Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What people often overlook in this conversation is the fact that quality companies don't want to low-ball their employees. Not out of any sense of altruism, but because an underpaid employee is an employee who will most likely leave for greener pastures within a few years. Employee retention is important; bringing someone new on board is is both expensive and disruptive.
If...they budgeted $90-110k, it is highly unlikely that they would offer a salary significantly below that range. If they do, they know they will just be back to square one in a couple of years, and who wants that? The cost of recruiting and onbarding erases any potential savings, not to mention the lapse in productivity that comes from losing someone familiar with the role and having to bring in someone new.
What people often overlook in this conversation is the fact that quality companies don't want to low-ball their employees. Not out of any sense of altruism, but because an underpaid employee is an employee who will most likely leave for greener pastures within a few years. Employee retention is important; bringing someone new on board is is both expensive and disruptive.
If the market rate for this kind of work is approximately $100k, and they budgeted $90-110k, it is highly unlikely that they would offer a salary significantly below that range. If they do, they know they will just be back to square one in a couple of years, and who wants that? The cost of recruiting and onbarding erases any potential savings, not to mention the lapse in productivity that comes from losing someone familiar with the role and having to bring in someone new.
There's no such thing as a quality company unless it is your own. No company is going to pay you a fair wage unless they absolutely have to.
If I'm the OP, I'm not divulging my salary. No company is "quality." They aren't loyal, so why the hell should you be?
There's no such thing as a quality company unless it is your own. No company is going to pay you a fair wage unless they absolutely have to.
If I'm the OP, I'm not divulging my salary. No company is "quality." They aren't loyal, so why the hell should you be?
Did you actually read my post? It has nothing to do with altruism or kindness or loyalty to their employees.
Well-run companies employing people in a professional capacity want to those people to continue working for them. The fact of the matter is that replacing an employee is expensive.
It costs money to hire a recruiter and/or post job ads. It costs time for HR and the hiring manager to write a new job description, sift through resumes, do phone screens, do one or more interviews with several candidates. It costs time for the manager to train the new worker--even if they are incredibly experienced, there will still be new policies and procedures to teach.
You know the saying "time is money"? That is directly true to an employer. Every minute spent searching for a new candidate is time that cannot be spent on that employee's regular job duties. The lag time between when the old employee leaves and when the new hire is up and running is a loss in productivity time that can never be made up. Not to mention the loss of productivity that may result when the original underpaid employee becomes dissatisfied and begins to job search. Diminished productivity costs the employer money.
I really feel sorry for you that your experiences have led you to such a dismal conclusion.
It's the truth. It is a grim truth.. but it is the truth. No private company is going to pay you a fair wage unless you are owner or partner.
Every time you explore options in the marketplace, you can pick up raises by changing companies. That is just evidence of how screwed up the system is. Your boss isn't going to pay your "worth" unless you have another offer on the table.
It's the truth. It is a grim truth.. but it is the truth. No private company is going to pay you a fair wage unless you are owner or partner.
Every time you explore options in the marketplace, you can pick up raises by changing companies. That is just evidence of how screwed up the system is. Your boss isn't going to pay your "worth" unless you have another offer on the table.
Public Sector is a different story generally.
It's "your" truth but not "the" truth - a huge difference. My experience has been very different all in all. There have been times when I've not been rewarded as much as I feel I should have been but the good in general has far outweighed the bad and I think/hope that my years as an employer were likewise appreciated by the majority of employees. It's sad to hear someone denigrating a whole class of people. I'm sure you have your reasons, I simply disagree with you in principle.
You have good cause to be concerned but they probably know why you're getting paid below market. I'd mention it but add that you get generous benefits.
What is your source that government employee have generous benefits? There are no bonuses, stock options, stock grants, restricted stock units, etc.
What is your source that government employee have generous benefits? There are no bonuses, stock options, stock grants, restricted stock units, etc.
For some government positions, there are bonuses.
As far as "stock options," your lifetime Pension, lifetime Cadillac healthcare benefits (nearly 100% paid), job security as well as the hefty amount of vacation/sick time you accrue are your "stock options."
My salary requirements are 100k, I am interviewing for a position that Pays 100k. If the position pays less then 100k I am not interested in the position. I have no problem disclosing my salary history as a part of the job application process.
So let's assume I am making 60k in my current position. Does it matter ?
Yes, it matters, because if you reveal you are making $60K, unless it's a tight labor market and your skills are in high demand, they are going to low-ball you. Because in their view you are only being paid $60K, because that's all you are worth. If you were really worth more than that, you wouldn't be at that job and would have left long ago the moment you weren't being given a good raise and/or promotion. Furthermore, if you were really worth $100K, then you would be getting that now, and the reason you aren't is because you aren't worth $100K. You aren't worth $100K because as they said in HR to each other "this person isn't at that level for the position".
This is how HR and the company views you once you reveal salary to them, they pigeonhole you. As I said, unless it's a tight labor market and your skills are in high demand. In that cause you could say you make $50K a year and tell them, they won't care because they need JAVA programmers badly and will pay you $100K because they want you to start now and don't want to miss out on hiring you.
This is why they ask for your current salary, because it's in their best interests to do so. A house is only worth $500K, if someone paid $500K for it very recently. It isn't worth $750K simply because that's what you are asking. Unlike real estate, they don't have easy access to everyone's current salary without your permission, so it puts you in a better position.
Just be honest. Tell them you make 'X', but are looking to make 'Y'. If they can't see that hiring someone who's jumping ship needs a much stronger incentive to do so other than applying some cookie cutter formula of taking new hire's current salary and applying an additional 10%, without considering a case-by-case basis, then they're probably deluded about many other things too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by weinerdog
I wouldn't reveal it. It's not their concern and not relevant to the their hiring process. Ask the external recruiter how much they earn, and they'd probably reply 'none of your business', to which I'd be tempted to reply 'exactly'. Because it isn't, no matter how much they badger you.
Employers/recruiters who ask that are lazy and weak. There is a much simpler and effective way to go about it. They have a range for the position, and should be doing their research to know that what they're offering is market value. If a candidate's experience warrants being in that range, it's a red flag that they'd try and lowball someone qualified simply because they are underpaid at their current employer.
Well, I've heard of concerns from employers about how long term unemployed are able to pay their bills. That's an especially "none of your business". When people get laid off, they most certainly don't care about what you're going do to pay the bills.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
