5 ms·

I think it’s better than nothing, but ultimately not helpful for job seekers working to learn how much a position will pay them. I work in a very regulated org

I think it’s better than nothing, but ultimately not helpful for job seekers working to learn how much a position will pay them. I work in a very regulated organization where all pay rates are published with postings. [0] But the ranges are $20-40k for each grade and it’s hard to tell what you will end up being offered and accepted. I think it helps prevent some mismatches of people confusing $20k and $200k positions but I frequently see people with work history in the $30/hour range applying for very high pay jobs. I find it hard to accurately peg my market value. When I worked in smaller orgs I would frequently see variability of 100-300% for the same job title. And even in really large orgs with big HR there might be a $100k pay band before bonuses. So what do I do with a job posting that says $110-250k? If Im senior, do I apply and expect $250k not knowing if there’s a single person who is amazing making they amount? Or if Im junior do I ask for $110, knowing I could get more. What I do is network to find what the actual pay is and negotiate around there. Or discuss with multiple offers. Id like to see something like the IRS releasing more anonymized data from w2 for employers that will let you look up quartiles by employer, broken out by employee filing address. This also has severe limitations but at least you can see how many employees they actually have and actually pay based on taxid. But self-reported pay data is so bad I don’t think it’s actually useful for stuff like “does this company I found on the internet actually hire people?” Unfortunately titles are so useless that I don’t think anything more than number of employees and distribution of their pay is better than what we have now. The privacy implications are serious and need to be accounted for. But I think only releasing for orgs over 100 or something. Or only for publicly traded. Or only that receive public funds, etc etc [0] https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/23Tables/html/GS.aspx https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries...

