7 ms·

I don't know about the EU business culture, but in the US you are expected to negotiate. You really have to fight for every penny you want...

Scarblac 8y ago
But we're talking about someone who already has a job, and the new company wants to entice away from that. What kind of negotiating tactic is it to start at 60% of current salary?
- pm90 8y ago
  Well, the OP mentioned that the recruiter thought the candidate was lying which is why they low-balled. So that explains the logic at least. They're not stupid, but they don't trust candidates I guess. Which is a whole different thing.
  - sverige 8y ago
    > the recruiter thought the candidate was lying > they don't trust candidates ...which is a great tell for what kind of relationship you would be starting if you did take the offer.
    - bsanr2 8y ago
      My understanding is that it IS common to lie, or else to redirect the conversation from what was made in the last position to what is desired for the new position. Why should it matter? You're being hired to fill a position that's worth x amount of compensation; the primary reason to ask for prior compensation seems to be to to get a "deal" (i.e., rob an employee of potential earnings).
      - bayesian_horse 8y ago
        There's no such thing as "worth X amount of compensation". The way it's supposed to work is that you and your employer (who represents the capital) generate a return from your joint venture. But the actual return is hard to predict. And there is no fair and obvious way to divvy up the return. So it comes down to negotiation power. There also may not be any condition where you and the capital agree to join. The capital may have better options to generate a return and you may have better options to get a salary.
        kraigie 8y ago
        >And there is no fair and obvious way to divvy up the return How about x% of average revenue per employee. Usally around 100k to 300k. So ARPE minus expenses = average salary. Probably around 60k to 70k for most companies.
        bayesian_horse 8y ago
        There is no shortage of ideas how to distribute profits, and no shortage of arguments which one is "fair" or which one is the best for whatever reason. This particular scheme means you are paying janitors as much as people who went to school for a decade or more. Some people would not find that equitable and fair. Few academics would find that offer competitive. And depriving the executives of large salaries also means you are increasing the incentive for corruption. If somebody has the power to squander a billion Dollar, you better pay her more than 100k. And you forgot to include capital gains, or you included it with expenses. Whoever owns the equity will want some return, otherwise they will invest elsewhere (or not at all).
      - bryanrasmussen 8y ago
        In my country there are very good statistics provided by the technical unions as to what compensation can be expected by region, technology domain, and seniority. I tend to quote those to set my salary and then argue up if need be.
      - naveen99 8y ago
        Once you make lying common, not sure you can claim higher moral ground or even a flat stable ground to stand on ever.
  - geezerjay 8y ago
    The OP also mentioned the offer was below the average market price for somenone with a similar work experience, which is simply absurd if their goal is to entice you away from your current job.
    - bayesian_horse 8y ago
      They may not know the precise work experience nor the market price. They may also not be able to need or afford either.
      - cannonedhamster 8y ago
        Which means that they haven't done the bare minimum research into the position, they hired incompetent people, or they themselves are incompetent. None of these options really screams good place to work.
