24 ms·
An update on salary transparency in job posts
- bearjaws 3y agoNow lets quantify how many of them are absurd listings. Recently saw a Senior Security Engineer role for Netflix, $100-$700k salary range. How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Do I come in at $400k? Is $250k a bargain rate? https://imgur.com/a/0Fe00Qf https://imgur.com/a/0Fe00Qf
- linuxftw 3y agoThis is an often proffered limitation of these laws, but there are second order effects. If someone hires a woman, minority, whatever else, at the $100k rate with the same qualifications they typically hire X group at the $700k rate, they're going to have some 'splainin' to do.
- toomuchtodo 3y agoPerfect is the enemy of good enough. If laws are found to have bugs, you keep patching them over time to close the loopholes.
- BobaFloutist 3y agoUnfortunately, the patch cycle for laws is, by design, incredibly slow.
- Retric 3y agoLuckily humans don’t change quickly. 1870’s era anti trust issues are still relevant in 2023. Problem shows up 150+ years ago and we’re still dealing with it. Slow patch times are often a feature. Laws that solve problems can seem irrelevant when those problems go away.
- altdataseller 3y agoExactly, and so there are a few outliers that don’t follow the spirit or good faith of the law. Guess what? You can ignore them! Nobody says you have to apply. There are plenty of other companies that are publishing informative salary ranges
- nightski 3y agoBut if it isn't a minority or woman then whatever right?
- howenterprisey 3y agoWhat's your point? Their point was that these scales can help provide evidence of minorities and women getting paid less. Can you expand on what we could learn from the situation of two people getting different salaries when they're neither minorities nor women?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- nightski 3y agoMy point was that singling out minorities or women is not necessary, it applies to all humans. Although I think what you end up is a mediocre salary for everyone, not just those who negotiate poorly. By setting the salary range tightly it prevents market forces from affecting pay much.
- linuxftw 3y agoUnfortunately, grouping people is the only way to enforce these laws in the US. You have to prove you were discriminated against because you are part of some protected group.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- thebradbain 3y agoA big range like that means you should feel more than fine selecting the average— so $400k— at the minimum. Anything less and you’re essentially admitting you don’t think you’re worth what the salary range is. Personally I would ask for clarification, and if they refuse to provide any, ask for near or above the top-end of the range. Theres plenty of $215k salary jobs currently, so if you happen to not land this one, then no loss of what you never had. But if you happen to get this job, making $700k, simply for asking, then congrats!
- joncrocks 3y agoThe issue is that if you're currently making $200K, it's hard to tell where they might think you might sit in that scale up-front. It's a bit like saying "Employee - $10K-$10M p/a" - It's not very useful in a job posting, as you might reasonably assume someone being paid the top salary is not actually doing the same role as at the bottom range.
- otteromkram 3y agoIf they aren't doing the same role, then why are salaries for two different roles listed under a single job requisition?
- dragonwriter 3y agoBecause outside of government and certain (but not all) bigcorps, knowledge worker jobs aren’t “find a cog to fit a precise position in a larger machine” things. Heck, even in government they often aren't, though the rules governing government hiring force people to superficially hire as if they were.
- vsareto 3y agoMost people don't know what a $400k Security Engineer actually does to warrant that pay because you can probably find a similar job at another company that pays much less and probably makes you work more. I sure as fuck don't and I at least have one pentesting cert FWIW. This pricing scheme punishes people trying to be honest about their skill set. Otherwise why stop at the average? Just max it out and ask for $700k. Another $300k/yr won't break Netflix's bank and everyone else is getting rich that they won't care to call you out either.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago>How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? Get a competing job offer. A minimum price lets labor sellers know if it is worth applying or not, and trends in supply and demand for that type of labor (based on which way the minimums are moving industry wide).
- photonbeam 3y agoThe timing on this is rather difficult though, and its non trivial time and effort
- lotsofpulp 3y agoIn any market, sellers should always be constantly seeking buyers and negotiating prices if they are interested in receiving the highest prices.
- buildbot 3y agoor “unethically” (depending on your ethics!), you could just _say_ you have a competing offer. Unless there is like some secret hiring manager slack where people ask each other “did you really send that person an offer?”.
