3 ms·

This kind of malicious compliance is what everyone said would happen, but to be fair most companies with any sense are too risk-averse to give that wide a range

This kind of malicious compliance is what everyone said would happen, but to be fair most companies with any sense are too risk-averse to give that wide a range, and they actually give you a realistic idea of what the role will pay, with the low end being their lowest CoL location and the high end being SF/NYC/etc. YMMV of course...

ghaff 3y ago
If you really won't negotiate up past some point, who wins by listing a higher number? And if you do encounter some superstar you really want to hire, there's usually the option of creating a position for them.
- vidarh 3y ago
  Wouldn't argue it's a "superstar" position, but this is exactly what happened for me. I applied to a role where the range was too low but I figured I could negotiate it up, they told me they couldn't for that role, but that they had something else in mind that would work. This is also a plus of people listing ranges: You know when you can have a realistic shot of overshooting it. Asking for 20% above the top if your experience is valuable is not unreasonable. I've gone over the top of the top listed range several times over my career. (A bonus of trying for that, incidentally, is that you often stand out relative to other candidates and talking up salary and convincing people it's worth upping the seniority with you as only one of few candidates that experienced can work out well - aiming for a "I didn't realize we could get someone this experienced for only a little bit more" effect...)
  - ghaff 3y ago
    My current role, they just ended up creating a position for me. (I had sort of a non-standard background and they wanted to hire me.) It wasn't that the comp was especially spectacular but it was a lot better than what I was making and I wouldn't have fit neatly into posted jobs at the time.
notatoad 3y ago
this is really not "malicious compliance" it's just regular old non-compliance. publishing an absurd range doesn't satisfy the requirements of any pay transparency laws.
johnnyanmac 3y ago
those numbers aren't even minimum wage in any country, so it's in fact illegal to advertise that.

ghaff 3y ago

If you really won't negotiate up past some point, who wins by listing a higher number? And if you do encounter some superstar you really want to hire, there's usually the option of creating a position for them.

vidarh 3y ago
Wouldn't argue it's a "superstar" position, but this is exactly what happened for me. I applied to a role where the range was too low but I figured I could negotiate it up, they told me they couldn't for that role, but that they had something else in mind that would work. This is also a plus of people listing ranges: You know when you can have a realistic shot of overshooting it. Asking for 20% above the top if your experience is valuable is not unreasonable. I've gone over the top of the top listed range several times over my career. (A bonus of trying for that, incidentally, is that you often stand out relative to other candidates and talking up salary and convincing people it's worth upping the seniority with you as only one of few candidates that experienced can work out well - aiming for a "I didn't realize we could get someone this experienced for only a little bit more" effect...)
- ghaff 3y ago
  My current role, they just ended up creating a position for me. (I had sort of a non-standard background and they wanted to hire me.) It wasn't that the comp was especially spectacular but it was a lot better than what I was making and I wouldn't have fit neatly into posted jobs at the time.

notatoad 3y ago

this is really not "malicious compliance" it's just regular old non-compliance. publishing an absurd range doesn't satisfy the requirements of any pay transparency laws.

johnnyanmac 3y ago

those numbers aren't even minimum wage in any country, so it's in fact illegal to advertise that.