21 ms·

Quick Salary Tip for Software Engineers

177 points by trustfundbaby 15y ago

peacemaker 15y ago
His supplied quote asking if it's OK to go away and think about it comes across as weak/unsure of yourself in my opinion. A confident candidate will TELL the interviewer that they will need time to think about it. This isn't a thing to be rushed anyway so any interviewer should be fine with this. If not, do you really want to work for someone so pushy? Interviews are a 2 way street, a lot of interviewers forget that they are also on show to impress the candidate. Especially right now where there seems to be a lack of skilled engineers out there.
- jeffclark 15y ago
  It seems to me like that question may be purely "polite". It's OK to be and act confident. It's also OK to be nice and respectful at the same time.
kyt 15y ago
Wasn't part of the job of the technical recruiter supposed to be negotiating the salary? Considering they make a commission off it, I would assume it would be in their best interest.
- checker 15y ago
  Their commission can be based off how well they lowball you, so it's generally in their best interest to rush you into a quick decision before you second-guess your value.
  - jaggederest 15y ago
    Completely incorrect. A standard fee is usually based on six months of salary at the new job. Recruiters incentive is almost always to increase your salary. It's a bit different for internal recruiting, but this fellow seems like a normal external recruiter.
    - geebee 15y ago
      It's not quite as incorrect as you might think. The recruiter has a much greater incentive to close the deal than to get you a higher salary. Think about it this way - the recruiter gets paid a percentage of your salary when both sides reach agreement. Let's go with the 6 month figure here. So the company offers 100K and the programmer wants 110K. The recruiter stands to get 5k more. Sure, that's nice, but not if it means way more work, along with a risk of the deal falling apart! Here's a recruiter's dream placement: 1) recruiter get a resume 2) recruiter does quick hygiene check 3) recruiter forwards contact info to client 4) developer interviews well and accepts offer 5) recruiter collect commission A recruiter would much rather collect a quick 50K check for very little work than spend a lot of time haggling and potentially watching the whole deal fall apart. Most brokers are mainly interested in getting both sides to agree to a deal, because then they get paid. This is a very important thing to keep in mind when dealing with brokers!
    - ajross 15y ago
      That's true in isolation, but the variables have corrolations. If you dicker about salary long enough that the candidate takes another position you make no money at all. So the biggest incentive is to get your signature on the offer. That makes serious negotiation on the part of the recruiter almost impossible. I've never seen it in practice; they've always left salary discussions to me and the employer.
    - mcherm 15y ago
      A recruiter's income is proportional to salary * time-spent-per-position. If they could close deals 20% faster by settling on salaries that are 5% lower, it would increase their annual income. Also, repeat business is controlled by the firm, not by the employee, so it is to their advantage to keep the firm happy.
    - 9oliYQjP 15y ago
      Just curious, how does internal recruiting usually work?
- drewrv 15y ago
  Not always. Sometimes their time isn't worth the extra commission and they're better off working on other leads. Same goes for a real estate agent selling your house, why should they spend a week trying to sell for five or ten thousand more when only get five percent of that?
  - al0 15y ago
    someone read freakonomics
- Valien 15y ago
  Hey all, I'm a tech guy that also spent 3 years as a recruiter and in IT staffing sales/business dev. I know this industry in and out. I'm going to speak for our location (Greenville, SC). The normal direct-hire % is between 18-25%. If you're doing volume with a company you'll probably be 18-20%. If it's a niche skill or new company then 25%. The days of 30% is mostly over unless it's a retained search or some extremely difficult skill. This recruiter is on par with his advice. For a direct-hire role it is his best interest in getting you the highest salary possible because he will make more money that way. If he's a good recruiter he will do all the negotiation for you and you won't have to worry about it at all. You tell him what you need and he'll work his magic. Trust me, we are very good at getting those target salaries (if not more) for our developers. If you are going through a good agency and the salary question comes up then you need to defer that to the recruiter and if your recruiter doesn't know what to do then find a different agency. Lots of bad ones out there. Sometimes though you have to persuade a candidate even if the salary is not what he wants. As an example I placed a Sr. Architect at an awesome gig and the salary was 15K lower than what he was used to making. He was hemming and hawing and I told him up front that he could continue to look for work for his skillset and not find it in this area (he had been out of work for about 6 months at this time) or take the job at the lower salary with the potential to grow. Needless to say he took the job and has since been promoted (which I knew would happen cause of his skills and knowledge). No on contract-to-hire gigs it's the best interest in the recruiter to get you to take the lowest possible hourly rate and then he will bill the client the highest he could go. Why? Because it's all based on a Net Margin formula and the more NM the recruiter makes the more commission he'll make. Our firm wasn't too aggressive on beating down candidates but companies like TekSystems are notoriously known for low-balling their contractors and high-billing clients. Hope this helps some. Not all recruiters and agencies are bad but unfortunately many fly-by-night and sorry shops give the good ones a bad name. I will say this that 90% of the IT jobs out there (at least in our market) are never posted on a job board. They are filled by agencies because they can get it done faster and more efficiently than a job board and an HR person who's clueless on IT skill sets. ~V ps On a side note we had a joke in that internal recruiters were folks that couldn't hack it working for an agency. It's a different culture and fast-paced and being heavily commission driven tends to drive a good number of folks away. Why I left was that I placed myself back into IT :) And no, I did not get a commission on that (which would have been nice to boot!) :)
- stonemetal 15y ago
  If they get a 20% commission getting you a 2% pay increase nets them next to nothing(100K salary 20K commission, 102K salary 20.4K commission). So closing the deal is more important than getting you every last dollar possible.
atarian 15y ago
I would assume that it probably helps to have other job offers on the side or a current job that pays nearly the same as the job you're interested in for this to work.
edw519 15y ago
Quicker Salary Tip for Software Engineers: The first one to mention a number loses. Even when pressed, I never mention a number. For both of our sakes, however, I want to make sure that we're in the same ballpark or we're wasting each other's time. So I may (only if I have no better way) say something along the lines of, "I'm in the 90's now, but I'm clearly underpaid and I'm looking for the best way to solve that problem." Then I'll ask, "Are we in the same ballpark?" If not, we both smile and move on. If yes, we proceed. I always let them make an offer first. That's when the negotiation begins.
- jaggederest 15y ago
  My other tip is, there's always a little wiggle room to your advantage. When they give you their 'final offer' tell them to come up a little. They never fail to do it, even if it's only 1-2%, and it's increased my salary substantially over the years.
  - ams6110 15y ago