  - revvx 8y ago
    Yeah, the recruiter told me the whole hiring team thought I was bullshitting about my salary. It was a problematic company from the get go. I was cold called and the recruiter was very insistent. Their engineers were very unprofessional during the technical interview and complained A LOT about technical debt left by past co-workers during the interview. Now, when I tell recruiters my minimum salary I refer recruiters to Glassdoor, just in case they doubt me.
    - chrisweekly 8y ago
      IIRC it's becoming illegal to ask about current salary. IMHO it should be irrelevant. The question is, what is the market rate for someone w/ your skills and experience?
      - WalterBright 8y ago
        > illegal The inevitable result of that is the people making bank will be sure to tell you, and ones making low salaries will not. The employer will therefore still know if you're making above or below the usual salary. Businesses don't like risk (just like employees don't) and hiring a new person poses a lot of risk. It's expensive, and the employee may not work out at all. The more risk there is in hiring someone, the lower the salary offer will be to compensate. Salaries are a proxy for one's value when hiring. Removing that piece of information increases risk, and hence will lower the salary offers.
        stale2002 8y ago
        > The employer will therefore still know if you're making above or below the usual salary. Thats still way better than being forced to give an exact number. Now the employer has to kinda sorta guess. Instead of getting underpaid by 30%, you might only get underpaid by 20%.
        WalterBright 8y ago
        The more an employer has to guess, the more risk there is in hiring someone. Risk is mitigated by lowering the price, i.e. you get a lower offer. Also, if you wind up getting a salary that's more than you produce for the company, you'll be first in line to get laid off.
int_19h 8y ago
In Eastern Europe, you can also negotiate and make gains that way. The point is that you come to the interview with a known baseline of what they intend to offer to the candidate that meets their expectations. Thus, you can skip offers where it's so low that it's clearly not worth the trouble even trying to negotiate over. And if you do go to interview, you know the number below which you shouldn't go (and they know that you know).
lazyasciiart 8y ago
Thats not always what's happening. I've turned down jobs that came in beneath the expected salary range I gave them and then tried to sound offended when I said it wasn't good enough, they weren't interested in negotiating.
geuszb 8y ago
You can negotiate for a reasonable increase but if an offer comes in at half of what you're making, negotiation is a waste of time for both parties.
retiredcoder 8y ago
My anedata for EU is that varies a lot between States. In Germany, I had salary negotiation closer to what I was used to in the US (e.g.: two competing offers, etc). In Denmark, very little room to maneuver. I had no luck negotiating salaries in big corps here (Final comp in DK mostly from salary). Every attempt I made to initiate a salary discussion/negotiation seemed to make the hiring managers uncomfortable as in “we don’t do this here”..
- kraigie 8y ago
  >In Denmark, very little room to maneuve About the only thing I could see you getting in Denmark is a cost of living raise or maybe something to the whole department or team. Some EU countries have a much stronger emphasis on sectoral bargaining. (Often there's a formal mechanism for everyone to work together to negotiate more pay)
kraigie 8y ago
>don't know about the EU business culture It varies much more than the American one does.