- rglullis 3y agoThere is, but if I give more details my life will be in danger.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 3y agoYou don’t even have to disclose the company during negotiation, I’ve simply said “I have an offer from a Series A company with X equity and Y salary” so they have something to benchmark against
- tyingq 3y agoYou did used to be able to similarly overstate your current salary, and then something quite a lot more formal than "secret slack channel" evolved. And it's often not accurate. Urgh.
- wredue 3y agoDoes Netflix do location based pay? Could explain that. Not that I necessarily agree with location based pay scales. I haven’t really thought about this idea tbh. On one hand, a company can get location based pay scales simply by having an office in a different area. On the other, if you’re hired in San Fran and working remotely in (some much cheaper to live place) then it’s not really the same. Obviously, the state is benefiting much less from this scenario.
- barryrandall 3y agoDon't apply. The employer is showing you how they operate when they're trying to impress candidates. Do you really want to find out what they do when they know your best alternative is a job search?
- snovymgodym 3y agoI don't think that's absurd. That's a realistic enough salary band for getting hired at Netflix across all levels (https://www.levels.fyi/companies/netflix/salaries/software-engineer https://www.levels.fyi/companies/netflix/salaries/software-e...). It's not like those job listings that put "$0-$1000000 a year" in the salary range just to check the box. For that role it's most likely, they're hiring multiple security engineers and will level based on experience - most people they hire will probably make $200k-$350k. But the right person (10+ YoE in Security, relevant experience at competing streaming companies, strong interview performance) could definitely negotiate themselves to the top end of that range.
- Infinitesimus 3y ago> $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Research a bit about Netflix's comp philosophy and this will make more sense. It's not bubble compensation. They aim to beat what someone else will pay for your skills, as long as they want you working there. Until recently, they also only hired at a single IC level so the range was probably narrower.
- bearjaws 3y ago> They aim to beat what someone else will pay for your skills, as long as they want you working there. So what happened in 2020-2022 where everyone was willing to pay more and more for the same skill sets? I think we're agreeing on the same thing here, I am saying they will never pay $700k now, but they probably have someone at that comp level, so they have to list that in the range.
- purpleblue 3y agoYou have no idea what you're talking about, so please stop talking with such confidence. Netflix has always paid top of the market. They haven't dropped their salaries. Period, end of sentence.
- liquidpele 3y agoThey will, but it depends on previous work/level. The range is because they’ll hire you in for a position at your ideal level, not necessarily for the position you actually applied for.
- bee_rider 3y agoThat looks like, essentially, the decision not to tie skill levels to job titles. Which is legitimate I guess. But the company needs to fill particular niches, right? So if their philosophy doesn’t allow them to advertise for more or less experienced coders, it seems like they are signing themselves up for a more difficult filtering problem? I guess that’s why they are unusual. If this sort of thing became really widespread, it would be easy to write a law with more onerous reporting requirements. Maybe we should require a distribution of salaries for that role, for example.
- purpleblue 3y agoEvery one of these comments so far are from people that have no idea how much Netflix pays. $600k-700k for a Senior Software Engineer at Netflix is about expected. Also keep in mind, they pay all cash, so this isn't a "Total Compensation" number. I have a friend who made over $1 million cash at Netflix per year. Their philosophy is to pay top of market for the best talent.
- paulcole 3y ago> How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? Ask for what you want. If I'm making a salary I'm excited to earn, why do I care if I left money on the table? I'm happy! If I'm happy, somebody else being a better negotiator than me doesn't make me unhappy. If something in the future makes me unhappy about the salary I'm earning, then I'll address that in the future.
- varispeed 3y agoYou are asking wrong question. Salary range is what they can offer, but you should know your own value. If you think your time is worth $400k then ask $400k. It is simple as that. At one point you should know what amount of money would drive you to get out of bed and do whatever client wants.