    Typically your best opportunity for a big raise is in the initial salary number. Future raises are often at least partly formula-driven. And since they are likely to be computed as a percentage of your current pay, perhaps with a merit component as well, getting more in the initial salary also means your raises will be more later.
    - shasta 15y ago
      Though if you're appreciated (I won't say good), you can get a big raise when you announce you're leaving.
      - dustingetz 15y ago
        if an employee has to threaten to leave to get a raise, someone is doing something wrong. probably the employee.
        15y ago
dotBen 15y ago
If you are healthy and have no dependents (thus don't have unusual/expensive medical insurance needs) then the best salary tip I've found is to be a 1099 contractor over a W2 employee. This is especially so if you are in a work-at-will State like California. When you've done your interview and the company is ready to make you an offer you can straight-up tell them you'd prefer a 1099 based relationship over W2. They may not like it or prefer that, but obviously the market for software engineering is a seller's market. You can usually expect to make at least 30% more like-for-like as a contractor because you're going to have to look after your own medical insurance, tax affairs and pension, etc. Don't forget that $100k offer the firm is going to pay you actually costs them more like $130k in terms of benefits, payroll tax, etc. So why not just ask them to give the full $130l to you? Plus you may be able to negotiate even more on top of that. The real fun happens when you start to make legitimate tax deductions that as a W2 employee you can't normally make. Computer equipment, software, ipads, games consoles, phone bill, meals with other people in the industry, etc. I bet you work from home too sometimes, so deduct a %age of your rent and utilities. These are all legitimate business expenses which are hard or impossible to deduct as a W2. The net benefit in terms of your annual take home pay is potentially going be a lot more than the advice given by the OP - although there is no reason to combine all of this together. (BTW Recruiters won't suggest this tip because their remuneration usually is based on W2 salary, and not contract positions)
- cma 15y ago
  Though you will make more, you will be on the hook for 100% of payroll taxes rather than 50% as in a normal W2 relationship. It is also a lot easier to get let go.
  - mahyarm 15y ago
    That obvious calculation will be added to your pay as a 1044, since they'll have to pay it anyway if they hired you as a W2.
- Jasber 15y ago
  You should be careful here: I bet you work from home too sometimes, so deduct a %age of your rent and utilities. This is usually a big red flag for IRS audits. It's my understanding you have to have a dedicated area just for work. So lounging on your couch wouldn't count. A corner desk or separate office is fine I think.
xarien 15y ago
You hear the quote "never give the first number" thrown around a lot and while it's sometimes good advice, it's not always the best option. There are times where setting the anchor is a very valid approach to hitting an upper bound. The most important aspect of negotiations is power. He who has more power will always have the upper hand in negotiations. This is usually where someone suggests reading the art of war, and that suggestion is generally pretty damn good. Power is defined pretty loosely as anything from data, supply, demand, urgency and beyond can be considered part of the equation. I'd start by doing some research to get a range of how much someone with the same background is currently making in the particular field. The caveat here is that you want to ask the person who just changed jobs and not the person who've been working at the same place for 20 years (I guarantee they'll be underpaid). One last point I want to make is that average negotiators always assume that the two parties will meet near the middle. Use that towards your advantage as bait.
- mkn 15y ago
  This is a hi-fidelity recapitulation of one of the main pop theories of negotiation, that good bargaining is always hard bargaining, especially if it's brainless. However, I think it's completely wrongheaded. There's a great book called Getting To Yes that I recommend everybody read. Here are the main points in a nutshell: 1. Focus on interests, not positions. 2. Separate the people from the problem. 3. Invent options for mutual gain. 4. Insist on objective criteria. How might that work in a salary negotiation? On the first point, the employer has interests in retention and morale, as well as in the value they can extract from an employee. (Or, maybe not. This is good information to have.) They want to minimize disruption so that they don't have to retrain. The employee has this interest, too, as it's stressful to change jobs. Neither party is going to be served by a wage that is out of balance either way. On the second point, one important thing not to do is to treat them as someone whom you'd use petty tactics on, as someone to whom you would use something "towards your advantage as bait." You're always having a meta-negotiation about the terms of the negotiation that carries over into your employment environment. Are you going to be cutting each other's throat all the time? Or, during your working relationship, are you going to want to be reaching understandings about how best and most fairly to proceed? On the third point, you might find that there is a non-obvious imbalance between your demonstrated skills, for example, and your potential in a job that looks to be an amazing fit. What to do then? Do we shift the risk onto the employer, forcing them to pay for potential? Do we shift it onto the employee, insisting on pay for experience only? Well, to "invent an option," what about a probationary period long enough to see whether the potential is going to materialize? The pay would be, say, slightly above pay for experience only, but well below potential. And then you revisit, agreeing in advance that either party can walk if the fit is poor. That's one option, there may be more. Like contracting at a higher rate with an option to be brought on as an employee. Or so on. Finally, on objective criteria: "Market rate" is not the only criteria. Market rate is just an average, anyhow. What's more objective would be anticipated value from the unique relationship between this employee and that company. How much can you increase sales? What's the likely perceived differential in reputation of your employer if you, the crack tester, continually find nasty bugs before they're discovered outside, so that they can be patched before they become problems? What if you're the amazing architect who can design a robust system that is easy to program in, increasing developer productivity across the board? These things are measurable, even if Bayesian, criteria, if we can look at your history of providing these goods. I just bristle at this simplistic view of bargaining as mere power plays, and marvel at its persistence in the face of so many better options, not to mention the enormity of value left on the table by both sides of negotiations everywhere.
engtech 15y ago
I've sadly realized that almost all job offers are based on some combination of what they offer other candidates at that level and what you state your previous salary as. Given that you're an unknown commodity, they use your previous salary to determine how other companies valued you. Between 2001 to 2006 my salary went from 60k to 94k 2006 to 2008 I took a job at a "hot" startup and went down to 89k in return for options (I am never doing that again for a company bigger than 5 people). 2008 to 2012 I took a job that started at 95k, and I've only been able to drive the salary up to 103k even though I've gotten the highest rating possible on every performance evaluation (and I've been a key contributor to hardware development worth about 50 million in revenue -- when other products are breaking even / losing money). I feel that the only way I can advance my current position is by getting other job offers, but I don't want to be that guy.
- peteretep 15y ago
  > I feel that the only way I can advance my current position is by getting other job offers, but I don't want to be that guy. I don't understand that. Who is /that guy/ and why don't you want to be him?
