3 ms·

I think your prediction of how things would play out is just wrong. Employers usually have an HR team that is dedicated to knowing what the labor market looks

I think your prediction of how things would play out is just wrong. Employers usually have an HR team that is dedicated to knowing what the labor market looks like. They may not know exactly your previous salary, but they keep very up to date tabs on industry trends. They also know exactly how their current human resources are paid. Hm? It's correct in my experience. People can get massive raises on the order of 50% or more just by keeping quiet about their past salary. If they pull some "We need an answer in order to move forward with the job" nonsense on you, tell them your past salary was $1.

RodericDay 9y ago
I'm not questioning whether you can get a raise. I'm questioning whether this raise will usually immediately make you the best paid person on your new team.
- sillysaurus3 9y ago
  Is it hard to believe that the new team's salary fluctuates by as much as $50k solely due to negotiation? If a company wants someone, and that someone doesn't want to go, negotiation and salary fluctuation is what happens. I think $50k is on the low side of what the disparities could end up being. (See the recent craze of poaching AI talent.)
  - RodericDay 9y ago
    There's a reason why it's called "a craze". I'm being hired for my software skills, not my negotiation skills. The fact that negotiation is so important is cargo culting from business-types who benefit from it. (I happen to be quite savvy at negotiation, but I've seen many shy people exploited because they're not as cocky as me). More to the point, 1) If my team was hiring a new guy with skills indistinct from mine for 50k extra, and I found out about it, I'd ask for a raise. If they refused, I'd quit on the spot. 2) If the skills are indeed a whole class above mine, they'll probably have a different title, and it's much less of my concern (I wouldn't call it "a fluctuation among members in my team"). Information may not always make things better, but it always -- no exceptions -- makes a market more efficient. Moreover, stop focusing on two team members fighting against each other. The big prize here is employees finding out how much their bosses make, especially when it comes to "tightening belt" periods. I don't honestly care if Jeff-next-door is getting 20k extra because he plead for his newborn, but I absolutely care if my salary gets frozen and my boss gets a bonus. Opponents to salary transparency are basically arguing for an inefficiency that favors higher-ups, preying on the ignorance of less resourceful subordinates.

RodericDay 9y ago

I'm not questioning whether you can get a raise. I'm questioning whether this raise will usually immediately make you the best paid person on your new team.

sillysaurus3 9y ago
Is it hard to believe that the new team's salary fluctuates by as much as $50k solely due to negotiation? If a company wants someone, and that someone doesn't want to go, negotiation and salary fluctuation is what happens. I think $50k is on the low side of what the disparities could end up being. (See the recent craze of poaching AI talent.)
- RodericDay 9y ago
  There's a reason why it's called "a craze". I'm being hired for my software skills, not my negotiation skills. The fact that negotiation is so important is cargo culting from business-types who benefit from it. (I happen to be quite savvy at negotiation, but I've seen many shy people exploited because they're not as cocky as me). More to the point, 1) If my team was hiring a new guy with skills indistinct from mine for 50k extra, and I found out about it, I'd ask for a raise. If they refused, I'd quit on the spot. 2) If the skills are indeed a whole class above mine, they'll probably have a different title, and it's much less of my concern (I wouldn't call it "a fluctuation among members in my team"). Information may not always make things better, but it always -- no exceptions -- makes a market more efficient. Moreover, stop focusing on two team members fighting against each other. The big prize here is employees finding out how much their bosses make, especially when it comes to "tightening belt" periods. I don't honestly care if Jeff-next-door is getting 20k extra because he plead for his newborn, but I absolutely care if my salary gets frozen and my boss gets a bonus. Opponents to salary transparency are basically arguing for an inefficiency that favors higher-ups, preying on the ignorance of less resourceful subordinates.