5 ms·

I value talented people but sometimes during the hiring process I find myself thinking: 1. You're spoiled 2. You're overpriced 3. Your lack of humility is go

I value talented people but sometimes during the hiring process I find myself thinking: 1. You're spoiled 2. You're overpriced 3. Your lack of humility is going to burn us one day Technical folk and designers hold the whip hand right now, but that's no reason to abuse it.

cachemiss 9y ago
At the higher end of the market (i.e you can get hired at the majors in a senior role or equivalent at a smaller company), I generally see three types of people: I see people that truly understand their market value, have data backing it up, they are professional (I always tell people how I appreciate the time / offer, and I'm polite to recruiters), demanding about information (I have little tolerance for ambiguity in compensation, define everything, this is how I pay the mortgage and save for retirement / my kids college). Some managers think that is spoiled (not that you are necessarily saying that), but this is a business transaction, I ask for market and turn it down if it's not that, or if the compensation is ambiguous. Then I see those that don't know their value and just sort of take whatever because they don't like interviewing / negotiating. I don't see many of those at the high end. The third group are who you are talking about, total babies. They complain about recruiters, or how much everyone wants them, place crazy demands on companies (I worked with a guy who literally had a rider like Van Halen in his LinkedIn profile, he ended up being a total prima donna who got fired because everyone hated him). Most people in this third group think they are in the first, and they aren't worth recruiting, even if they are strong technically. Sometimes people believe this means startups / small companies can't compete, but the issue is, startups / small companies really aren't offering any sort of market comp, they don't give enough equity to employees to make the risk worth your while. You don't necessarily need to pay me what AmaGoogFaceSoft do, but you need to give me a significant chunk of equity and give me enough visibility into how that is cut up (preferences etc.) in the company for me to value it, otherwise its worth 0, even if I believe that the company will be successful. If you can't trust me enough with that sort of transparency, then it's not gonna work out. With a huge public company, I know what my stock is worth roughly.
- BrandoElFollito 9y ago
  There is probably a 2bis category of people who know their value but do not like to interview and negotiate. They will take or not what is given to them but it is a one shot proposition. I usually tell companies that I really do not like to negotiate compensation because this is logistics to me and is not worth the effort. Either a company is good and gives the right pay or I pass. I tell this early enough so that there is no expectation of haggling. So far it worked.
toomuchtodo 9y ago
From the other side of the table, employers usually hold all the cards. I don't care about your mission, your values, just show me the money. This is a transaction, not an interview for me to be a part of your family. I will be polite, but if you offer a dollar less in total compensation than the other person, I will accept the other offer and thank you for your time. Have to make hay while the sun is shining, and the music could stop at any time. Don't say someone is overpaid when the issue is you don't want to pay market rate; you're bringing emotion into a business transaction. Can't hire someone for a role? You're not paying enough or you're not willing to train someone to be as niche as you need. Source: Infosec, ~2-3 contacts a week from recruiters. EDIT: To those who are replying that I'm detached, not who you'd hire, etc, that's perfectly fine. Hire someone who undervalues their time and values your team or your working environment over getting paid what they're worth. I work hard to save up faster for financial independence; I want to spend my time working on what I want, not what someone else wants me to work on. Life is short.
- scandox 9y ago
  Sure and I don't expect people to be foolish. Or to buy into any BS. However I do think politeness and an interest in long term mutual benefit is better. The world you describe suggests a zero sum approach in which, indeed, the music must one day stop.
  - eropple 9y ago
    It isn't labor's decision whether this is a zero-sum game or not, though.
- tensor 9y ago
  It could be that people offering less simply don't value your skills as much. I've certainly seen people who think they are senior but in tests come out only intermediate. That someone else will buy into their senior claim doesn't mean the companies that do a better job judging skill level don't pay market rate. You seem to be implying that there is no such thing as being overpaid, which is pretty nonsensical.
ndrr 9y ago
Spoiled and overpriced sounds like you don't value them. Is this a reaction to their attitude in the interview or does it start at the resume or email communications?
- scandox 9y ago
  Face to face. I'm talking about people who don't feel the need to in anyway justify why they're there. The discussion is basically a critical assessment of us combined with a mortal combat approach to salary discussions.
  - ktRolster 9y ago
    Let's be honest: the corporations that hire us will drop us as soon as it becomes convenient to the bottom line, and as likely as not without a severance package. You owe it to yourself to get the best possible compensation package, because no one else will do it for you.
    - minikites 9y ago
      That happens to all workers, but because technical workers are in short supply, that's why they tend to be spoiled and overpriced. Everyone else learns humility.
- delphinius81 9y ago
  It starts early at the resume/email communications. I expect to see in communications that a candidate can present themselves in a mature, professional manner. That's something you tend to learn with experience, though it also feels like common sense.
whipoodle 9y ago
Oh my god. Give me a break.
bogomipz 9y ago
Are you a recruiter then? What specifically is your role in the hiring process? Two of the points were detailing completely unprofessional and all too common practices from recruiters and - ghosting and not keeping appointments(flaking.) I would be curious to hear how a candidate expressing frustration at those disrespectful practices might cause you to think that they are "spoiled", "overpaid" or "lack humility."
- scandox 9y ago
  No. I am the person who hires IT people at my organisation. Edit: I am also a programmer
  - bogomipz 9y ago
    How is that not a recruiter then? Can you answer the other part of my question?
rovek 9y ago
Speaking as an engineer regularly hiring engineers, it depends on the hiring company. Assuming that one is interviewing for a benevolent and altruistic employer - who values and rewards positive, talented employees - one could afford to be accommodating during the hiring process. Given those don't exist I would expect tech folk and designers to rinse employers for every penny as that is the treatment they will get when the table turns again.

