5 ms·

And yet they are our only weapon against business owners who are just as clueless but lack the incentive to pay a competitive wage. When it comes to salary nego

And yet they are our only weapon against business owners who are just as clueless but lack the incentive to pay a competitive wage. When it comes to salary negotiation, it's nice to have Shithead in your corner.

pricechild 11y ago
Could you expand on that? If you can't negotiate with the owner, how does shithead help?
- reustle 11y ago
  Sounds like a place I wouldn't want to be working at anyway.
- nordic_nomad 11y ago
  If you have a good recruiter (the last one I worked with was such) they'll negotiate for you. This one asked me what I was looking for, said I could get more than that, and then got even more than that for me. Just because they have industry data and like jobs to back up the negotiation. I've had bad ones of course, I think everyone has. But the good ones can do a lot more leg work than you have time for and find you a much better situation than you could find on your own, plus play both sides to make their comission as big as possible which benefits you. The best are agents, the worst are pimps.
- celticninja 11y ago
  more if you as an individual are not good as negotiating (and in IT there can be a higher % of people with less than stellar social skills) then these people will negotiate on your behalf. Its their job to negotiate so if they want to place you you tell them you want $x per day and if they dont get it for you you don't do the job.
moron4hire 11y ago
They are more likely to negotiate against you than for you. They will tell you the company is offering less than what they actually are, and they will tell the company that you are asking for more than you actually are. Then, if it's at all close, they don't have to actually negotiate, they can find the middle on their own and both of you are happy with the outcome because you didn't know the original set-point.
- jameshart 11y ago
  Yes - you might assume 'well, they get a percentage of what I get so our interests are aligned'. Sure, they do, but their downside if they don't place you is that they get a percentage of nothing, whereas their downside if they place you for less than your value is they get a percentage of a lot of money instead of a percentage of a load of money. Also, they are hoping to work with the hiring company again, whereas they will likely never have to speak to you after you're hired, so who are they going to do a favor for? So no, your interests really aren't aligned, and they will screw candidates on salary negotiation, take the slight hit on commission, and then make it up in volume.
  - moron4hire 11y ago
    Better to place 2 people at 90% than 1 person at 100%, especially if you have a quota that will get you fired if you place less than 2 people.
dommer 11y ago
Have you tried to negotiate without a recruiter? Many companies are now sharing some of the recruiter costs with the employee if they go direct. In London [currently] it is an employee market, so this is a simple and effective incentive.
acqq 11y ago
The workers are poorly pad because they accept the offers. The recruiters are there because companies like them, I don't know exactly why? Maybe the whole procedure results in lower salaries?
lukasm 11y ago
Angel list with open salary range policy, glassdoor, friends, BATNA
- rch 11y ago
  Open salary ranges tend towards the lower end, out of necessity.
rch 11y ago
Why not have a lawyer help negotiate on your behalf instead? Employment contracts can get complicated enough that you might want to consult with one regardless.
untog 11y ago
Eh. If you can't negotiate yourself then you're still going to end up in trouble down the road when Shithead isn't there to negotiate for you in your job.
- mavdi 11y ago
  You simply find another shithead. ie: another job.
emodendroket 11y ago
The recruiter's percentage of what you get is small enough that an extra couple thousand or whatever is much smaller to him than to you and, anyway, closing three deals a little lower than he'd like is better than closing one on the high end.
cookiecaper 11y ago
Have you ever met a recruiter who actually does this? In my experience, recruiters are about matching companies and people for interviews, and the handoff occurs there. I've never heard of someone having the recruiter negotiate on their behalf.
vox_mollis 11y ago
This argument doesn't scan at all. Employer's compensation maximum being equal, you'd be able to negotiate a 25-30% higher salary without the recruiter's cut being a part of total compensation.

pricechild 11y ago

Could you expand on that? If you can't negotiate with the owner, how does shithead help?

reustle 11y ago
Sounds like a place I wouldn't want to be working at anyway.
nordic_nomad 11y ago
If you have a good recruiter (the last one I worked with was such) they'll negotiate for you. This one asked me what I was looking for, said I could get more than that, and then got even more than that for me. Just because they have industry data and like jobs to back up the negotiation. I've had bad ones of course, I think everyone has. But the good ones can do a lot more leg work than you have time for and find you a much better situation than you could find on your own, plus play both sides to make their comission as big as possible which benefits you. The best are agents, the worst are pimps.
celticninja 11y ago
more if you as an individual are not good as negotiating (and in IT there can be a higher % of people with less than stellar social skills) then these people will negotiate on your behalf. Its their job to negotiate so if they want to place you you tell them you want $x per day and if they dont get it for you you don't do the job.

moron4hire 11y ago

They are more likely to negotiate against you than for you. They will tell you the company is offering less than what they actually are, and they will tell the company that you are asking for more than you actually are. Then, if it's at all close, they don't have to actually negotiate, they can find the middle on their own and both of you are happy with the outcome because you didn't know the original set-point.

jameshart 11y ago
Yes - you might assume 'well, they get a percentage of what I get so our interests are aligned'. Sure, they do, but their downside if they don't place you is that they get a percentage of nothing, whereas their downside if they place you for less than your value is they get a percentage of a lot of money instead of a percentage of a load of money. Also, they are hoping to work with the hiring company again, whereas they will likely never have to speak to you after you're hired, so who are they going to do a favor for? So no, your interests really aren't aligned, and they will screw candidates on salary negotiation, take the slight hit on commission, and then make it up in volume.
- moron4hire 11y ago
  Better to place 2 people at 90% than 1 person at 100%, especially if you have a quota that will get you fired if you place less than 2 people.

dommer 11y ago

Have you tried to negotiate without a recruiter? Many companies are now sharing some of the recruiter costs with the employee if they go direct. In London [currently] it is an employee market, so this is a simple and effective incentive.

acqq 11y ago

The workers are poorly pad because they accept the offers. The recruiters are there because companies like them, I don't know exactly why? Maybe the whole procedure results in lower salaries?

lukasm 11y ago

Angel list with open salary range policy, glassdoor, friends, BATNA

rch 11y ago
Open salary ranges tend towards the lower end, out of necessity.

rch 11y ago

Why not have a lawyer help negotiate on your behalf instead? Employment contracts can get complicated enough that you might want to consult with one regardless.

untog 11y ago

Eh. If you can't negotiate yourself then you're still going to end up in trouble down the road when Shithead isn't there to negotiate for you in your job.

mavdi 11y ago
You simply find another shithead. ie: another job.

emodendroket 11y ago

The recruiter's percentage of what you get is small enough that an extra couple thousand or whatever is much smaller to him than to you and, anyway, closing three deals a little lower than he'd like is better than closing one on the high end.

cookiecaper 11y ago

Have you ever met a recruiter who actually does this? In my experience, recruiters are about matching companies and people for interviews, and the handoff occurs there. I've never heard of someone having the recruiter negotiate on their behalf.

vox_mollis 11y ago

This argument doesn't scan at all. Employer's compensation maximum being equal, you'd be able to negotiate a 25-30% higher salary without the recruiter's cut being a part of total compensation.