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

NYC to require salary ranges be included in job postings

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 331 posts

Re: NYC to require salary ranges be included in job postings

#291

Post by BenFranklin100 »

rednerrus wrote: post #189
gopalv wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they're not doing that, they're wasting your time and their time. Actually, they're getting paid for the their time. I'm not. I'm actually burning my time. > Recruiters should be talking about numbers in the first interview. I'm going through the recruitment process right now and the numbers out of the gate are always lowball figures (possibly personalized to me), because of two reasons. Because they want to see…

If they're asking your number and you're not being straight forward, what's the problem? Them: "What's your number"? You: "$350k." Them: "Ok, cool lets move forward." or "That's a lot of money and we can't pay that much. Thanks for meeting with us." I'm assuming that you've done your homework and know what a reasonable top of the range is. If that's the case, just say what your number is and let them decide if it's t…

Interviewers/recruiters who don’t quickly screen out salary mismatches get fired by management for wasting management’s time.

Re: NYC to require salary ranges be included in job postings

#292

Post by BenFranklin100 »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #185
gopalv wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If they're not doing that, they're wasting your time and their time. Actually, they're getting paid for the their time. I'm not. I'm actually burning my time. > Recruiters should be talking about numbers in the first interview. I'm going through the recruitment process right now and the numbers out of the gate are always lowball figures (possibly personalized to me), because of two reasons. Because they want to see…

> So the companies are legitimately balking at this because they'll have to pay their existing employees more if they put out an attractive posting.... Let's phrase this properly: companies are balking because they'll have to pay existing employees market rate .

Not really. Employees aren’t stupid. If they are paid below market they are a serious flight risk, especially in today’s tight labor market. We thus raise valued employee’s compensation to keep up with market.

Re: NYC to require salary ranges be included in job postings

#293

Post by BenFranklin100 »

Dave_Rosenthal wrote: post #223
llbeansandrice wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't actually know what they would be willing to pay someone. As an employee, sounds like not my fuckin problem. I'm not about to go through 3 phone screens, a take-home test, a full-day onsite, etc. just for the privilege to be low-balled or even worse denied. > I think it will be about $X Oh! So looks like it's not that hard to ball-park a number off the top of your head. I don't get this "how the world really w…

If neither prospective employee nor employer talk about salary up-front before investing many hours with interviews, travel, etc. that's just simply a screwup on both sides. This salary range thing won't fix that. Ready? The job listing is now "$100k to $200k depending on experience." If you are making $140k and hoping to make $160k the range doesn't help you at all. You still better talk about salary up front!

This. As an employer, we ask rough salary expectations up front. We take into account seniority, experience etc… in adjusting the salary to match a person’s worth too.

Re: NYC to require salary ranges be included in job postings

#296

Post by rhaway84773 »

andrewstuart wrote: post #54

I'm a recruiter. I've known for a long time it drives people nuts that job ads don't have salary, or have a wide salary range. The fact is that many employers don't actually know what they would be willing to pay someone . Until they have met them, assessed them, heard what they salary target is and weighed it up against their skills and experience and calibrated it against the team. The conversation almost always go…

I think you’re confusing “don’t know” with “not willing to do the basic research on what they’re looking for because there is no reason to do so”.

Why would an employer spend any time thinking about the salary they’re willing to offer when there is no penalty for not doing so. The party that does suffer are the applicants who have to sit through many rounds of interviews before finding out the max salary the job is offering is a fraction of what they’re being paid right now.

The lack of transparency is a classic neutral-lose situation, where the neutral party has the power in the relationship dynamics. It’s the perfect situation for the govt to step in and require transparency.

Re: NYC to require salary ranges be included in job postings

#297

Post by guitarsteve »

BenFranklin100 wrote: post #295

So what’s to stop employers from posting a range from $10K to $1M ‘depending on experience and skill set”?

If a company offers a very low lower bound like $10k, job seekers won’t apply there and will go to competitors with a more reasonable lower bound.

Similarly, when a highly qualified applicant gets an offer way below the upper bound they’ll be upset and ask “why don’t I get paid near the top of your band?”

Unless all employers work together to make the bands useless, it’ll at least give some visibility into what employers are worth targeting as an applicant.

My employer has Colorado jobs and gives some wide ranges (ex: 130-300k) and more narrow ranges (ex: 200-240k). The wide ones probably cover 3-4 levels and the narrow ones are for a specific level. They’re all missing RSUs or bonuses, but they should give you a rough idea if it’s worth applying or starting a discussion with a recruiter/hiring manager.

Re: NYC to require salary ranges be included in job postings

#298

Post by chrisdbanks »

akvadrako wrote: post #240
chrisdbanks wrote: post #94

As an employer, I am reticent to name a salary range because the fact is that the return on investment of employees is not normally distributed; it follows a power law where the top people return many times the amount of an average person. This may be because of connections, experience, intelligence, or a mixture. When I recruit I always want to hire a top person for whom I'm happy to pay 50% more than an average per…

It doesn't make sense that top people return many times what the average does but you are only able to pay them 50% more. That kind of thinking is why salary ranges should be posted before top people waste their time applying.

I completely agree that it doesn't make sense, but that's how it is. Anyone who's ever hired a top performer will feel like they're getting the biggest bargain ever. I guess that psychology artificially limits the top of the range for salaries.

Re: NYC to require salary ranges be included in job postings

#299

Post by chrisdbanks »

mikebenfield wrote: post #224
chrisdbanks wrote: post #94

As an employer, I am reticent to name a salary range because the fact is that the return on investment of employees is not normally distributed; it follows a power law where the top people return many times the amount of an average person. This may be because of connections, experience, intelligence, or a mixture. When I recruit I always want to hire a top person for whom I'm happy to pay 50% more than an average per…

> The worst case is that I say I can't afford you. There are many possible bad cases. Possibly much worse than this is that the candidate lowballs themselves. Another bad case is that they price themselves out when they might have been willing to take a lower offer after learning more. The candidate has just as much uncertainty as the employer. There's no reason the burden should be on the candidate to be the first t…

I don't say that the candidate has to be the first to name a number, just that they can. In fact, in most negotiations the results ends up closest to the first number named, so candidates should be happy to name the first number.

Re: NYC to require salary ranges be included in job postings

#300

Post by chrisdbanks »

game_the0ry wrote: post #182
chrisdbanks wrote: post #94

As an employer, I am reticent to name a salary range because the fact is that the return on investment of employees is not normally distributed; it follows a power law where the top people return many times the amount of an average person. This may be because of connections, experience, intelligence, or a mixture. When I recruit I always want to hire a top person for whom I'm happy to pay 50% more than an average per…

> The worst case is that I say I can't afford you. Actually, the worst case is that they employer lies and after 4 rounds of interviews and maybe take home assignments, the employer says "actually this job will be paying much less." (this has happened to me once, it wastes everyones' time)

Yes, so why did they do it? I guess it depends on the type of job and company. In this case it sounds like they didn't have the budget or wisdom to hire a high performer but we're trying to net one through trickery. There will always be bad actors. A salary range wouldn't stop this as they could do the same by baiting you at the top of the range and switching to the lower end.
Post reply on HN