4 ms·

When I apply for a job, I use data to figure out the highest salary the company will accept.

WalterBright 7mo ago
The internet has information on what salaries a company pays. One would be foolish to not look it up before negotiating compensation.
- JCTheDenthog 7mo ago
  Definitely not for all companies let alone all positions.
  - WalterBright 7mo ago
    You can get it from similarly positioned positions. For a simple example, you can google average starting salaries for your major. You can submit your resume to AI and ask it what your salary should be. You can go to a recruiter, who makes money by getting you as high a salary as possible (and they do know their business and their clients). I've been on both sides of the negotiating table. The idea that the employer dictates terms is not reality.
tombert 7mo ago
When I've applied for jobs and done salary negotiations, I try pretty hard to find out the max I can get using as many variables that I think are relevant (e.g. years of experience, previous companies I've worked for, projects I've contributed to, etc). No one is writing an article trying to expose me for this. I think the concern is how invasive they can be when doing this. It's one thing to quickly search your name on Google or something, but they can do creepier stuff. They can look at many, many more variables that I can, and it's a little creepy. It seems a little wrong to use peoples' credit scores in order to squeeze down a lower salary. I don't think there's anything even remotely comparable that a prospective employee can do.
- WalterBright 7mo ago
  > remotely comparable If it's publicly traded, the company's financial situation is laid bare. Nobody is obliged to accept a lowball offer, either.
  - moregrist 7mo ago
    A public company’s overall situation is laid bare. Unless you’re pretty close to the C suite, it has little to no relevance on your salary negotiation. As we’ve seen time and again this year, highly profitable companies will often lay off workers. So the overall health of a company has little to do with how much it necessarily values employees. And the tech industry has a record of both using machine learning to skirt laws and a history of illegally colluding to suppress wages. This feels like a greatest hits album for both. That is my concern: that all of this data combines with some black-box invasive “AI” model and then, magically, all my offers end up being lowball. Not whether I can decline to accept a specific lowball offer.
    - WalterBright 7mo ago
      > illegally colluding to suppress wages This was exposed because the colluders were cheating on their agreements with each other. That's the perennial problem with colluding - there is no enforcement of it. That's why cartels are unstable. > lowball When you enter a negotiation, you are always going to get a lowball offer. That's why it's a negotiation. There are many resources on how to negotiate. It's worth your while (literally) to study them. > So the overall health of a company has little to do with how much it necessarily values employees. Employees are valued according to the value they contribute to the company. Not the profits or losses to the company. Companies are not a jobs program, nor a social welfare organization, nor one's parents. The only thing a company owes you is what the terms of the contract you signed with them says they owe you. A company exists to make money for its owners. The employees are hired because they produce value in excess of what they cost.
      - moregrist 7mo ago
dymk 7mo ago
You have less data than the company
- throwaway_19sz 7mo ago
  What are you talking about? You have access to far more info on them than they do on you.
  - dymk 7mo ago
    Go read the article
    - throwaway_19sz 7mo ago
      I have read it. I don’t think you get my point. I said ‘access to’. If you think about it, there is plenty of data freely available about the company in most job applications (often including actual salaries they pay their staff - literally the most pertinent data). Yes, employers will use whatever tools they can to guess at what you might accept. It’s a negotiation. It is perfectly possible for both sides to approach a salary conversation as the negotiation that it clearly is. In reality, many job candidates barely think about negotiating the salary, but I doubt that’s due to not having enough data points. I think it’s probably more to do with not wanting to be perceived as ‘greedy’ or some other moral badness, and finding it more comfortable to let the recruiter/employer play them like a fiddle. Moral pride to spite their face. Sure, we can feel good in the moment by angrily pointing out that companies take various measures to maximise income and minimise expenditure, as if it’s surprising or ‘wrong’. But it might also be helpful to remember that we are in exactly the same situation. Then perhaps we can start negotiating better deals for ourselves, thus improving life for ourselves and our dependents.

The internet has information on what salaries a company pays. One would be foolish to not look it up before negotiating compensation.

JCTheDenthog 7mo ago
Definitely not for all companies let alone all positions.
- WalterBright 7mo ago
  You can get it from similarly positioned positions. For a simple example, you can google average starting salaries for your major. You can submit your resume to AI and ask it what your salary should be. You can go to a recruiter, who makes money by getting you as high a salary as possible (and they do know their business and their clients). I've been on both sides of the negotiating table. The idea that the employer dictates terms is not reality.

tombert 7mo ago

When I've applied for jobs and done salary negotiations, I try pretty hard to find out the max I can get using as many variables that I think are relevant (e.g. years of experience, previous companies I've worked for, projects I've contributed to, etc). No one is writing an article trying to expose me for this. I think the concern is how invasive they can be when doing this. It's one thing to quickly search your name on Google or something, but they can do creepier stuff. They can look at many, many more variables that I can, and it's a little creepy. It seems a little wrong to use peoples' credit scores in order to squeeze down a lower salary. I don't think there's anything even remotely comparable that a prospective employee can do.

WalterBright 7mo ago
> remotely comparable If it's publicly traded, the company's financial situation is laid bare. Nobody is obliged to accept a lowball offer, either.
- moregrist 7mo ago
  A public company’s overall situation is laid bare. Unless you’re pretty close to the C suite, it has little to no relevance on your salary negotiation. As we’ve seen time and again this year, highly profitable companies will often lay off workers. So the overall health of a company has little to do with how much it necessarily values employees. And the tech industry has a record of both using machine learning to skirt laws and a history of illegally colluding to suppress wages. This feels like a greatest hits album for both. That is my concern: that all of this data combines with some black-box invasive “AI” model and then, magically, all my offers end up being lowball. Not whether I can decline to accept a specific lowball offer.
  - WalterBright 7mo ago
    > illegally colluding to suppress wages This was exposed because the colluders were cheating on their agreements with each other. That's the perennial problem with colluding - there is no enforcement of it. That's why cartels are unstable. > lowball When you enter a negotiation, you are always going to get a lowball offer. That's why it's a negotiation. There are many resources on how to negotiate. It's worth your while (literally) to study them. > So the overall health of a company has little to do with how much it necessarily values employees. Employees are valued according to the value they contribute to the company. Not the profits or losses to the company. Companies are not a jobs program, nor a social welfare organization, nor one's parents. The only thing a company owes you is what the terms of the contract you signed with them says they owe you. A company exists to make money for its owners. The employees are hired because they produce value in excess of what they cost.
    - moregrist 7mo ago

dymk 7mo ago

You have less data than the company

throwaway_19sz 7mo ago
What are you talking about? You have access to far more info on them than they do on you.
- dymk 7mo ago
  Go read the article
  - throwaway_19sz 7mo ago
    I have read it. I don’t think you get my point. I said ‘access to’. If you think about it, there is plenty of data freely available about the company in most job applications (often including actual salaries they pay their staff - literally the most pertinent data). Yes, employers will use whatever tools they can to guess at what you might accept. It’s a negotiation. It is perfectly possible for both sides to approach a salary conversation as the negotiation that it clearly is. In reality, many job candidates barely think about negotiating the salary, but I doubt that’s due to not having enough data points. I think it’s probably more to do with not wanting to be perceived as ‘greedy’ or some other moral badness, and finding it more comfortable to let the recruiter/employer play them like a fiddle. Moral pride to spite their face. Sure, we can feel good in the moment by angrily pointing out that companies take various measures to maximise income and minimise expenditure, as if it’s surprising or ‘wrong’. But it might also be helpful to remember that we are in exactly the same situation. Then perhaps we can start negotiating better deals for ourselves, thus improving life for ourselves and our dependents.