  - jordan0day 15y ago
    I think engtech's point is they wish their work was better-recognized and better-rewarded, without him/her feeling he had to force his employer's hand by pulling a "well, XYZ corp is all lined up to pay me 20% more!" (AKA, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease"). Maybe that's realistically what you do have to do, but that doesn't mean it's ideal. It's easy to view the employer/employee relationship in a purely market-driven, antagonistic style, but I think many people who like their jobs really wish it wasn't like that. Again, it might be naive, but that doesn't make it wrong to feel that way. It really would be great if businesses could treat their employees like friends, and not just resources.
    - peteretep 15y ago
      I've heard this point before, and you know, not only do I vehemently disagree with it, I also think it's massive cognitive dissonance. People are brought up told that discussing money is taboo, and rationalize that. > force his employer's hand by pulling a > purely market-driven, antagonistic style Doesn't it strike you as odd that you've made those statements so emotionally laden? > It really would be great if businesses could treat their employees like friends, and not just resources. I think that would be dreadful. I want a company to treat me as a resource, and to realize that as a resource, they'll get the most out of me if they keep me happy. I would like the company to be acutely aware of how much I am worth, how much I cost, and what my options are, and to be happy that they're getting good value by employing me. Programmers spend so long convincing themselves they're scientists, but for some reason (and maybe it's because economics is such a weak science) this all completely goes out the window as soon as money is involved. I think it's weak-sauce for a programmer to be jumping around chasing a few bucks here and there, but if you're being undervalued, do something about it, rather than complaining that life is unfair, and that the company should be looking after you. And I say this as a bleeding-heart pinkie limey leftie liberal who actually worked at The Guardian once.
SatvikBeri 15y ago
Here's a not so quick tip: learn to steer conversations towards value for your client/employer, not just skills or abstract, hard-to-quantify achievements. When you and your potential employer are talking about millions of dollars, a 50% increase in salary becomes rather small.
earle 15y ago
I would never recommend this. Never, ever, negotiate salary. Negotiate COMPENSATION.
- krupan 15y ago
  No, negotiate salary to get it as high as possible, then vacation time to get as much as possible, then stock options, then 401k match, etc., etc. With each one make sure they know that is the most important thing to you, so they think that if they give you more on one item they can make it up by not giving you as much on the next one. Of course then the next one becomes the most important thing in the world to you... Of course, that's used-car buying tactics, so be careful. If you are talking to an HR guy it might be fine to make him mad, but sometimes I feel uncomfortable pushing that hard on my future manager like that.
AznHisoka 15y ago
I think best thing is just look for something when you dont need it. Then when they ask about salary, mention any number, it doesn't matter. Then when they give you a final offer, be a hard-ass and ask for 30% more. Keep saying no until you get the offer or they don't call you back. You might get laughed at a handful of times, but there will be someone who will give in. Again, do this when you don't need a job and aren't desperate. Just keep being a hardass and douchebag. It's not hard to when you're looking for sumthing casually.
- hippich 15y ago
  I would say, this possibly the best advice. It is applicable in many areas in fact. Starting from relationship...
- enan 15y ago
  Agreed. You can confidently negotiate if you've got nothing to lose. Another way to achieve this is to have multiple offers. You come out ahead when you have competing offers - get them in a bidding war. Also you can be a total hard-ass when negotiating with HR - you won't offend your future boss or team in the process. They usually are not involved in the negotiation process.
justinhj 15y ago
Here's a tip. Take tips from recruiters with a pinch of salt. Their goal in life is for programmers to change jobs as often as possible, and to make as big a salary as possible so that they get better commission. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, but their motivations are different to those of a programmer who wants a career. When I go for a job I take a lot more into consideration than the salary. There are the other benefits, the work environment, what will I learn, what challenges will I have to overcome, will I enjoy the work. If you change fields you may happily take a pay cut until you can perform at the same level you do now. You may take at a job that's a in a startup or at a company with financial difficulties that you think you can help turn around. In these scenarios a pay cut, deferred pay via bonus schemes or stock options maybe more important. Another issue is job security. Nobody likes to think of themselves as replaceable or average, but of course by definition most of us are. So if you negotiate yourself an extra $10k-$25k you better be prepared to deliver on that value or you will be at the top of the spreadsheet when it comes time to make cuts.
Sukotto 15y ago
(For anyone interested, here's a rehash of a comment I made a while back http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1097801 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1097801 which suggests you be flexible on salary to gain a larger total compensation. If you haven't worked out these numbers in advance, this is how I think you should spend the extra time the OP's tip will give you) Keep firmly in mind that your salary is only one term in the overall equation adding up your total compensation. Total compensation = sum(salary, daycare, commute costs, conferences, professional development, 401k matching, ...) Consider, for example, lunch. Here in NYC, a company that buys you a $10 sandwich for lunch every day is giving you $3,330+ salary equivalent (Assuming you're in the 25% tax bracket) [1] Take the time to sit down and do something along the following lines: - list out benefits a company might offer - group them into things you care about and things you don't (don't have kids -> don't need daycare) - for the things you care about, think about how much each one would cost you to pay for yourself - think about what minimum level of that benefit you would accept, happy, and ecstatic. (eg. Minimum: company pays for one local conference/year. Happy: one conference anywhere in US/yr. ecstatic: more than one conference anywhere in the world) - for the ones you DON'T care about, think about how much it costs the company to pay for each When it comes time to negotiate your compensation, always think in sets. Think (and talk) in terms of how moving any one piece requires movement on a different piece. Give up the things in the "don't care" set to gain at least as much value in the "want" set. Eg. They want to give you less money, you can agree to that, if they give you X more vacation days. Eg. They offer free daycare, you say that you appreciate that, but since you don't have kids you would rather have "work at home Fridays" and a slightly larger 401k match. By considering the total you are much more likely to get a better overall package [1] (salary equivalent) = (daily cost * 5 days/wk * 50 wks/yr) ------------------------------------ ( 1 - tax rate ) 25% tax bracket $ 5 lunch = (5 * 5 * 50)/(75%) = $1,667 salary $10 lunch = $3,333 So every $1 the company saves you (by buying your lunch or your monthly parking or whatever) is worth $333 in salary in the 25% tax bracket. (Assuming you don't change to a different tax bracket by the change to your cash salary)
- krupan 15y ago
