4 ms·
Did you happen to see the part where I explained that a company could hire someone at a relatively junior, mid-level or senior opening- in an extremely competit
by hash872 5y ago
Did you happen to see the part where I explained that a company could hire someone at a relatively junior, mid-level or senior opening- in an extremely competitive market for software developers? Like, let's say you're X Startup, you desperately need a Golang developer, not having another good Golang developer on your team is costing you Y amounts of money per month, and you just can't find one in your preferred experience range. Do you A) do nothing and just continue to lose money each month for lack of a good developer, or B) hire someone who knows Golang, regardless of whether they're more junior or more senior than you were hoping? Does that kinda make sense?
- tshaddox 5y agoI understand that some companies might want to do this, but it’s explicitly not giving clear salary ranges for certain positions. It’s basically saying “we will pay you whatever, based on what we determine you are worth,” which is precisely the status quo that transparent salary advocates want to change.
- hash872 5y agoI know this is a bit of a loaded term, and I'm trying to use this in a non-political/nonpartisan context here- but isn't paying people based on rigid salary bands a bit, uh, Communistic? Like yes the company should pay you, an individual, based on what they're worth- if someone has 3 years of experience but they're better than someone with 10 years, shouldn't they be paid more? I thought tech culture was about individualism. You know who definitely has preset salary ranges for years of experience and isn't paying based on individual ability? The government & heavily unionized jobs. Seniority Trumps Everything there. I dunno, is that the world we want? I thought tech was philosophically opposed to that kind of mediocrity?