cachemiss 9y ago

At the higher end of the market (i.e you can get hired at the majors in a senior role or equivalent at a smaller company), I generally see three types of people: I see people that truly understand their market value, have data backing it up, they are professional (I always tell people how I appreciate the time / offer, and I'm polite to recruiters), demanding about information (I have little tolerance for ambiguity in compensation, define everything, this is how I pay the mortgage and save for retirement / my kids college). Some managers think that is spoiled (not that you are necessarily saying that), but this is a business transaction, I ask for market and turn it down if it's not that, or if the compensation is ambiguous. Then I see those that don't know their value and just sort of take whatever because they don't like interviewing / negotiating. I don't see many of those at the high end. The third group are who you are talking about, total babies. They complain about recruiters, or how much everyone wants them, place crazy demands on companies (I worked with a guy who literally had a rider like Van Halen in his LinkedIn profile, he ended up being a total prima donna who got fired because everyone hated him). Most people in this third group think they are in the first, and they aren't worth recruiting, even if they are strong technically. Sometimes people believe this means startups / small companies can't compete, but the issue is, startups / small companies really aren't offering any sort of market comp, they don't give enough equity to employees to make the risk worth your while. You don't necessarily need to pay me what AmaGoogFaceSoft do, but you need to give me a significant chunk of equity and give me enough visibility into how that is cut up (preferences etc.) in the company for me to value it, otherwise its worth 0, even if I believe that the company will be successful. If you can't trust me enough with that sort of transparency, then it's not gonna work out. With a huge public company, I know what my stock is worth roughly.

BrandoElFollito 9y ago
There is probably a 2bis category of people who know their value but do not like to interview and negotiate. They will take or not what is given to them but it is a one shot proposition. I usually tell companies that I really do not like to negotiate compensation because this is logistics to me and is not worth the effort. Either a company is good and gives the right pay or I pass. I tell this early enough so that there is no expectation of haggling. So far it worked.

toomuchtodo 9y ago

From the other side of the table, employers usually hold all the cards. I don't care about your mission, your values, just show me the money. This is a transaction, not an interview for me to be a part of your family. I will be polite, but if you offer a dollar less in total compensation than the other person, I will accept the other offer and thank you for your time. Have to make hay while the sun is shining, and the music could stop at any time. Don't say someone is overpaid when the issue is you don't want to pay market rate; you're bringing emotion into a business transaction. Can't hire someone for a role? You're not paying enough or you're not willing to train someone to be as niche as you need. Source: Infosec, ~2-3 contacts a week from recruiters. EDIT: To those who are replying that I'm detached, not who you'd hire, etc, that's perfectly fine. Hire someone who undervalues their time and values your team or your working environment over getting paid what they're worth. I work hard to save up faster for financial independence; I want to spend my time working on what I want, not what someone else wants me to work on. Life is short.

scandox 9y ago
Sure and I don't expect people to be foolish. Or to buy into any BS. However I do think politeness and an interest in long term mutual benefit is better. The world you describe suggests a zero sum approach in which, indeed, the music must one day stop.
- eropple 9y ago
  It isn't labor's decision whether this is a zero-sum game or not, though.
tensor 9y ago
It could be that people offering less simply don't value your skills as much. I've certainly seen people who think they are senior but in tests come out only intermediate. That someone else will buy into their senior claim doesn't mean the companies that do a better job judging skill level don't pay market rate. You seem to be implying that there is no such thing as being overpaid, which is pretty nonsensical.

ndrr 9y ago

Spoiled and overpriced sounds like you don't value them. Is this a reaction to their attitude in the interview or does it start at the resume or email communications?

scandox 9y ago
Face to face. I'm talking about people who don't feel the need to in anyway justify why they're there. The discussion is basically a critical assessment of us combined with a mortal combat approach to salary discussions.
- ktRolster 9y ago
  Let's be honest: the corporations that hire us will drop us as soon as it becomes convenient to the bottom line, and as likely as not without a severance package. You owe it to yourself to get the best possible compensation package, because no one else will do it for you.
  - minikites 9y ago
    That happens to all workers, but because technical workers are in short supply, that's why they tend to be spoiled and overpriced. Everyone else learns humility.
delphinius81 9y ago
It starts early at the resume/email communications. I expect to see in communications that a candidate can present themselves in a mature, professional manner. That's something you tend to learn with experience, though it also feels like common sense.

whipoodle 9y ago

Oh my god. Give me a break.

bogomipz 9y ago

Are you a recruiter then? What specifically is your role in the hiring process? Two of the points were detailing completely unprofessional and all too common practices from recruiters and - ghosting and not keeping appointments(flaking.) I would be curious to hear how a candidate expressing frustration at those disrespectful practices might cause you to think that they are "spoiled", "overpaid" or "lack humility."

scandox 9y ago
No. I am the person who hires IT people at my organisation. Edit: I am also a programmer
- bogomipz 9y ago
  How is that not a recruiter then? Can you answer the other part of my question?

rovek 9y ago

Speaking as an engineer regularly hiring engineers, it depends on the hiring company. Assuming that one is interviewing for a benevolent and altruistic employer - who values and rewards positive, talented employees - one could afford to be accommodating during the hiring process. Given those don't exist I would expect tech folk and designers to rinse employers for every penny as that is the treatment they will get when the table turns again.