

> There are very few things that it's actually illegal for an employer to ask about.

I guess it depends on your definition of "very few things" but this list[1] of Unlawful vs. Lawful questions seems pretty long/wide ranging. And I know that the small business I worked for violated it on a regular basis. I actually had it sent out to each person who does interviewing (since the company didn't have a formal policy on training someone for interviews) so they knew what was/wasn't acceptable.

[1]https://www.stat.washington.edu/jobs/questions/

Post reply on HN