  That's one way to look at it, but keep in mind how many other benefits are based off your salary. Raises[1] are often some percentage of your base salary. 401k match? Percentage of your salary. Bonuses? Often a percentage of your salary. Life insurance, AD&D benefits, long- and short-term disability, which you hopefully will never need, but if you do, all pay out according to your base salary. Keep all that in mind when you are doing the math. With a higher salary you can pay for day-care yourself (and still deduct it from your taxes) and bring a sandwich from home for lunch. 1. If a raise ever comes at all. Do not plan on it when you are negotiating your salary, even if they tell you everyone has gotten a 10% raise every year for the past 10 years.
markcunningham 15y ago
Hey everyone, thanks for the comments. As evidenced below, there are many different ways to negotiate on salary with companies. I've read through several below and they are spot on. Regards, Mark
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
johngalt 15y ago
Additional Quick Tip (Salary Judo): If they try to play hardball on salary negotiations. Turn their high standards around on them. Bring a copy of the job listing/requirements. Boss: "So we'll start you at $<salary>, and welcome aboard." You: "I look forward to it, but can we agree that I've demonstrated a value of $<salary+30%>?" Boss: "$<salary> is what everyone gets to start out, we'll review you in 6months." You: "Your job posting listed you were looking for an expert in a number of fields ABC...XYZ? Perhaps you're looking for more of a junior engineer?" The key is that you have a polite helpful tone the whole time. It's not confrontational or sarcastic. The point isn't to antagonize. Merely point out that high hiring standards = high compensation standards.
- mwd_ 15y ago
  This is interesting. I've learned to decode the over-the-top qualifications a little. It's not unheard of to see job listings mentioning 5 years of experience with some form of software development plus ideally a graduate degree with "competitive" compensation that turns out to be a fairly low-paid, junior position. These days I ignore the crazy qualifications when applying, but I've never called anyone on it.
- yason 15y ago
  I mis-clicked and accidentally downvoted you whereas I intended to give you an upvote. Looks like I can't unvote, so please someone up this back one notch.
  - kaybe 15y ago
    Done.
techiferous 15y ago
Quick salary tip for hiring software engineers: go easy on the low-balling. Once the software engineer realizes they are getting paid significantly lower than what they could get paid in the market, you may have just incentivized them to leave the company. Depending on the personality of the software engineer, they may not come to you and re-negotiate, they may simply look for a better offer elsewhere. So make sure you don't undermine your ability to retain talent.
- JoeCortopassi 15y ago
  Not much worse than finding out you are grossly underpaid. If that doesn't turn an exceptional employee into a slouch, I don't know what will.
anmol 15y ago
A founders perspective on this: I think such negotiation tips are great because they helps engineers, many of whom are not the best negotiators, get the fair market value they deserve. This is a real concern when recruiters are involved, or its a big company, or even a large startup (e.g. 50+ people). However, as a technical founder for a smaller team, its not really in my interest to mis-align employee incentives, especially engineers. The people we hire are at the top of their game. If they're are not treated fairly, they will eventually find out, and someone will feel bad or be de-motivated or eventually leave. Every instance of lack of transparency or apparent "unfairness" will breed resentment and impact the net productivity of a team that's trying to run at its 110%. Even if/when we do get things wrong occasionally, quarterly/annual reviews are a great way to correct for decisions made with limited initial data. Tl;Dr : Founders don't get rich by cutting corners on someone's salary/benefits.
dabent 15y ago
The example does work well if a company makes the mistake of not even going over salary early in the process. It's generally advised for the candidate to not bring up salary early on, but every situation that's involved a recruiter, it's the recruiter that brings salary up early - often before a phone screen. They don't want to waste the company's time if you're way to far off with salary. I'm also making the assumption that the 105k and 90k salaries both have the same benefit packages, option grants (if applicable) and work environments for the sake of simplicity in the article, but in practice, I've learned the hard way that the things beyond the salary matter most. One does want to maximize salary for a given company, but remember, that once you've been there for short while, all the other things start to matter much more. At least that's my experience.
mrs_doubtfire 15y ago
Employers: More often than not, you get what you pay for. Saving a few bucks in salary will probably cost you in the long run. Employees: Negotiate your salary realistically. Embellish too much and you'll find yourself negotiating your salary again (probably with a NEW potential employer) sooner than you'd like.
jakejake 15y ago
Another tip applies when you're interviewing at a company where they have a dedicated HR person who you talk to about salary (in other words you are not negotiating salary with the person who will actually be your boss or the owner) In that case there is a good chance that person is an internal recruiter and they may get a bonus based on number of hires they bring in. So if the company decided they want to hire you - this recruiter is very motivated to get you to accept. They will be bound by policy as far as what numbers they can give out without you asking for more. But they really don't really care how high your salary will be (unlike for example your boss or the owner might). If this is the situation then you really have nothing to lose by going way, way high with your salary request. The worst that will happen is the recruiter will just have to name their highest price they are allowed to go and hope you will accept. I can't think of any situation where a prospective employee named a price and we said "oh they're way too expensive, let's not insult them with a counter-offer." We always make our best counter-offer and hope the person accepts it.
hermannj314 15y ago
Isn't it bad to take salary negotiation advice from a recruiter? They might want to get you a job, absolutely, but their pay is directly proportional to how shitty you negotiate. I don't know if I can take advice from someone that directly benefits when their own advice is wrong.
- jurre 15y ago
  Don't recruiters get a percentage of your salary? If so, it would be in their interest for you to get paid as much as possible, wouldn't it?
  - hermannj314 15y ago
    Not necessarily. Let's assume the recruiter is paid a percentage (although in some cases they get paid more simply because you get paid less, let's ignore that case.) First, you and the recruiter have a different BATNA. He just wants you to get a job, otherwise he gets $0 and you want to get a job that aligns with your goals. Those usually don't match up. I've been in the position of being offered a job and rejecting it, it was clear at that moment the recruiter and I had divergent interests. Secondly, at the margin, the fact that the recruiter gets a percentage of the benefits of the negotation but usually shares equally in the costs of negotiating (every recruiter I work with proxies the negotiation), the profit maximization point for you and the recruiter are rarely ever at the same point. In fact, the recruiter will nearly always be willing to abandon negotiations and settle at a lower salary than you should. The same thing happens in real-estate. Offering and counter-offering for 3 days over 6% of $3000 is a lot different than 94% of $3000. Maybe I am wrong. Also, I am not saying the recruiter that wrote this is incorrect. I am just saying that I hold his advice under the strong light of scrutiny. I hope I haven't crossed the line into ad hominem fallacy by doing this.

177 points by trustfundbaby 15y ago

His supplied quote asking if it's OK to go away and think about it comes across as weak/unsure of yourself in my opinion. A confident candidate will TELL the interviewer that they will need time to think about it. This isn't a thing to be rushed anyway so any interviewer should be fine with this. If not, do you really want to work for someone so pushy? Interviews are a 2 way street, a lot of interviewers forget that they are also on show to impress the candidate. Especially right now where there seems to be a lack of skilled engineers out there.

jeffclark 15y ago
It seems to me like that question may be purely "polite". It's OK to be and act confident. It's also OK to be nice and respectful at the same time.

kyt 15y ago

Wasn't part of the job of the technical recruiter supposed to be negotiating the salary? Considering they make a commission off it, I would assume it would be in their best interest.

checker 15y ago
Their commission can be based off how well they lowball you, so it's generally in their best interest to rush you into a quick decision before you second-guess your value.
- jaggederest 15y ago
  Completely incorrect. A standard fee is usually based on six months of salary at the new job. Recruiters incentive is almost always to increase your salary. It's a bit different for internal recruiting, but this fellow seems like a normal external recruiter.
  - geebee 15y ago
    It's not quite as incorrect as you might think. The recruiter has a much greater incentive to close the deal than to get you a higher salary. Think about it this way - the recruiter gets paid a percentage of your salary when both sides reach agreement. Let's go with the 6 month figure here. So the company offers 100K and the programmer wants 110K. The recruiter stands to get 5k more. Sure, that's nice, but not if it means way more work, along with a risk of the deal falling apart! Here's a recruiter's dream placement: 1) recruiter get a resume 2) recruiter does quick hygiene check 3) recruiter forwards contact info to client 4) developer interviews well and accepts offer 5) recruiter collect commission A recruiter would much rather collect a quick 50K check for very little work than spend a lot of time haggling and potentially watching the whole deal fall apart. Most brokers are mainly interested in getting both sides to agree to a deal, because then they get paid. This is a very important thing to keep in mind when dealing with brokers!
  - ajross 15y ago
    That's true in isolation, but the variables have corrolations. If you dicker about salary long enough that the candidate takes another position you make no money at all. So the biggest incentive is to get your signature on the offer. That makes serious negotiation on the part of the recruiter almost impossible. I've never seen it in practice; they've always left salary discussions to me and the employer.
  - mcherm 15y ago
    A recruiter's income is proportional to salary * time-spent-per-position. If they could close deals 20% faster by settling on salaries that are 5% lower, it would increase their annual income. Also, repeat business is controlled by the firm, not by the employee, so it is to their advantage to keep the firm happy.
  - 9oliYQjP 15y ago
    Just curious, how does internal recruiting usually work?
drewrv 15y ago
Not always. Sometimes their time isn't worth the extra commission and they're better off working on other leads. Same goes for a real estate agent selling your house, why should they spend a week trying to sell for five or ten thousand more when only get five percent of that?
- al0 15y ago
  someone read freakonomics
Valien 15y ago
Hey all, I'm a tech guy that also spent 3 years as a recruiter and in IT staffing sales/business dev. I know this industry in and out. I'm going to speak for our location (Greenville, SC). The normal direct-hire % is between 18-25%. If you're doing volume with a company you'll probably be 18-20%. If it's a niche skill or new company then 25%. The days of 30% is mostly over unless it's a retained search or some extremely difficult skill. This recruiter is on par with his advice. For a direct-hire role it is his best interest in getting you the highest salary possible because he will make more money that way. If he's a good recruiter he will do all the negotiation for you and you won't have to worry about it at all. You tell him what you need and he'll work his magic. Trust me, we are very good at getting those target salaries (if not more) for our developers. If you are going through a good agency and the salary question comes up then you need to defer that to the recruiter and if your recruiter doesn't know what to do then find a different agency. Lots of bad ones out there. Sometimes though you have to persuade a candidate even if the salary is not what he wants. As an example I placed a Sr. Architect at an awesome gig and the salary was 15K lower than what he was used to making. He was hemming and hawing and I told him up front that he could continue to look for work for his skillset and not find it in this area (he had been out of work for about 6 months at this time) or take the job at the lower salary with the potential to grow. Needless to say he took the job and has since been promoted (which I knew would happen cause of his skills and knowledge). No on contract-to-hire gigs it's the best interest in the recruiter to get you to take the lowest possible hourly rate and then he will bill the client the highest he could go. Why? Because it's all based on a Net Margin formula and the more NM the recruiter makes the more commission he'll make. Our firm wasn't too aggressive on beating down candidates but companies like TekSystems are notoriously known for low-balling their contractors and high-billing clients. Hope this helps some. Not all recruiters and agencies are bad but unfortunately many fly-by-night and sorry shops give the good ones a bad name. I will say this that 90% of the IT jobs out there (at least in our market) are never posted on a job board. They are filled by agencies because they can get it done faster and more efficiently than a job board and an HR person who's clueless on IT skill sets. ~V ps On a side note we had a joke in that internal recruiters were folks that couldn't hack it working for an agency. It's a different culture and fast-paced and being heavily commission driven tends to drive a good number of folks away. Why I left was that I placed myself back into IT :) And no, I did not get a commission on that (which would have been nice to boot!) :)
stonemetal 15y ago
If they get a 20% commission getting you a 2% pay increase nets them next to nothing(100K salary 20K commission, 102K salary 20.4K commission). So closing the deal is more important than getting you every last dollar possible.

atarian 15y ago

I would assume that it probably helps to have other job offers on the side or a current job that pays nearly the same as the job you're interested in for this to work.

edw519 15y ago

Quicker Salary Tip for Software Engineers: The first one to mention a number loses. Even when pressed, I never mention a number. For both of our sakes, however, I want to make sure that we're in the same ballpark or we're wasting each other's time. So I may (only if I have no better way) say something along the lines of, "I'm in the 90's now, but I'm clearly underpaid and I'm looking for the best way to solve that problem." Then I'll ask, "Are we in the same ballpark?" If not, we both smile and move on. If yes, we proceed. I always let them make an offer first. That's when the negotiation begins.

