4 ms·

I understand the goal of this law but don't see how it solves it. I usually ask people what their current salary is now. I want to offer them (at least) a modes

by snarf21 10y ago

I understand the goal of this law but don't see how it solves it. I usually ask people what their current salary is now. I want to offer them (at least) a modest raise to come here. I want them to be happy and excited. I also want to not waste a ton of time negotiating salary if they want 50K more then I have available in my budget. You are worth whatever you can get someone to pay you. Some people may come in with a lower ask but then you have yourself, are they a bargain or are they just less talented? If they come in high, are they overpriced or are they just that good? I also think this only works for the employee if there is a shortage in this field and employers are desperate (but the market will force those prices up) or if you are trying to just get more than your experience might warrant. Let's say you are a knowledge worker making $80K and hoping to go to $90K. So, in the new rules, the employer asks for your expected salary and you say "give me your best offer". The employer will either get annoyed and work with the candidate that said $85K in response or they low ball you at $60K because they can play games too. You say "no" and they ask what you are looking for, rinse and repeat. It seems like you still end up at the same place with the same result except the negotiation process sucked. As a candidate, I don't see the downside of saying I want X+ dollars. I'd rather know about the job and culture and other things than $5K more or less.

crdoconnor 10y ago
I usually respond to this question with a question of my own: "Are you asking this question because you don't have faith in your own ability to interview and value employees or because you are trying to lowball me?"
- snarf21 10y ago
  I understand what you are saying but I personally don't think any amount of interviewing will ever tell me exactly how much value an employee will give me in the next year. [Serious] Do you think this is possible? I can think of no way except to put them on a 3 month contract to see what they are really worth and I don't think that is what candidates are looking for.
  - crdoconnor 10y ago
    Yes, I got this from what you said: "Some people may come in with a lower ask but then you have yourself, are they a bargain or are they just less talented?" shrug I have faith in my interviewing skills. I was interviewing for a position for about 5 months for a very picky employer. I interviewed a lot of people who were good but expensive and even more who were cheap but not so good. Eventually I spotted a bargain and they snapped him up. I don't really believe in bargains though. It takes a lot of time and effort to find one and they tend to leave quickly once they've figured out that they underpriced themselves. Most places I've worked I've done so initially on a short term contract. I prefer it mainly because I can charge more.
kabouseng 10y ago
If it really wasn't about offering candidates the absolute minimum you have to (low balling them), why not just make your hiring budget known, hell make it part of your advertisement, this way candidates who are more expensive won't waste your time because they won't even apply.
- brianwawok 10y ago
  If he just advertises his budget is 100k... The guy he could have hired for 70k gets hired at 100k. That's wasted 30k to the company. Do that for many roles and your company is now out of business.
  - crdoconnor 10y ago
    You're essentially agreeing that the point is to lowball the candidate.
    - brianwawok 10y ago
      Ya exactly. As the person owning the business, the less you pay your staff the bigger your paycheck. Its direct 1:1 for a private company. As a person being a employee, you want to make the most you can. The goals are directly competing, hence the classic struggle. Always going to be some give and take.
      - crdoconnor 10y ago
        In practice not every employer is like this and the ones that are tend to engender resentment, shoddy workmanship and a high turnover of skilled employees and a low turnover of useless employees without options. There's value in being explicitly fair and upfront about compensation.
philliphaydon 10y ago
Your example. You don't value the candidate. If you want that candidate then offer them what you believe they are worth to the value they will bring to your company.
- snarf21 10y ago
  I made a similar response below but how can any amount of interviewing give me anything but a vague notion of the amount of value they will provide the company over the next twelve months. I assume that their previous employer, who had them working there for years, is a much better judge of value they can provide. So if I am offering more than that, I don't see how I am not valuing the candidate.
  - philliphaydon 10y ago
    This is why probation periods exist. Either you value the individual or you don't. You either both agree on a fixed amount or you don't. If the individual says no. He feels undervalued.
coolgeek 10y ago
> I want to offer them (at least) a modest raise to come here. I want them to be happy and excited. I also want to not waste a ton of time negotiating salary if they want 50K more then I have available in my budget If this were the case, you should ask what salary the desire, rather than what their current salary is. Also, assuming that you're not the owner or otherwise the sole decision maker, others in the company do not share you're enlightened view. For various reasons, they seek to pay as little as possible to employ an acceptable minimum standard of employee.

by snarf21 10y ago

crdoconnor 10y ago

I usually respond to this question with a question of my own: "Are you asking this question because you don't have faith in your own ability to interview and value employees or because you are trying to lowball me?"

snarf21 10y ago
I understand what you are saying but I personally don't think any amount of interviewing will ever tell me exactly how much value an employee will give me in the next year. [Serious] Do you think this is possible? I can think of no way except to put them on a 3 month contract to see what they are really worth and I don't think that is what candidates are looking for.
- crdoconnor 10y ago
  Yes, I got this from what you said: "Some people may come in with a lower ask but then you have yourself, are they a bargain or are they just less talented?" shrug I have faith in my interviewing skills. I was interviewing for a position for about 5 months for a very picky employer. I interviewed a lot of people who were good but expensive and even more who were cheap but not so good. Eventually I spotted a bargain and they snapped him up. I don't really believe in bargains though. It takes a lot of time and effort to find one and they tend to leave quickly once they've figured out that they underpriced themselves. Most places I've worked I've done so initially on a short term contract. I prefer it mainly because I can charge more.

kabouseng 10y ago

If it really wasn't about offering candidates the absolute minimum you have to (low balling them), why not just make your hiring budget known, hell make it part of your advertisement, this way candidates who are more expensive won't waste your time because they won't even apply.

brianwawok 10y ago
If he just advertises his budget is 100k... The guy he could have hired for 70k gets hired at 100k. That's wasted 30k to the company. Do that for many roles and your company is now out of business.
- crdoconnor 10y ago
  You're essentially agreeing that the point is to lowball the candidate.
  - brianwawok 10y ago
    Ya exactly. As the person owning the business, the less you pay your staff the bigger your paycheck. Its direct 1:1 for a private company. As a person being a employee, you want to make the most you can. The goals are directly competing, hence the classic struggle. Always going to be some give and take.
    - crdoconnor 10y ago
      In practice not every employer is like this and the ones that are tend to engender resentment, shoddy workmanship and a high turnover of skilled employees and a low turnover of useless employees without options. There's value in being explicitly fair and upfront about compensation.

philliphaydon 10y ago

Your example. You don't value the candidate. If you want that candidate then offer them what you believe they are worth to the value they will bring to your company.

snarf21 10y ago
I made a similar response below but how can any amount of interviewing give me anything but a vague notion of the amount of value they will provide the company over the next twelve months. I assume that their previous employer, who had them working there for years, is a much better judge of value they can provide. So if I am offering more than that, I don't see how I am not valuing the candidate.
- philliphaydon 10y ago
  This is why probation periods exist. Either you value the individual or you don't. You either both agree on a fixed amount or you don't. If the individual says no. He feels undervalued.

coolgeek 10y ago

> I want to offer them (at least) a modest raise to come here. I want them to be happy and excited. I also want to not waste a ton of time negotiating salary if they want 50K more then I have available in my budget If this were the case, you should ask what salary the desire, rather than what their current salary is. Also, assuming that you're not the owner or otherwise the sole decision maker, others in the company do not share you're enlightened view. For various reasons, they seek to pay as little as possible to employ an acceptable minimum standard of employee.