5 ms·

There is a 0% chance that I'd put in the effort to get an offer from a company just to set my price with a company I'd like to work for. No company is worth tha

by jghn 3y ago

There is a 0% chance that I'd put in the effort to get an offer from a company just to set my price with a company I'd like to work for. No company is worth that headache. If I happen to already have a competing offer, sure. But when job searching I'm not carpet bombing resumes, I'm targeting specific companies that I think would be a match.

lotsofpulp 3y ago
Then that is the price of not having the headache. Markets work best when buyers AND sellers are constantly engaging in negotiations.
- grogenaut 3y ago
  wouldn't this mean that your company is also negotiating your salary down regularly?
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    They do, by not giving appropriate raises. Adjusting down nominally is typically done via terminating everyone and telling them to reapplying. Though, in at least a somewhat healthy company, adjusting down nominally leaves too much of a bad taste, so layoffs are used instead where the remaining employees’ pay to qualify of life at work ratio goes down (more work responsibilities, more hours, less amenities at work, etc).
    - jghn 3y ago
      This is where pay transparency [1] comes in. If employees can see what other people are making and it's clear that old hands are getting the shaft, then old hands will leave. Also the last few places I've been at have made a conscious attempt to reset once a year or two to combat this effect. I can't speak to prior employers as that was before I started to be privy to how the sausage was made. Companies that don't reset compensation aren't worth working for. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38167969 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38167969
      - lotsofpulp 3y ago
        Transparency helps a lot, but is not sufficient. Labor buyers can also be knowledgeable about their labor supplier's other options, so if they are the only game in town (such as in smaller towns/metros), they might choose to adopt a more take it or leave it attitude.
- janalsncm 3y ago
  Markets also work best without information asymmetry.
dymk 3y ago
That's why you find two companies you'd like to work for, and have them compete against each other. This is just job hunting basics.
- no_wizard 3y ago
  In practice, this can get dubious. You'd be surprised how many companies will simply pull you out of the candidate process and decline the offer. Companies you would probably work for, to be honest. This works when you're pitting say, Netflix vs Meta or Apple vs Microsoft, or Google vs Amazon etc. but if you go down the ladder just a little, you'd be shocked at how much this doesn't work, is all. I feel like its too general of advice to say you can simply play two companies off each other. There's other tactics too, like setting a high minimum acceptable amount of compensation upfront, that one can use. Its all a little risky in a way
  - dymk 3y ago
    I believe that this has been your experience - I can only offer my own as another data point. I've done the "two competing offers" thing four or five times at companies big and small. I've never had a company rescind an offer or ghost. In fact they all seem to expect a competing offer; all have asked "Are you interviewing anywhere else?" at some point. I agree with discussing a minimum early on in the interview process. It's a good smoke test to ensure neither party's time is being wasted.
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    I’ve never heard of a company pulling an offer because a candidate was applying somewhere else. As a hiring manager, I’ve certainly never done it, because I basically don’t care where else you’re considering working. I’ll put our situation (project, team, comp, culture, etc) forward and you decide if you think it’s your best option. We might negotiate a tiny amount, but if you find a place that’s a lot better for you, you should go there, but I’m not pulling back the offer we made.
    - no_wizard 3y ago

by jghn 3y ago

lotsofpulp 3y ago

Then that is the price of not having the headache. Markets work best when buyers AND sellers are constantly engaging in negotiations.

grogenaut 3y ago
wouldn't this mean that your company is also negotiating your salary down regularly?
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  They do, by not giving appropriate raises. Adjusting down nominally is typically done via terminating everyone and telling them to reapplying. Though, in at least a somewhat healthy company, adjusting down nominally leaves too much of a bad taste, so layoffs are used instead where the remaining employees’ pay to qualify of life at work ratio goes down (more work responsibilities, more hours, less amenities at work, etc).
  - jghn 3y ago
    This is where pay transparency [1] comes in. If employees can see what other people are making and it's clear that old hands are getting the shaft, then old hands will leave. Also the last few places I've been at have made a conscious attempt to reset once a year or two to combat this effect. I can't speak to prior employers as that was before I started to be privy to how the sausage was made. Companies that don't reset compensation aren't worth working for. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38167969 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38167969
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      Transparency helps a lot, but is not sufficient. Labor buyers can also be knowledgeable about their labor supplier's other options, so if they are the only game in town (such as in smaller towns/metros), they might choose to adopt a more take it or leave it attitude.
janalsncm 3y ago
Markets also work best without information asymmetry.

dymk 3y ago

That's why you find two companies you'd like to work for, and have them compete against each other. This is just job hunting basics.

no_wizard 3y ago
In practice, this can get dubious. You'd be surprised how many companies will simply pull you out of the candidate process and decline the offer. Companies you would probably work for, to be honest. This works when you're pitting say, Netflix vs Meta or Apple vs Microsoft, or Google vs Amazon etc. but if you go down the ladder just a little, you'd be shocked at how much this doesn't work, is all. I feel like its too general of advice to say you can simply play two companies off each other. There's other tactics too, like setting a high minimum acceptable amount of compensation upfront, that one can use. Its all a little risky in a way
- dymk 3y ago
  I believe that this has been your experience - I can only offer my own as another data point. I've done the "two competing offers" thing four or five times at companies big and small. I've never had a company rescind an offer or ghost. In fact they all seem to expect a competing offer; all have asked "Are you interviewing anywhere else?" at some point. I agree with discussing a minimum early on in the interview process. It's a good smoke test to ensure neither party's time is being wasted.
- sokoloff 3y ago
  I’ve never heard of a company pulling an offer because a candidate was applying somewhere else. As a hiring manager, I’ve certainly never done it, because I basically don’t care where else you’re considering working. I’ll put our situation (project, team, comp, culture, etc) forward and you decide if you think it’s your best option. We might negotiate a tiny amount, but if you find a place that’s a lot better for you, you should go there, but I’m not pulling back the offer we made.
  - no_wizard 3y ago