jaggederest 15y ago
My other tip is, there's always a little wiggle room to your advantage. When they give you their 'final offer' tell them to come up a little. They never fail to do it, even if it's only 1-2%, and it's increased my salary substantially over the years.
- ams6110 15y ago
  Typically your best opportunity for a big raise is in the initial salary number. Future raises are often at least partly formula-driven. And since they are likely to be computed as a percentage of your current pay, perhaps with a merit component as well, getting more in the initial salary also means your raises will be more later.
  - shasta 15y ago
    Though if you're appreciated (I won't say good), you can get a big raise when you announce you're leaving.
    - dustingetz 15y ago
      if an employee has to threaten to leave to get a raise, someone is doing something wrong. probably the employee.
      - 15y ago

dotBen 15y ago

If you are healthy and have no dependents (thus don't have unusual/expensive medical insurance needs) then the best salary tip I've found is to be a 1099 contractor over a W2 employee. This is especially so if you are in a work-at-will State like California. When you've done your interview and the company is ready to make you an offer you can straight-up tell them you'd prefer a 1099 based relationship over W2. They may not like it or prefer that, but obviously the market for software engineering is a seller's market. You can usually expect to make at least 30% more like-for-like as a contractor because you're going to have to look after your own medical insurance, tax affairs and pension, etc. Don't forget that $100k offer the firm is going to pay you actually costs them more like $130k in terms of benefits, payroll tax, etc. So why not just ask them to give the full $130l to you? Plus you may be able to negotiate even more on top of that. The real fun happens when you start to make legitimate tax deductions that as a W2 employee you can't normally make. Computer equipment, software, ipads, games consoles, phone bill, meals with other people in the industry, etc. I bet you work from home too sometimes, so deduct a %age of your rent and utilities. These are all legitimate business expenses which are hard or impossible to deduct as a W2. The net benefit in terms of your annual take home pay is potentially going be a lot more than the advice given by the OP - although there is no reason to combine all of this together. (BTW Recruiters won't suggest this tip because their remuneration usually is based on W2 salary, and not contract positions)

cma 15y ago
Though you will make more, you will be on the hook for 100% of payroll taxes rather than 50% as in a normal W2 relationship. It is also a lot easier to get let go.
- mahyarm 15y ago
  That obvious calculation will be added to your pay as a 1044, since they'll have to pay it anyway if they hired you as a W2.
Jasber 15y ago
You should be careful here: I bet you work from home too sometimes, so deduct a %age of your rent and utilities. This is usually a big red flag for IRS audits. It's my understanding you have to have a dedicated area just for work. So lounging on your couch wouldn't count. A corner desk or separate office is fine I think.

xarien 15y ago

You hear the quote "never give the first number" thrown around a lot and while it's sometimes good advice, it's not always the best option. There are times where setting the anchor is a very valid approach to hitting an upper bound. The most important aspect of negotiations is power. He who has more power will always have the upper hand in negotiations. This is usually where someone suggests reading the art of war, and that suggestion is generally pretty damn good. Power is defined pretty loosely as anything from data, supply, demand, urgency and beyond can be considered part of the equation. I'd start by doing some research to get a range of how much someone with the same background is currently making in the particular field. The caveat here is that you want to ask the person who just changed jobs and not the person who've been working at the same place for 20 years (I guarantee they'll be underpaid). One last point I want to make is that average negotiators always assume that the two parties will meet near the middle. Use that towards your advantage as bait.

mkn 15y ago
This is a hi-fidelity recapitulation of one of the main pop theories of negotiation, that good bargaining is always hard bargaining, especially if it's brainless. However, I think it's completely wrongheaded. There's a great book called Getting To Yes that I recommend everybody read. Here are the main points in a nutshell: 1. Focus on interests, not positions. 2. Separate the people from the problem. 3. Invent options for mutual gain. 4. Insist on objective criteria. How might that work in a salary negotiation? On the first point, the employer has interests in retention and morale, as well as in the value they can extract from an employee. (Or, maybe not. This is good information to have.) They want to minimize disruption so that they don't have to retrain. The employee has this interest, too, as it's stressful to change jobs. Neither party is going to be served by a wage that is out of balance either way. On the second point, one important thing not to do is to treat them as someone whom you'd use petty tactics on, as someone to whom you would use something "towards your advantage as bait." You're always having a meta-negotiation about the terms of the negotiation that carries over into your employment environment. Are you going to be cutting each other's throat all the time? Or, during your working relationship, are you going to want to be reaching understandings about how best and most fairly to proceed? On the third point, you might find that there is a non-obvious imbalance between your demonstrated skills, for example, and your potential in a job that looks to be an amazing fit. What to do then? Do we shift the risk onto the employer, forcing them to pay for potential? Do we shift it onto the employee, insisting on pay for experience only? Well, to "invent an option," what about a probationary period long enough to see whether the potential is going to materialize? The pay would be, say, slightly above pay for experience only, but well below potential. And then you revisit, agreeing in advance that either party can walk if the fit is poor. That's one option, there may be more. Like contracting at a higher rate with an option to be brought on as an employee. Or so on. Finally, on objective criteria: "Market rate" is not the only criteria. Market rate is just an average, anyhow. What's more objective would be anticipated value from the unique relationship between this employee and that company. How much can you increase sales? What's the likely perceived differential in reputation of your employer if you, the crack tester, continually find nasty bugs before they're discovered outside, so that they can be patched before they become problems? What if you're the amazing architect who can design a robust system that is easy to program in, increasing developer productivity across the board? These things are measurable, even if Bayesian, criteria, if we can look at your history of providing these goods. I just bristle at this simplistic view of bargaining as mere power plays, and marvel at its persistence in the face of so many better options, not to mention the enormity of value left on the table by both sides of negotiations everywhere.

engtech 15y ago

I've sadly realized that almost all job offers are based on some combination of what they offer other candidates at that level and what you state your previous salary as. Given that you're an unknown commodity, they use your previous salary to determine how other companies valued you. Between 2001 to 2006 my salary went from 60k to 94k 2006 to 2008 I took a job at a "hot" startup and went down to 89k in return for options (I am never doing that again for a company bigger than 5 people). 2008 to 2012 I took a job that started at 95k, and I've only been able to drive the salary up to 103k even though I've gotten the highest rating possible on every performance evaluation (and I've been a key contributor to hardware development worth about 50 million in revenue -- when other products are breaking even / losing money). I feel that the only way I can advance my current position is by getting other job offers, but I don't want to be that guy.

