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

231–240 of 412 posts

Re: Talking About Money

#231

Post by toomuchtodo »

cperciva wrote: post #213
toomuchtodo wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless current employer a) receives your permission to pull your tax return transcripts or b) receives your permission to contact your previous employer and you provide permission for previous employer to divulge said information, you will almost surely not be found out. Disclaimer: Not a lawyer, not your lawyer, but fairly confident based on past experience with this over ~15 years.

you will almost surely not be found out. ... unless, like patio11, you decide to blog about your salary history at some point. The problem with lies is that you need to remember what they were so that you don't contradict yourself later.

I'm flattered you responded to my comment cperciva!

patio11 is unusually (yet refreshingly) open with his financial information.

If you're going to blog about your intimate financial details, you should of course "have your ducks in a row".

Re: Talking About Money

#232

Post by lscore720 »

Nicholas_C wrote: post #37
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…

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…

Recruiting expert here! First off, a company "walking" without your salary information is a failure on their part, and their loss! However, to answer your question - I find the salary question to be a great indicator on many levels, here a few:

It's just one data point in determining whether you're a qualified candidate

1) Why would I waste the candidate or the client/employer's time if there's too large a gap between candidate's salary & their highest potential for this role? The company has a budget, candidate have a minimum; let's get this out of the way - it would be terrible if the interview process went swimmingly only to find that the candidate wouldn't budge under $125K and client wouldn't exceed $100K.

2. Finally: it's not a huge deal if candidate prefers NOT to provide salary; sure, it makes you feel a little uncomfortable. If that's the case: no worries, but then I do ask that the candidate gives me a 10% range for their current salary & expectations. Again, employer just wants to know that we're potentially on the same page before wasting time.

3. Literally 95% of my software engineering candidates have no qualms about sharing their salary. The other 4% will at least give me a small range. These candidates that challenge this minor issue end up being more trouble than they're worth in other ways too; it's a red flag. (next stop: "no, I'm not taking a coding test").

Again, there are ways around REQUIRING the salary #. It should not result in a candidate or employer walking. Oof!

Re: Talking About Money

#233

Post by Adrock »

beachstartup wrote: post #153
nilkn wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done this before. It worked. To figure out what number you should cite, look in a mirror. Keep saying bigger numbers. Don't stop until you've got a sheepish grin on your face.

LOL, of course it works. why wouldn't it? someone asks you a question, you give them an answer. to me all of this buffoonery around hiding your salary requirements sounds ridiculous. i'm a startup co-founder, i hire all the time. if i asked someone what their salary requirements are and they said 200k or 300k i'd immediately interview them to see if they're worth that much. i would take it as a personal challenge to…

They may not be getting paid that much because they can answer your "stumpers." You might be better served by using the interview to find out why they add so much value instead of trying to prove that you're superior in some way.

Re: Talking About Money

#234

Post by tptacek »

fredkbloggs wrote: post #188
mathattack wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen it be remarkably accurate, but that was for a "Mostly cash, limited bonus" environment. I think one of their sources is H1B filings, which can be very accurate for those types of jobs. It misses equity and outsize bonuses.

First of all, you should always value equity at zero. Neither your landlord nor the guys at the farmers' market want your stock certificates, which are overwhelmingly likely to end up worthless (if they aren't already). Second, most companies don't pay bonuses. Those that do usually have a bonus pool that depends in some way on the company's success in the marketplace, and they can almost always abolish bonuses at ma…

Serious question: if you value equity at 0, then (ceteris paribus) given a choice between (1) an offer at $150,000 and 50 basis points and (2) an offer at $150,100 and 0 basis points, you should choose option (2). Given that: why should any employer offer equity?

Re: Talking About Money

#235

Post by lscore720 »

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #34
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…

Crazy. I'd definitely send a quick note to someone higher up if you can get a hold of him/her. I know, not worth the time, a hassle etc. But a typical CEO worth his salt will crush something silly like that in no-time, if you really want to hire good people this is the type of person you want to fire. I mean, hell, asking the question is one thing. I can live with that. But turning that into some kind of litmus test…

Recruiter here. Some may not like this answer, but: honesty is the best policy. Bluffing, or LYING, could backfire - especially if things escalate and they eventually learn about this.

It's bullshit, especially for those who began their careers during a time of salary deflation.

