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

We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

resumeskills.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 810 posts

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#251

Post by Scarblac »

meddlepal wrote: post #188
b212 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this an American thing? I live in Eastern Europe and make decent buck here (close to 5000 EUR/mo after taxes in a country where you can cover all expenses under 1000 EUR/mo). I never had any trouble getting quality work in my country but a few times I got approached by companies from the US and oh boy, weeks of tiring recrutation process and the pay was ALWAYS worse than local. I feel like they do it on purpose ma…

I don't know about the EU business culture, but in the US you are expected to negotiate. You really have to fight for every penny you want...

But we're talking about someone who already has a job, and the new company wants to entice away from that. What kind of negotiating tactic is it to start at 60% of current salary?

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#252

Post by d4mi3n »

revvx wrote: post #111
d4mi3n wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rule number 1, IMO, never discuss salary. I find listing your salary requirements before starting a process weeds out a lot of silly interviews. If you know your worth and have a goal for your salary, it is the most effective way I know to avoid dumb offers.

But that's exactly what I did? Sorry, I didn't phrase it right. My non-negotiable requirement was 20% more than I was getting. I gave a hard number and they said "yeah we can give that" before the interview. However the recruiter just assumed I was bluffing and went ahead with that colossal waste of time.

Sorry, didn’t get that when I read your previous post.

If that is the case: screw those guys. If you can’t trust a company with _writing an employment contract_, how can you trust any future interaction.

If your skills are in demand, move on. Not worth your time and being able to walk away is the single most valuable card one can play during a negotiation.

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#253

Post by [deleted] »

d4mi3n wrote: post #104
revvx wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the same thing happen to me a couple times. Long and tiring process. Blackboard, make a project, lots of dirty laundry about "long gone incompetent developers" that made the current system a giant mess. Lots of red flags but lots of promises including a large maximum salary, including bonuses and stock options. The final offer, however, was 60% of my current pay. Lower than the average for someone with my exper…

Rule number 1, IMO, never discuss salary. I find listing your salary requirements before starting a process weeds out a lot of silly interviews. If you know your worth and have a goal for your salary, it is the most effective way I know to avoid dumb offers.

[deleted]

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#254

Post by d4mi3n »

peteradio wrote: post #192
revvx wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had the same thing happen to me a couple times. Long and tiring process. Blackboard, make a project, lots of dirty laundry about "long gone incompetent developers" that made the current system a giant mess. Lots of red flags but lots of promises including a large maximum salary, including bonuses and stock options. The final offer, however, was 60% of my current pay. Lower than the average for someone with my exper…

You are supposed to lie to inflate your salary even more? So rather than offer of 60% current pay they'd be offering 30% wink wink current pay. I hope you no longer communicate with that recruiter.

This is common practice, but it’s playing into a bad power dynamic where the employer is trying to anchor the negotiation to a number. It’s a predatory question, and giving a bullshit answer to a bullshit question is a reasonable response.

As I mentioned in another comment, I personally prefer just setting a salary range I’d be willing to accept. I walk away if given an offer below that range. It gives me the initiative of anchoring the negotiation to a number I want.

It also saves me a lot of time by screening out companies that aren’t willing to actually negotiate.

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#255

Post by antoinevg »

jobthrowaway420 wrote: post #9

Made my first ever HN throwaway account to respond to this. I have been running a successful business, but it's not "tech". I want to get back into the software industry. I didn't have a software business idea, so I explored some tech company jobs. I am well-qualified at the VP/Director level for startups and even larger companies. I did go so far as to do an on-site interview for one company. I have verifiable proof…

…and this is the rational response to a sucker offer. Go into business for yourself because competition like that is going to be an absolute pushover!

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#256

Post by WrtCdEvrydy »

owldimoon wrote: post #168
marcinzm wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ones who are good salesman do get takers. I don't really know why or how but they get them. Not the greatest engineers but also not bottom feeders. It's surreal. Granted it's usually people who don't realize their own worth or are naive about how much equity is actually going to be worth.

Hey, uh. So, I'm going to be graduating with a B.Eng soon. Any tips on how to realize my own worth? I have a tendency to let myself be taken advantage of... I mean, I'm currently doing a research internship at a computer vision lab at my uni for very little compensation (grant + departmental top-up). I told myself I was doing it "for the experience." I... I feel like I might be a candidate for the behavior you descri…

I've been doing this for a while.

I just measure positives and negatives and once exceeds the other, I'm done.

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#257

Post by projektfu »

scottlegrand2 wrote: post #142

When a company wants to hire a specific person and they have already found that specific person, to comply with employment law, they have to write up a job description so other people can apply for that job. By making that job description so specific that only one person in the known universe satisfies it, they comply with employment law and get to hire the person they want. I know this because I have gone through th…

Tell me, where is this the law? I know that government positions (VA, universities, etc.) often have to do this, but where is a private company required to allow competitive application to these positions? As I understand it, it's simply corporate policy. But I'd be interested to know where it's actually illegal to hire someone based solely on referral/networking.

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#258

Post by IshKebab »

areyouseriousxx wrote: post #74
mattnewport wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyway... Went in for 4-5 interviews. Took me about 10 hours in total to interview with them. The experience of the poster you are responding to doesn't seem to align with the situation you are describing. Sure posting an online job ad is pretty cheap. The rest of the hiring process, not so much.

Believe it or not, those interviews usually aren't that expensive. You probably have a mix of managers, which spend all their time in meetings anyway, and engineers, which are paid salary so they typically end up putting in a couple extra hours when they fall behind due to interviewing. Sure it isn't free, but remember, this person had made it all the way to the end of the process. The determination was made that the…

Yeah... no. Most engineers and programmers don't interview for free. They do it on company time.

If their other work falls behind because they spend too much time interviewing, well that is the company's problem. I have never worked with anyone that would stay late because they interviewed someone that day. That is ridiculous.

And as for staying late "to get the work done", what job do you work in where the work is ever "done"?

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#259

Post by pm90 »

Scarblac wrote: post #251
meddlepal wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about the EU business culture, but in the US you are expected to negotiate. You really have to fight for every penny you want...

But we're talking about someone who already has a job, and the new company wants to entice away from that. What kind of negotiating tactic is it to start at 60% of current salary?

Well, the OP mentioned that the recruiter thought the candidate was lying which is why they low-balled. So that explains the logic at least. They're not stupid, but they don't trust candidates I guess. Which is a whole different thing.

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#260

Post by antoinevg »

le-mark wrote: post #202
jobthrowaway420 wrote: post #9

Made my first ever HN throwaway account to respond to this. I have been running a successful business, but it's not "tech". I want to get back into the software industry. I didn't have a software business idea, so I explored some tech company jobs. I am well-qualified at the VP/Director level for startups and even larger companies. I did go so far as to do an on-site interview for one company. I have verifiable proof…

You have to admit there are loads of unscrupulous people out there who will take the compensation you're referring to, deliver nothing and leave. I've seen it myself at one start up I was at. The founders recieved a generous investment (on the order of $40m) to grow the business. They hired sr vp of sales and a sr vp of marketing who did exactly zero to move the business forward after 12 months. Both left having acco…

There is a difference between promising a unicorn and having a proven track record. That you are too lazy to verify the background your potential hire is providing you is 100% your problem. Bite me.
Post reply on HN