Scarblac 8y ago

But we're talking about someone who already has a job, and the new company wants to entice away from that. What kind of negotiating tactic is it to start at 60% of current salary?

pm90 8y ago
Well, the OP mentioned that the recruiter thought the candidate was lying which is why they low-balled. So that explains the logic at least. They're not stupid, but they don't trust candidates I guess. Which is a whole different thing.
- sverige 8y ago
  > the recruiter thought the candidate was lying > they don't trust candidates ...which is a great tell for what kind of relationship you would be starting if you did take the offer.
  - bsanr2 8y ago
    My understanding is that it IS common to lie, or else to redirect the conversation from what was made in the last position to what is desired for the new position. Why should it matter? You're being hired to fill a position that's worth x amount of compensation; the primary reason to ask for prior compensation seems to be to to get a "deal" (i.e., rob an employee of potential earnings).
    - bayesian_horse 8y ago
      There's no such thing as "worth X amount of compensation". The way it's supposed to work is that you and your employer (who represents the capital) generate a return from your joint venture. But the actual return is hard to predict. And there is no fair and obvious way to divvy up the return. So it comes down to negotiation power. There also may not be any condition where you and the capital agree to join. The capital may have better options to generate a return and you may have better options to get a salary.
      - kraigie 8y ago
        >And there is no fair and obvious way to divvy up the return How about x% of average revenue per employee. Usally around 100k to 300k. So ARPE minus expenses = average salary. Probably around 60k to 70k for most companies.
        bayesian_horse 8y ago
        There is no shortage of ideas how to distribute profits, and no shortage of arguments which one is "fair" or which one is the best for whatever reason. This particular scheme means you are paying janitors as much as people who went to school for a decade or more. Some people would not find that equitable and fair. Few academics would find that offer competitive. And depriving the executives of large salaries also means you are increasing the incentive for corruption. If somebody has the power to squander a billion Dollar, you better pay her more than 100k. And you forgot to include capital gains, or you included it with expenses. Whoever owns the equity will want some return, otherwise they will invest elsewhere (or not at all).
    - bryanrasmussen 8y ago
      In my country there are very good statistics provided by the technical unions as to what compensation can be expected by region, technology domain, and seniority. I tend to quote those to set my salary and then argue up if need be.
    - naveen99 8y ago
      Once you make lying common, not sure you can claim higher moral ground or even a flat stable ground to stand on ever.
- geezerjay 8y ago
  The OP also mentioned the offer was below the average market price for somenone with a similar work experience, which is simply absurd if their goal is to entice you away from your current job.
  - bayesian_horse 8y ago
    They may not know the precise work experience nor the market price. They may also not be able to need or afford either.
    - cannonedhamster 8y ago
      Which means that they haven't done the bare minimum research into the position, they hired incompetent people, or they themselves are incompetent. None of these options really screams good place to work.
- revvx 8y ago
  Yeah, the recruiter told me the whole hiring team thought I was bullshitting about my salary. It was a problematic company from the get go. I was cold called and the recruiter was very insistent. Their engineers were very unprofessional during the technical interview and complained A LOT about technical debt left by past co-workers during the interview. Now, when I tell recruiters my minimum salary I refer recruiters to Glassdoor, just in case they doubt me.
  - chrisweekly 8y ago
    IIRC it's becoming illegal to ask about current salary. IMHO it should be irrelevant. The question is, what is the market rate for someone w/ your skills and experience?
    - WalterBright 8y ago
      > illegal The inevitable result of that is the people making bank will be sure to tell you, and ones making low salaries will not. The employer will therefore still know if you're making above or below the usual salary. Businesses don't like risk (just like employees don't) and hiring a new person poses a lot of risk. It's expensive, and the employee may not work out at all. The more risk there is in hiring someone, the lower the salary offer will be to compensate. Salaries are a proxy for one's value when hiring. Removing that piece of information increases risk, and hence will lower the salary offers.
      - stale2002 8y ago
        > The employer will therefore still know if you're making above or below the usual salary. Thats still way better than being forced to give an exact number. Now the employer has to kinda sorta guess. Instead of getting underpaid by 30%, you might only get underpaid by 20%.
        WalterBright 8y ago
        The more an employer has to guess, the more risk there is in hiring someone. Risk is mitigated by lowering the price, i.e. you get a lower offer. Also, if you wind up getting a salary that's more than you produce for the company, you'll be first in line to get laid off.

int_19h 8y ago

In Eastern Europe, you can also negotiate and make gains that way. The point is that you come to the interview with a known baseline of what they intend to offer to the candidate that meets their expectations. Thus, you can skip offers where it's so low that it's clearly not worth the trouble even trying to negotiate over. And if you do go to interview, you know the number below which you shouldn't go (and they know that you know).

lazyasciiart 8y ago

Thats not always what's happening. I've turned down jobs that came in beneath the expected salary range I gave them and then tried to sound offended when I said it wasn't good enough, they weren't interested in negotiating.

geuszb 8y ago

You can negotiate for a reasonable increase but if an offer comes in at half of what you're making, negotiation is a waste of time for both parties.

retiredcoder 8y ago

My anedata for EU is that varies a lot between States. In Germany, I had salary negotiation closer to what I was used to in the US (e.g.: two competing offers, etc). In Denmark, very little room to maneuver. I had no luck negotiating salaries in big corps here (Final comp in DK mostly from salary). Every attempt I made to initiate a salary discussion/negotiation seemed to make the hiring managers uncomfortable as in “we don’t do this here”..

kraigie 8y ago
>In Denmark, very little room to maneuve About the only thing I could see you getting in Denmark is a cost of living raise or maybe something to the whole department or team. Some EU countries have a much stronger emphasis on sectoral bargaining. (Often there's a formal mechanism for everyone to work together to negotiate more pay)

kraigie 8y ago

>don't know about the EU business culture It varies much more than the American one does.