However, the right employer will NOT base your future salary solely on your current. It should simply be one data point in the process - your value as an employee should be based on a multitude of factors. This isn't pie in the sky; many of my clients do have a compensation system for employees and end up paying fairly.

Re: Talking About Money

#236

Post by eropple »

bigtunacan wrote: post #221
eropple wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the area, I guess. I don't think people would have blinked in SF or Boston at that. Or he was screwing with you to try to drag down your ask. Happens pretty frequently, because their incentives don't align with yours (it's the realtor problem all over again).

While dealing with recruiters can be a hassle their goals align much more closely with ours if we are maintaining the fallacy that only the money counts. Recruiters are typically paid a percentage of your salary so they want you to receive the highest salary possible since that is the best payout for them as well. My experience with recruiters is they want to know how little it will take for you to accept the job, bu…

> While dealing with recruiters can be a hassle their goals align much more closely with ours if we are maintaining the fallacy that only the money counts. Recruiters are typically paid a percentage of your salary so they want you to receive the highest salary possible since that is the best payout for them as well.

No, this isn't true, and this misconception is explicitly why I invoked the realtor problem. If the recruiter gets paid, say, 15%, the difference to the recruiter between $100K and $110K is $1500. To get $16,500 instead of $15,000, the recruiter risks extra days of negotiation in which the applicant may find another job, or one or both sides passing on each other because of lack of salary fit. In most cases, then, it is in the recruiter's best interest to pressure you to take the job at $100K. Most recruiters are out of the business in a couple years, only a few are in it for the long hall--since he's not going to work with you again, it's in his best interest to get the payout now. Over any length of time, they will make so much more money by you saying yes than you pushing for more money that it's stupid of them not to get you to take the first offer that comes down the pike.

A few recruiters, among them the best ones I've worked with, are in it for the long haul, and cultivate real relationships, but they are uncommon. I remain on good terms with them whenever I can--I've been on job interviews before where I was clearly sent to the wrong job and told the interviewer "look, you don't want me for this job and the recruiter just wasted your time and mine--go talk to this guy, he'll feed you candidates you can actually use." It's worth it, because what goes around comes around, but most are in-and-out and they act like it.

Re: Talking About Money

#237

Post by fixxer »

StavrosK wrote: post #178
saturdayplace wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what happened in my last negotiation, where $X was a 30%-ish raise. They didn't bat an eye, and made an offer of exactly $X. I asked them, "Could we make that $(X + .06*X) and they did. Negotiate.

I keep raising my rates 30% every time someone asks, mainly because I don't want to take on more work, but apparently people don't mind, so I keep getting more work... Oh, the humanity.

"Price discovery"

Re: Talking About Money

#238

Post by tptacek »

galfarragem wrote: post #230
kasey_junk wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the things that has made Patrick a "tech. celebrity" is that he has written extensively and openly about this very topic. In particular his brand of uniqueness was to take a lot of things that engineers don't like and then turn it into an engineering problem. He didn't guess, he tested. Here is the amazing thing, he also did all of us a huge service and wrote it up and put it on the internet for everyone to fi…

I wouldn't call Patrick a 'tech celebrity', I would call him a 'marketing celebrity' in tech. His writings on how to market yourself are without doubt the best essays I've ever read on the subject.

See you guys only put it like this because you haven't heard him sing along to TLC. He's really just a straight-up celebrity.

Re: Talking About Money

#239

Post by lscore720 »

chadgeidel wrote: post #100
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…

I had a recruiter tell me I was legally obligated to tell him my current salary. I said no thanks, not interested and he proceeded to attempt to keep me on the phone for another 10 minutes (after which I hung up). Needless to say, I don't waste my time any longer when a recruiter asks. I just say "here's what I expect".

Legally obligated, wow, never heard that one before! Good answer. When I'm talking to a reasonable candidate, that's all I need at the end of the day: an expectation $ range.

Re: Talking About Money

#240

Post by [deleted] »

bobjordan wrote: post #228
civilian wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'm a bootstrapped entrepreneur CEO with ~30 employees in my company now, growing quickly, expect to have ~60 in next 12 months. I am not so interested in previous salary. Rather, I always directly ask "what is your salary requirement". I think it is good business sense to not underpay what people think they require, though sometimes this means we must pass on what could otherwise be good employees, so requesting moo…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN