4 ms·

What prevents employers to game the rules with broad ranges like "30K-300K DOE"?

brianwawok 5y ago
The fun part is when you get to the offer stage, and the offer isn't for 300k.. "Hey you said this job paid 300k, what gives?"
ARandomerDude 5y ago
Just a couple guesses, could be wrong: 1. If someone has 10 years of experience and gets offered $150K, they know they're at half the earning potential. That's not a good way to come into the job. 2. Employees may monitor the job postings of their own company, then ask for a raise closer to the $300K ceiling, especially if they know they're valuable contributors.
burnished 5y ago
Does anything need to? Imagine you are looking at two job postings that are identical except for the salary range. One says 30K-300K DOE and the other says 150K-180K DOE. Are you going to trust the first one? I sure wouldn't. And if you are right and that becomes a problem, well, shit. Back to the drawing board I guess.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  If I wouldn't consider moving for anything less than $250K/yr, I’d consider the first one and not the second one. I'm not sure I'd trust a company who thought that software engineer value creation only varied by a maximum of 20% either. Tight ranges cut against companies differently than broad ranges.
  - burnished 5y ago
    I don't seriously believe that you want to apply for a job, knowing you set the bar at 250K/yr, when the posting set the bar at 30k/yr.
  - crvdgc 5y ago
    > I'm not sure I'd trust a company who thought that software engineer value creation only varied by a maximum of 20% either. But hiring is not evaluating a software engineer in general, rather it's to find a person for a specific role and a specific set of work to be done, a tighter range could mean better estimation.
georgel 5y ago
This already happens, for a while jobs on LinkedIn for Nordstrom (Denver) said exactly that.
Schiendelman 5y ago
Human reactions to being lowballed prevent that. Putting that bottom on a role that pays up to 300K will sour your candidates and is INCREDIBLY costly to hire for as a result.

The fun part is when you get to the offer stage, and the offer isn't for 300k.. "Hey you said this job paid 300k, what gives?"

ARandomerDude 5y ago

Just a couple guesses, could be wrong: 1. If someone has 10 years of experience and gets offered $150K, they know they're at half the earning potential. That's not a good way to come into the job. 2. Employees may monitor the job postings of their own company, then ask for a raise closer to the $300K ceiling, especially if they know they're valuable contributors.

burnished 5y ago

Does anything need to? Imagine you are looking at two job postings that are identical except for the salary range. One says 30K-300K DOE and the other says 150K-180K DOE. Are you going to trust the first one? I sure wouldn't. And if you are right and that becomes a problem, well, shit. Back to the drawing board I guess.

sokoloff 5y ago
If I wouldn't consider moving for anything less than $250K/yr, I’d consider the first one and not the second one. I'm not sure I'd trust a company who thought that software engineer value creation only varied by a maximum of 20% either. Tight ranges cut against companies differently than broad ranges.
- burnished 5y ago
  I don't seriously believe that you want to apply for a job, knowing you set the bar at 250K/yr, when the posting set the bar at 30k/yr.
- crvdgc 5y ago
  > I'm not sure I'd trust a company who thought that software engineer value creation only varied by a maximum of 20% either. But hiring is not evaluating a software engineer in general, rather it's to find a person for a specific role and a specific set of work to be done, a tighter range could mean better estimation.

georgel 5y ago

This already happens, for a while jobs on LinkedIn for Nordstrom (Denver) said exactly that.

Schiendelman 5y ago

Human reactions to being lowballed prevent that. Putting that bottom on a role that pays up to 300K will sour your candidates and is INCREDIBLY costly to hire for as a result.