- Aurornis 3y ago> How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Netflix does actually compensate within this range, though. The alternatives to these wide ranges are: 1. Create a lot of different postings with different ranges. This is how companies end up with Junior Engineer, Engineer, Senior Engineer, Staff Engineer, Senior Staff Engineer and other titles for what might be the same headcount. If someone comes in with skills and compensation expectations that don’t match the job they applied for, they get bumped to a different job listing. Nothing actually changes, but now the salary ranges are narrower in the job postings. 2. Give everyone similar base compensation and make the difference up in bonuses and RSUs, which aren’t posted in the job listings. These listings usually have lower compensation listed to signal the candidate that RSUs are going to be significant. For example, you’ll see Meta posting jobs with comp down to $129K even though everyone knows they’re going to get more RSUs than base comp. I’ve seen more companies claim to pay everyone the same, with the fine print being that equity grants can vary greatly from person to person. Really though, I think highly compensated devs need to acknowledge that this law wasn’t made for them. It was made for the people applying to jobs where they don’t know if the typical compensation is $18/hr or $30/hr, or people who have been earning $45K for years who haven’t realized that their peers are getting $60K. When someone is applying to $450K jobs at Netflix, they have numerous resources from levels.fyi to Blind that will reveal far more than a number on a job listing will. The law is not for highly compensated SWEs applying to the top 0.1% of jobs.
- jampekka 3y agoDouble the median salary is clearly a joke? White collar pay has gotten totally out of hand.
- digging 3y agoIn context, yes. For a senior engineering role at one of humanity's biggest richest companies in a very HCOL location, $100k is ludicrously low. Now, I agree that pay ranges across our economy are completely out of touch with reason, but in this context it would be downright stupid to take $100k for that role when non-FAANG could pay you more.
- yodsanklai 3y agoIt's not absurd, it's an actual range. I don't know about Netflix specifically, but I think it works that way: They know you resume, and how well you did at the interview. Based on that, they'll make you an offer which you can negotiate only slightly. It's also better to have a competing offer. Conversely, you should have some idea of how much you're worth and where you fit in that $100-$700K range.
- jejeyyy77 3y agoIf you fully meet said requirements, you anchor at $700K as per the ad - and then negotiate from there.
- INGSOCIALITE 3y agoThat’s what I’ve seen as well, it’s always a range with a huuuuuge gap. No one is posting the actual expected salary. It’s almost a scam, I could post a job listing with a salary of “$0 to $1,000,000,000.00”. It’s the same as not posting a salary number at all
- altdataseller 3y agoThe median range is somewhere around 40%, that is the max is 40% or so above the min. That’s based on my analysis of over 5 million job postings with salary ranges in them. A subset here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1j0Xap2Qt1bzY-8OA1GqkcV8IQzQtVsx2j4pNrGlpjqs/edit https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1j0Xap2Qt1bzY-8OA1Gqk.... Which is around what most salary ranges for a specific job grade have [1] That’s my data, not my gut. So yes, there are absurd ones, but it’s not the vast majority by far. So don’t throw the baby out with the bath water based on some outliers [1] https://www.aihr.com/hr-glossary/range-spread/#:~:text=A%20good%20salary%20range%20spread,job%20level%2C%20and%20the%20industry https://www.aihr.com/hr-glossary/range-spread/#:~:text=A%20g....
- oooyay 3y ago> How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. $100K is easily a junior salary. $700K is a Principal plus salary in "big tech". A huge portion of that is RSU's and there may be weight thrown into personal performance with certain goals that align to company objectives. There are certain SRE jobs that are designed this way, especially if you're on the policy or proactive software development side of SRE work where the products you build (policy or software) take time to build and have huge associated returns in terms of monetary and customer trust. For reference, my first SRE job was $75k/year.
- michaelteter 3y agoThe post says L4. That’s not junior or principal, it’s L4 (lower/middle). Given the specific level, the salary range is indeed absurd.
- oooyay 3y agoYeah, providing a range when they specify the level is unethical, I agree
- michaelteter 3y agoA range appropriate for the stated level is reasonable, but a range that (apparantely) encompasses their entire set of levels doesn't make sense. I would seriously wonder if the 100-700k part of the post was a mistake, because that would probably turn off a lot of candidates (preventing them from even applying).