version_five 3y ago
The big ranges is a logical consequence of such stupid rules. People are not commodities, and only in the most trivial of work can you a priori know what an individual brings to it. It's typical government thinking that makes no sense in the real world. So employers are stuck publishing an absurdly wide band that reflects the difference in what different people might bring to the position. This is effectively populism, a simple and wrong solution to a much more complex problem.
- sarchertech 3y ago
  In the vast majority of cases, you’re not going to know what an individual brings to the job for 6 months to a year at the minimum. The majority of the pay difference between 2 people with the same job title (assuming standard bigco leveling) comes down to negotiating ability. Published pay ranges aren’t going to solve anything, but they do reduce the information asymmetry a little bit. They give you and idea of what is possible for they title in that company at that location. Companies have an incentive to post a relatively accurate range, and in most of the jobs I’ve applied for it was.
  - pc86 3y ago
    > The majority of the pay difference between 2 people with the same job title (assuming standard bigco leveling) comes down to negotiating ability. No, it comes down to about 1/3 negotiating ability and about 2/3 prior experience, impressions you give at the interview, and leverage (e.g. other offers real or perceived). The first one you can get from the resume and the other two happen over the course of the interview(s). If your resume shows you as a perfect fit for a position with a ton of relevant hyper-specific experience, you will naturally get an offer higher in the pay band than someone with half the amount of pseudo-relevant experience. Pay bands even $40-50k will help because most people actually do have a decent idea how qualified they are for a given job. I've applied for things where I'd be happy getting an offer toward the bottom of the pay band due to no relevant experience, and applied for things where I knew I should be at the very top.
    - sarchertech 3y ago
      When I say negotiating ability I also mean to include multiple offers. Which in my experience is the single biggest factor in determining pay for most software engineers. I agree more specialized and very senior rolls are different, but most people are going into much more generic roles. Even then bad negotiating skills can swamp out everything you else if you throw out a low number to someone willing to take advantage of it. All said we agree that realistic pay bands will help here.
- 3y ago
altdataseller 3y ago
I have asked some HR people this question about ranges, and most of them tell me they expect to pay the midpoint of the range. That is, if you meet the qualifications, they’ll offer you the midpoint. However if you blow them away or got some competing offers, they will offer you the high end. And if you got very little experience, the low end. That’s the rule of thumb. It doesn’t matter if the range is as wide as 80k-400k, just assume the midpoint is the starting offer I’ve also done some research where I took offers people disclosed in TeamBlind and compared them to the job posting, and in most cases the offer was very close to the midpoint https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SfaV1p_jbgoTOyCsD5wdU93ncZ8FIumrrFG5L5bUuqo/edit https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SfaV1p_jbgoTOyCsD5wd...
- artursapek 3y ago
  Yep, the range is also used for internal promotions. Someone who gets a title bump might end up in the lower end of the range for their new level (which should usually be higher than the high end of their previous range)
- carlob 3y ago
  If the range spans an order of magnitude, should I consider the logarithmic or linear midpoint? That is geometric or arithmetic mean between the ends?
  - altdataseller 3y ago
    The latter
  - Spooky23 3y ago
    They’re HR people - a log is a thing that used to be a tree.
    - verelo 3y ago
      No hate for HR but i have to share a funny line my previous business partner used to quote: "These people are often neither humane nor are they resourceful"
jstanley 3y ago
> I frequently see people with work history in the $30/hour range applying for very high pay jobs. Does a low-paying job in the past disqualify you from high-paying jobs in the future?
- throw1234651234 3y ago
  In my experience, it mostly does. Everyone tries to funnel you into +5-15% positions and may relent to +15%-30% when you reject their offer (two times and they still decide they need you).
  - nfriedly 3y ago
    I generally just don't say what my current role pays when interviewing. I ask what pay range they're targeting, and if they need a number from me, I'll offer a range where the low end is what I'd actually like.
    - pnutjam 3y ago
      Myself as well, but that information is out there and easily found through payroll subscription services.
- Spooky23 3y ago
  Yeah, it’s an entrenched form of classism. Sort of like the American version of the old British Civil Service. The plucky clerk will never be the high commissioner. Most companies paying premiums recruit a particular pedigree of university graduate. Few graduates of Flyover State are going to be rockstars at the First National Bank of Nowhere and get a fancy gig at Facebook or a hedge fund. One exception is .gov employees. For exceptional people, smarter companies will usually value their current comp at 150%.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
lotsofpulp 3y ago
> So what do I do with a job posting that says $110-250k? If Im senior, do I apply and expect $250k not knowing if there’s a single person who is amazing making they amount? Or if Im junior do I ask for $110, knowing I could get more. You apply with the knowledge that you will earn at least $110k, and if you want more, you should apply to more employers so that you have the negotiating position to ask for more.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> I work in a very regulated organization where all pay rates are published with postings. > But the ranges are $20-40k for each grade and it’s hard to tell what you will end up being offered and accepted Is it really that hard in fed land? I work for the state of California, and which has a similar level of regulation and similar posted ranges, but its pretty trivial most of the time to know exactly where you’d be set. I mean, its not 100% accurate, but this is right most of the time: If you are apply from outside the system, you will be offered the exact bottom of the range and there will be no flexibility. If you are inside the system, if its a lateral, you keep your pay. If its a higher range, you move up by the lesser of 5% or to the minimum of the new range. Also with no flexibility. The circumstances with any flexibility are very limited, what you get is almost completely determined by how you got to the job. > The privacy implications are serious and need to be accounted for. Of by-employer actual pay distribution disclosure? Is that why public sector employers pay a hefty wage premium because their employees pay data is public on an individual level, which obviously has even greater concerns? Oh, wait...

version_five 3y ago

The big ranges is a logical consequence of such stupid rules. People are not commodities, and only in the most trivial of work can you a priori know what an individual brings to it. It's typical government thinking that makes no sense in the real world. So employers are stuck publishing an absurdly wide band that reflects the difference in what different people might bring to the position. This is effectively populism, a simple and wrong solution to a much more complex problem.

sarchertech 3y ago
In the vast majority of cases, you’re not going to know what an individual brings to the job for 6 months to a year at the minimum. The majority of the pay difference between 2 people with the same job title (assuming standard bigco leveling) comes down to negotiating ability. Published pay ranges aren’t going to solve anything, but they do reduce the information asymmetry a little bit. They give you and idea of what is possible for they title in that company at that location. Companies have an incentive to post a relatively accurate range, and in most of the jobs I’ve applied for it was.
- pc86 3y ago
  > The majority of the pay difference between 2 people with the same job title (assuming standard bigco leveling) comes down to negotiating ability. No, it comes down to about 1/3 negotiating ability and about 2/3 prior experience, impressions you give at the interview, and leverage (e.g. other offers real or perceived). The first one you can get from the resume and the other two happen over the course of the interview(s). If your resume shows you as a perfect fit for a position with a ton of relevant hyper-specific experience, you will naturally get an offer higher in the pay band than someone with half the amount of pseudo-relevant experience. Pay bands even $40-50k will help because most people actually do have a decent idea how qualified they are for a given job. I've applied for things where I'd be happy getting an offer toward the bottom of the pay band due to no relevant experience, and applied for things where I knew I should be at the very top.
  - sarchertech 3y ago
    When I say negotiating ability I also mean to include multiple offers. Which in my experience is the single biggest factor in determining pay for most software engineers. I agree more specialized and very senior rolls are different, but most people are going into much more generic roles. Even then bad negotiating skills can swamp out everything you else if you throw out a low number to someone willing to take advantage of it. All said we agree that realistic pay bands will help here.
3y ago

