3 ms·
> "though I don't think that not-offering them 10% of your company is undervaluing them." I didn't say anything about 10% ;) This may or may not be what you'r
by potatolicious 13y ago
> "though I don't think that not-offering them 10% of your company is undervaluing them."
I didn't say anything about 10% ;)
This may or may not be what you're suggesting, but I've seen this time and time again in NYC - find someone with talent making $45K in the Midwest and dazzle them with visions of the Big City and... $80K. I've heard of the same things happening in SF as well.
These guys never stay put, once they're in your local talent pool the recruiters will set upon them like sharks. It'll be a few months at most before someone comes in with a price adjustment on your engineer's services.
In this market, with a supply this short, any arbitrage opportunity is going to be highly temporary.
- balls187 13y agoAnd I didn't say companies should recruit and under-value ;) But to your point, yes bringing someone over, only to under pay them is only going to hurt you, as you said--the switching cost is nearly zero, and these days having stints on your resume that are 1-2 year at most, isn't a big deal.
- hapless 13y agoThe big problem with recruiting out of the Midwest is that nearly anyone with a marketable skill in the Midwest has stayed there by choice. It's not as if Midwestern engineers are unaware that working on the coast is an option. It is almost certainly an option considered and rejected. .