- kevinsync 3y agoEarlier this year I read some commentary about how those wild salary ranges are in part a response to California's Pay Transparency Act -- basically, give a gigantic and irrelevant range to satisfy the letter of the law, not the spirit of the law. No clue if there's any truth to that though. https://californiapayroll.com/blog/sb-1162-california-pay-transparency-law/ https://californiapayroll.com/blog/sb-1162-california-pay-tr...
- ttymck 3y agoNetflix is probably the _only_ company I can think of where that range is defensible.
- JohnFen 3y ago> How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? I don't think I fully understand this question. When I apply for a position, I already know what my minimum salary requirement is, and I negotiate based on that. Any published salary range doesn't affect that, except that if my minimum is above their maximum, then I know not to bother applying.
- dantyti 3y ago> $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly... These are just your assumptions, but I aggree. However, when I see job posts with ranges like these, I just avoid the company, since it shows me that the company is: -lowballing employees -not transparent (i.e., posting nonsense salary ranges just to tick off the requirement)
- mock-possum 3y agoI just applied for an engineer position that listed it’s salary range as $130k-$190k - and part of the application process asked for a salary range, to which I replied $130k-$190k - what’s the point of that? Just say “this position starts at $130k” and let the details get worked out during the hiring process.
- altdataseller 3y agoThe median range is somewhere around 40%, that is the max is 40% or so above the min. That’s based on my analysis of over 5 million job postings with salary ranges in them. A subset here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1j0Xap2Qt1bzY-8OA1GqkcV8IQzQtVsx2j4pNrGlpjqs/edit https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1j0Xap2Qt1bzY-8OA1Gqk.... Which is around what most salary ranges for a specific job grade have [1] That’s my data, which you requested, so yes, there are absurd ones, but it’s not the vast majority by far. So don’t throw the baby out with the bath water based on one outlier you just found [1] https://www.aihr.com/hr-glossary/range-spread/#:~:text=A%20good%20salary%20range%20spread,job%20level%2C%20and%20the%20industry https://www.aihr.com/hr-glossary/range-spread/#:~:text=A%20g....
- gustavus 3y agoFirst off marketing piece masquerading as a blog/information. Secondly how many of those are ranges like $70,000-$150,000, or $15/hr-$30/hr type positions?
- pc86 3y ago$70-150k is completely reasonable for mid/mid-senior developer position at a small but profitable and growing company, for example. And you can parse a lot of good info from that. $150k is a reasonable if slightly-below-market cap for a mid-senior role. It also tells you that if you're far enough in your career to be looking for $200-250k+ TC roles, you won't waste your time. And if you're stuck at an entry-level role making $60-70k it's worth your time to spend a little more time on that application because it could be a big leg up.
- singron 3y agoThe scariest thing about the salary transparency laws is that it makes it blindingly obvious that companies do not regularly follow the law. Adherence is both very public and easy, but imagine all the other laws being broken all the time that aren't as trivial to comply with.
- mx_02 3y agoDo you mean it's a bad thing about the law? Or is a bad thing that is seeing the sunlight due to the law?
- dmoy 3y agoAlmost certainly the latter
- melvinmelih 3y agoSince the job listings are public it should be trivial to compile a public shame list of companies who still do not follow the rules in those states.
- toomuchtodo 3y agoPerhaps you could also use such a list to seek damages in states where the law allows for it (Washington state [1]) and provide the list to states where damages are not provided to encourage lawmakers to make the policy more robust. > If a company violates the new requirement [2], “a job applicant or an employee” is entitled to remedies, according to a state Legislature website. Those remedies could include up to $5,000 in compensation [3]. [1] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/months-after-wa-employers-required-to-share-pay-info-a-flood-of-lawsuits/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/months-after-wa-employ... ("Months after WA employers required to share pay info, a flood of lawsuits") [2] https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.110 https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.110 [3] https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.060 https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.060
- anotherhue 3y ago
- hiddencost 3y agoBig tech salary postings are mostly useless, because bonus and stock aren't included and could be more than half of total comp.
- fatnoah 3y agoAs someone in tech looking for a role, I agree, though there is some utility for big tech companies where compensation data is available elsewhere. By looking at the upper bound of the salary, I can reasonably infer the level of the role. For example, level 6 SWE roles at Meta show an upper bound of $241k and level 7 SWE roles show $289 (or thereabouts, IIRC). It's still of limited utility though, since one has to still use an external source to identify bonus percentage and possible range of equity values.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lotsofpulp 3y agoAt the least, they are helpful for people who are not “in the know” for which types of labor are selling for the highest prices. Maybe non native language speakers, immigrants, the immigrants’ kids, etc. more transparency in labor prices is helpful to at least the people earning less than the highest earners to show them where they can earn more.
- apocalyptic0n3 3y agoI'm shocked to see it's that high. I'm simultaneously shocked to see it's that low in states that require it. I suppose I shouldn't be — no law is obeyed 100% afterall — but I would have expected higher than 60%. This makes me think there needs to be higher penalties for failing to follow it.
- Consultant32452 3y agoI am similarly shocked. I don't remember the last time I saw a job posting that had the salary range listed.
- tbrake 3y agoI hope the next step is narrowing the ranges of "info" provided. You'll sometimes see postings like "Sr Staff Engineer at [fancy corp]: 135K-900K". Info like that is better than nothing, sure, but not by much.
- zeroCalories 3y agoImo the important information is the floor. If I could be offered an offensively low number after the trouble of applying and interviewing, I don't want to bother. The upper bound is at best for outlier rock star devs that might apply, at worst it's just bait or some arbitrary max.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- esprehn 3y agoHave you seen those absurdly wide ranges outside Netflix? They pay all cash and computed their ranges in a pretty silly way that produces nonsensical lower bounds.
- tbrake 3y agoNetflix is particularly egregious but yeah there are postings with ranges like $150K-400K all over. 250K is an incredible swing imo.
- DOSUser67 3y agoI wonder if a future law could include a clause that the salary range must be smaller than the minimum salary. Like you can't have a 250k swing with a 150k minimum salary.
- singron 3y agoI've seen companies give the range for an entire career ladder even though the listing is for a specific level. The laws aren't comprehensive enough to require it, but they should actually break it down instead. E.g. SWE1 135-155, SWE2 150-175, Sr SWE 165-200, etc. They should also detail equity comp and bonus. If you don't do this, somebody qualified for Sr Staff will see a ridiculously low minimum, assume that's total compensation, and ignore your listing.
- synergy20 3y agothis is absolutely welcome. yeah a wide range is still better than nothing. it's actually very simple, surprisingly many job posts still miss them: * location, remote or relocation or hybrid * pay range * job description this saves both sides' time in the end. I also like the 'simple apply' and in fact I only apply for those jobs, i.e. just send out resume, instead of filling out lots of personal info. if the employer needs that, please parse the resume yourself with a script.
- pc86 3y agoThe number of jobs I've seen that have absolutely no mention of whether they are remote, hybrid, or on-site is astounding. I'm not wasting my time applying for something 1200 miles away just to find out that they want a 2/3 hybrid setup. Realistically I'd never find out because they'll see my address and never contact me.
- SpicyLemonZest 3y agoThe default is and has always been that employees will come into the office, I don't know why you'd expect this to be specifically disclosed. If it doesn't say remote it's almost surely not remote.
- pc86 3y agoI would argue that the default for software engineers for the past 3-4 years has not been onsite, in person.
- SpicyLemonZest 3y agoAfter the big tech companies all did their RTO last year I'm really not sure how remote work could be seen as the default. I recognize that it happens - there was a whole drama cycle last month from Amazon employees who seem to have believed the RTO was optional - but it's not a wise job searching strategy to expect remote opportunities from a company that doesn't advertise them.
- photonbeam 3y agoIve seen good postings lately saying reasonable ranges like 130-200 and 180-250
- otteromkram 3y agoI'd take this number with some salt. Most job boards I've seem correctly parse salary ranges buried in job descriptions about 75% of the time. Also, this is just one job board; in all my time using internet career websites, I have never even heard of directly apply, so the headline seems a bit sensational in terms of what's being claimed.