altdataseller 3y ago

I have asked some HR people this question about ranges, and most of them tell me they expect to pay the midpoint of the range. That is, if you meet the qualifications, they’ll offer you the midpoint. However if you blow them away or got some competing offers, they will offer you the high end. And if you got very little experience, the low end. That’s the rule of thumb. It doesn’t matter if the range is as wide as 80k-400k, just assume the midpoint is the starting offer I’ve also done some research where I took offers people disclosed in TeamBlind and compared them to the job posting, and in most cases the offer was very close to the midpoint https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SfaV1p_jbgoTOyCsD5wdU93ncZ8FIumrrFG5L5bUuqo/edit https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SfaV1p_jbgoTOyCsD5wd...

artursapek 3y ago
Yep, the range is also used for internal promotions. Someone who gets a title bump might end up in the lower end of the range for their new level (which should usually be higher than the high end of their previous range)
carlob 3y ago
If the range spans an order of magnitude, should I consider the logarithmic or linear midpoint? That is geometric or arithmetic mean between the ends?
- altdataseller 3y ago
  The latter
- Spooky23 3y ago
  They’re HR people - a log is a thing that used to be a tree.
  - verelo 3y ago
    No hate for HR but i have to share a funny line my previous business partner used to quote: "These people are often neither humane nor are they resourceful"

jstanley 3y ago

> I frequently see people with work history in the $30/hour range applying for very high pay jobs. Does a low-paying job in the past disqualify you from high-paying jobs in the future?

throw1234651234 3y ago
In my experience, it mostly does. Everyone tries to funnel you into +5-15% positions and may relent to +15%-30% when you reject their offer (two times and they still decide they need you).
- nfriedly 3y ago
  I generally just don't say what my current role pays when interviewing. I ask what pay range they're targeting, and if they need a number from me, I'll offer a range where the low end is what I'd actually like.
  - pnutjam 3y ago
    Myself as well, but that information is out there and easily found through payroll subscription services.
Spooky23 3y ago
Yeah, it’s an entrenched form of classism. Sort of like the American version of the old British Civil Service. The plucky clerk will never be the high commissioner. Most companies paying premiums recruit a particular pedigree of university graduate. Few graduates of Flyover State are going to be rockstars at the First National Bank of Nowhere and get a fancy gig at Facebook or a hedge fund. One exception is .gov employees. For exceptional people, smarter companies will usually value their current comp at 150%.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

lotsofpulp 3y ago

> So what do I do with a job posting that says $110-250k? If Im senior, do I apply and expect $250k not knowing if there’s a single person who is amazing making they amount? Or if Im junior do I ask for $110, knowing I could get more. You apply with the knowledge that you will earn at least $110k, and if you want more, you should apply to more employers so that you have the negotiating position to ask for more.

dragonwriter 3y ago

> I work in a very regulated organization where all pay rates are published with postings. > But the ranges are $20-40k for each grade and it’s hard to tell what you will end up being offered and accepted Is it really that hard in fed land? I work for the state of California, and which has a similar level of regulation and similar posted ranges, but its pretty trivial most of the time to know exactly where you’d be set. I mean, its not 100% accurate, but this is right most of the time: If you are apply from outside the system, you will be offered the exact bottom of the range and there will be no flexibility. If you are inside the system, if its a lateral, you keep your pay. If its a higher range, you move up by the lesser of 5% or to the minimum of the new range. Also with no flexibility. The circumstances with any flexibility are very limited, what you get is almost completely determined by how you got to the job. > The privacy implications are serious and need to be accounted for. Of by-employer actual pay distribution disclosure? Is that why public sector employers pay a hefty wage premium because their employees pay data is public on an individual level, which obviously has even greater concerns? Oh, wait...