peteretep 15y ago
> I feel that the only way I can advance my current position is by getting other job offers, but I don't want to be that guy. I don't understand that. Who is /that guy/ and why don't you want to be him?
- jordan0day 15y ago
  I think engtech's point is they wish their work was better-recognized and better-rewarded, without him/her feeling he had to force his employer's hand by pulling a "well, XYZ corp is all lined up to pay me 20% more!" (AKA, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease"). Maybe that's realistically what you do have to do, but that doesn't mean it's ideal. It's easy to view the employer/employee relationship in a purely market-driven, antagonistic style, but I think many people who like their jobs really wish it wasn't like that. Again, it might be naive, but that doesn't make it wrong to feel that way. It really would be great if businesses could treat their employees like friends, and not just resources.
  - peteretep 15y ago
    I've heard this point before, and you know, not only do I vehemently disagree with it, I also think it's massive cognitive dissonance. People are brought up told that discussing money is taboo, and rationalize that. > force his employer's hand by pulling a > purely market-driven, antagonistic style Doesn't it strike you as odd that you've made those statements so emotionally laden? > It really would be great if businesses could treat their employees like friends, and not just resources. I think that would be dreadful. I want a company to treat me as a resource, and to realize that as a resource, they'll get the most out of me if they keep me happy. I would like the company to be acutely aware of how much I am worth, how much I cost, and what my options are, and to be happy that they're getting good value by employing me. Programmers spend so long convincing themselves they're scientists, but for some reason (and maybe it's because economics is such a weak science) this all completely goes out the window as soon as money is involved. I think it's weak-sauce for a programmer to be jumping around chasing a few bucks here and there, but if you're being undervalued, do something about it, rather than complaining that life is unfair, and that the company should be looking after you. And I say this as a bleeding-heart pinkie limey leftie liberal who actually worked at The Guardian once.

SatvikBeri 15y ago

Here's a not so quick tip: learn to steer conversations towards value for your client/employer, not just skills or abstract, hard-to-quantify achievements. When you and your potential employer are talking about millions of dollars, a 50% increase in salary becomes rather small.

earle 15y ago

I would never recommend this. Never, ever, negotiate salary. Negotiate COMPENSATION.

krupan 15y ago
No, negotiate salary to get it as high as possible, then vacation time to get as much as possible, then stock options, then 401k match, etc., etc. With each one make sure they know that is the most important thing to you, so they think that if they give you more on one item they can make it up by not giving you as much on the next one. Of course then the next one becomes the most important thing in the world to you... Of course, that's used-car buying tactics, so be careful. If you are talking to an HR guy it might be fine to make him mad, but sometimes I feel uncomfortable pushing that hard on my future manager like that.

AznHisoka 15y ago

I think best thing is just look for something when you dont need it. Then when they ask about salary, mention any number, it doesn't matter. Then when they give you a final offer, be a hard-ass and ask for 30% more. Keep saying no until you get the offer or they don't call you back. You might get laughed at a handful of times, but there will be someone who will give in. Again, do this when you don't need a job and aren't desperate. Just keep being a hardass and douchebag. It's not hard to when you're looking for sumthing casually.

hippich 15y ago
I would say, this possibly the best advice. It is applicable in many areas in fact. Starting from relationship...
enan 15y ago
Agreed. You can confidently negotiate if you've got nothing to lose. Another way to achieve this is to have multiple offers. You come out ahead when you have competing offers - get them in a bidding war. Also you can be a total hard-ass when negotiating with HR - you won't offend your future boss or team in the process. They usually are not involved in the negotiation process.

justinhj 15y ago

Here's a tip. Take tips from recruiters with a pinch of salt. Their goal in life is for programmers to change jobs as often as possible, and to make as big a salary as possible so that they get better commission. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, but their motivations are different to those of a programmer who wants a career. When I go for a job I take a lot more into consideration than the salary. There are the other benefits, the work environment, what will I learn, what challenges will I have to overcome, will I enjoy the work. If you change fields you may happily take a pay cut until you can perform at the same level you do now. You may take at a job that's a in a startup or at a company with financial difficulties that you think you can help turn around. In these scenarios a pay cut, deferred pay via bonus schemes or stock options maybe more important. Another issue is job security. Nobody likes to think of themselves as replaceable or average, but of course by definition most of us are. So if you negotiate yourself an extra $10k-$25k you better be prepared to deliver on that value or you will be at the top of the spreadsheet when it comes time to make cuts.

Sukotto 15y ago

(For anyone interested, here's a rehash of a comment I made a while back http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1097801 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1097801 which suggests you be flexible on salary to gain a larger total compensation. If you haven't worked out these numbers in advance, this is how I think you should spend the extra time the OP's tip will give you) Keep firmly in mind that your salary is only one term in the overall equation adding up your total compensation. Total compensation = sum(salary, daycare, commute costs, conferences, professional development, 401k matching, ...) Consider, for example, lunch. Here in NYC, a company that buys you a $10 sandwich for lunch every day is giving you $3,330+ salary equivalent (Assuming you're in the 25% tax bracket) [1] Take the time to sit down and do something along the following lines: - list out benefits a company might offer - group them into things you care about and things you don't (don't have kids -> don't need daycare) - for the things you care about, think about how much each one would cost you to pay for yourself - think about what minimum level of that benefit you would accept, happy, and ecstatic. (eg. Minimum: company pays for one local conference/year. Happy: one conference anywhere in US/yr. ecstatic: more than one conference anywhere in the world) - for the ones you DON'T care about, think about how much it costs the company to pay for each When it comes time to negotiate your compensation, always think in sets. Think (and talk) in terms of how moving any one piece requires movement on a different piece. Give up the things in the "don't care" set to gain at least as much value in the "want" set. Eg. They want to give you less money, you can agree to that, if they give you X more vacation days. Eg. They offer free daycare, you say that you appreciate that, but since you don't have kids you would rather have "work at home Fridays" and a slightly larger 401k match. By considering the total you are much more likely to get a better overall package [1] (salary equivalent) = (daily cost * 5 days/wk * 50 wks/yr) ------------------------------------ ( 1 - tax rate ) 25% tax bracket $ 5 lunch = (5 * 5 * 50)/(75%) = $1,667 salary $10 lunch = $3,333 So every $1 the company saves you (by buying your lunch or your monthly parking or whatever) is worth $333 in salary in the 25% tax bracket. (Assuming you don't change to a different tax bracket by the change to your cash salary)

krupan 15y ago
That's one way to look at it, but keep in mind how many other benefits are based off your salary. Raises[1] are often some percentage of your base salary. 401k match? Percentage of your salary. Bonuses? Often a percentage of your salary. Life insurance, AD&D benefits, long- and short-term disability, which you hopefully will never need, but if you do, all pay out according to your base salary. Keep all that in mind when you are doing the math. With a higher salary you can pay for day-care yourself (and still deduct it from your taxes) and bring a sandwich from home for lunch. 1. If a raise ever comes at all. Do not plan on it when you are negotiating your salary, even if they tell you everyone has gotten a 10% raise every year for the past 10 years.