- nytesky 3y agoThis will lead to universal low salaries, and real comp decided by bonuses and equity grants like with IB and Amazon. You don’t see full comp revealed, so since they have to show their hand it will trend down and make up the money for who they want to pay more with bonus etc
- tempsy 3y agoThere are other sites these companies know people check more than a posted salary range eg levels.fyi which would include everything
- LtWorf 3y agoSalary is money, bonuses are a bet. The 2 are not the same.
- SpicyLemonZest 3y agoThey're often not very bet-like in modern practice. One common setup is to have a "bonus target" of let's say 20% of your salary which is usually paid at par; perhaps you might get 25% if you get really great results or 15% if you have some big struggles.
- nytesky 3y agoYou should look into how investment bankers bonus work. If bonus was actual profit sharing, I would agree that it would be a different thing more akin to a bet, but the bonus is contingent mostly on your personal “performance” with some bail options if company hits the skids, but salary is a bet in that case as well, as you are an at will employee.
- LtWorf 3y agoMy company (USA located) paid less than the entirety of our bonuses because they lack money. My personal "performance" was fine. However performance without clear goals is useless, and with clear goals becomes a gamed metric.
- thrill 3y agoSalary ranges shouldn't be allowed - only minimums should be published.
- pc86 3y agoWhy? This doesn't line up to the reality of how headcount is allocated or how budgets are set. Every position has a range the hiring manager can place the new hire in given their experience and fit.
- DOSUser67 3y agoIt prevents companies from wasting peoples' time going through a whole interview loop, claiming a job is 200k-400k and then offering 200k-250k regardless. If the 200k isn't attractive to job seekers, they have to raise the floor.
- pc86 3y agoIf the budgeted range is 200-400k (it's very likely not) then it's an accurate post. It also shows the applicant that they can get 300k or more if they have a good argument for it beyond "I want it."
- dymk 3y agoA maximum on the band already existed, you just didn't know what it was.
- CYR1X 3y agoThis doesn't mean anything. Salary info could be as simple as "yes, there is a salary." This is like discounts that are "up to" a certain percentage. It doesn't actually mean anything.
- nonrandomstring 3y agoThis is a strange American thing. As a Brit it is utterly bizarre and alien to me. Nobody here would ever look twice at a job that didn't state the salary. If you're trying to fill a position the salary is probably the most important piece of information you need to sell it. How can an employment market even function otherwise?
- supersparrow 3y ago> As a Brit it is utterly bizarre and alien to me. I’m really surprised you say that. 90% of the jobs I look at for ‘software developer’ do not state salary. I have seen a couple with a ‘salary range’ but most don’t mention it or say “dependent on experience”. I’ve been working in software for 15 years now in the UK and that’s always been my experience. Even though it’s standard, I still don’t see it as normal that such a vital piece of information is always missing.
- BHSPitMonkey 3y ago> How can an employment market even function otherwise? Employee desperation to have income and health insurance means it's worth going into the interviews blind.
- digging 3y agoThat, and on the flip side, the very American desire to beat the odds and get an especially high offer.
- nonrandomstring 3y agoI admire that.
- SpicyLemonZest 3y agoI've seen plenty of UK job listings that don't state the salary? Meta for example posts a salary range for their US jobs (https://www.metacareers.com/v2/jobs/1651941818579349/ https://www.metacareers.com/v2/jobs/1651941818579349/) but not UK ones (https://www.metacareers.com/v2/jobs/2274967272693600/ https://www.metacareers.com/v2/jobs/2274967272693600/). There are some fields and roles where it's expected in the US as well, and I suspect that's just where the difference comes in. Without explicit salary ranges, the market functions through implicit cultural expectations about what an appropriate salary should be. Which of course has a lot of problems. For example, US software engineering salaries are stereotypically bimodal, and one of the staples of our mid 2010s job market discourse was people who'd only seen one hump insisting that the other can't possibly exist. (The question of whether there's actually two humps or just a wide range, I don't know if I've ever seen resolved.)
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 3y agoDoes anyone know what happens if someone posts a job at one range and then hires outside of it? Like if i get a competing offer outside their listed band, do they get in trouble for negotiating?
- nytesky 3y agoHah, who is going to report: I got paid too much.