markcunningham 15y ago

Hey everyone, thanks for the comments. As evidenced below, there are many different ways to negotiate on salary with companies. I've read through several below and they are spot on. Regards, Mark

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

johngalt 15y ago

Additional Quick Tip (Salary Judo): If they try to play hardball on salary negotiations. Turn their high standards around on them. Bring a copy of the job listing/requirements. Boss: "So we'll start you at $<salary>, and welcome aboard." You: "I look forward to it, but can we agree that I've demonstrated a value of $<salary+30%>?" Boss: "$<salary> is what everyone gets to start out, we'll review you in 6months." You: "Your job posting listed you were looking for an expert in a number of fields ABC...XYZ? Perhaps you're looking for more of a junior engineer?" The key is that you have a polite helpful tone the whole time. It's not confrontational or sarcastic. The point isn't to antagonize. Merely point out that high hiring standards = high compensation standards.

mwd_ 15y ago
This is interesting. I've learned to decode the over-the-top qualifications a little. It's not unheard of to see job listings mentioning 5 years of experience with some form of software development plus ideally a graduate degree with "competitive" compensation that turns out to be a fairly low-paid, junior position. These days I ignore the crazy qualifications when applying, but I've never called anyone on it.
yason 15y ago
I mis-clicked and accidentally downvoted you whereas I intended to give you an upvote. Looks like I can't unvote, so please someone up this back one notch.
- kaybe 15y ago
  Done.

techiferous 15y ago

Quick salary tip for hiring software engineers: go easy on the low-balling. Once the software engineer realizes they are getting paid significantly lower than what they could get paid in the market, you may have just incentivized them to leave the company. Depending on the personality of the software engineer, they may not come to you and re-negotiate, they may simply look for a better offer elsewhere. So make sure you don't undermine your ability to retain talent.

JoeCortopassi 15y ago
Not much worse than finding out you are grossly underpaid. If that doesn't turn an exceptional employee into a slouch, I don't know what will.

anmol 15y ago

A founders perspective on this: I think such negotiation tips are great because they helps engineers, many of whom are not the best negotiators, get the fair market value they deserve. This is a real concern when recruiters are involved, or its a big company, or even a large startup (e.g. 50+ people). However, as a technical founder for a smaller team, its not really in my interest to mis-align employee incentives, especially engineers. The people we hire are at the top of their game. If they're are not treated fairly, they will eventually find out, and someone will feel bad or be de-motivated or eventually leave. Every instance of lack of transparency or apparent "unfairness" will breed resentment and impact the net productivity of a team that's trying to run at its 110%. Even if/when we do get things wrong occasionally, quarterly/annual reviews are a great way to correct for decisions made with limited initial data. Tl;Dr : Founders don't get rich by cutting corners on someone's salary/benefits.

dabent 15y ago

The example does work well if a company makes the mistake of not even going over salary early in the process. It's generally advised for the candidate to not bring up salary early on, but every situation that's involved a recruiter, it's the recruiter that brings salary up early - often before a phone screen. They don't want to waste the company's time if you're way to far off with salary. I'm also making the assumption that the 105k and 90k salaries both have the same benefit packages, option grants (if applicable) and work environments for the sake of simplicity in the article, but in practice, I've learned the hard way that the things beyond the salary matter most. One does want to maximize salary for a given company, but remember, that once you've been there for short while, all the other things start to matter much more. At least that's my experience.

mrs_doubtfire 15y ago

Employers: More often than not, you get what you pay for. Saving a few bucks in salary will probably cost you in the long run. Employees: Negotiate your salary realistically. Embellish too much and you'll find yourself negotiating your salary again (probably with a NEW potential employer) sooner than you'd like.

jakejake 15y ago

Another tip applies when you're interviewing at a company where they have a dedicated HR person who you talk to about salary (in other words you are not negotiating salary with the person who will actually be your boss or the owner) In that case there is a good chance that person is an internal recruiter and they may get a bonus based on number of hires they bring in. So if the company decided they want to hire you - this recruiter is very motivated to get you to accept. They will be bound by policy as far as what numbers they can give out without you asking for more. But they really don't really care how high your salary will be (unlike for example your boss or the owner might). If this is the situation then you really have nothing to lose by going way, way high with your salary request. The worst that will happen is the recruiter will just have to name their highest price they are allowed to go and hope you will accept. I can't think of any situation where a prospective employee named a price and we said "oh they're way too expensive, let's not insult them with a counter-offer." We always make our best counter-offer and hope the person accepts it.

hermannj314 15y ago

Isn't it bad to take salary negotiation advice from a recruiter? They might want to get you a job, absolutely, but their pay is directly proportional to how shitty you negotiate. I don't know if I can take advice from someone that directly benefits when their own advice is wrong.

jurre 15y ago
Don't recruiters get a percentage of your salary? If so, it would be in their interest for you to get paid as much as possible, wouldn't it?
- hermannj314 15y ago
  Not necessarily. Let's assume the recruiter is paid a percentage (although in some cases they get paid more simply because you get paid less, let's ignore that case.) First, you and the recruiter have a different BATNA. He just wants you to get a job, otherwise he gets $0 and you want to get a job that aligns with your goals. Those usually don't match up. I've been in the position of being offered a job and rejecting it, it was clear at that moment the recruiter and I had divergent interests. Secondly, at the margin, the fact that the recruiter gets a percentage of the benefits of the negotation but usually shares equally in the costs of negotiating (every recruiter I work with proxies the negotiation), the profit maximization point for you and the recruiter are rarely ever at the same point. In fact, the recruiter will nearly always be willing to abandon negotiations and settle at a lower salary than you should. The same thing happens in real-estate. Offering and counter-offering for 3 days over 6% of $3000 is a lot different than 94% of $3000. Maybe I am wrong. Also, I am not saying the recruiter that wrote this is incorrect. I am just saying that I hold his advice under the strong light of scrutiny. I hope I haven't crossed the line into ad hominem fallacy by doing this.