Author Topic: Just got a raise and I'm still angry  (Read 19599 times)

FINate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1322
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #50 on: August 23, 2017, 02:58:35 PM »
Yes, in fact HR requires an answer before we will make any offer.  It is also on the paper application and they need to fill it out for the most current job at least.  People try to be evasive and they also know if they are found to have lied in the interview or application that can cause the offer to be rescinded or their employment terminated.  At a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I'm up front if this gets difficult.  I do not want to waste my time going back and forth negotiating salary.  They have no reason not to tell me what they want to get paid.  If they do it starts to create questions in my mind about what type of employee they will be.  In bognish's example I'd be fine with "I am currently getting paid $50K but I think that is low compared to the industry and I would not accept an offer less than $65K".  I'm not going to offer them $55K in that case because they've already told me they would not take it.  Now if I think $65K is out of the range then I also tell them.  In the end it's about each of us being respectful of each others time.

This is one of those areas where the power imbalance and resulting information asymmetry is unjust. In my ideal world if an employer can demand information about your current salary (with consequences if you lie), then the employee should be able to demand information about the pay range, with the ability to recover "back pay" if the company lies about it. I realize this is idealistic fantasyland :(

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #51 on: August 23, 2017, 03:12:39 PM »
Yes, in fact HR requires an answer before we will make any offer.  It is also on the paper application and they need to fill it out for the most current job at least.  People try to be evasive and they also know if they are found to have lied in the interview or application that can cause the offer to be rescinded or their employment terminated.  At a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I'm up front if this gets difficult.  I do not want to waste my time going back and forth negotiating salary.  They have no reason not to tell me what they want to get paid.  If they do it starts to create questions in my mind about what type of employee they will be.  In bognish's example I'd be fine with "I am currently getting paid $50K but I think that is low compared to the industry and I would not accept an offer less than $65K".  I'm not going to offer them $55K in that case because they've already told me they would not take it.  Now if I think $65K is out of the range then I also tell them.  In the end it's about each of us being respectful of each others time.

This is one of those areas where the power imbalance and resulting information asymmetry is unjust. In my ideal world if an employer can demand information about your current salary (with consequences if you lie), then the employee should be able to demand information about the pay range, with the ability to recover "back pay" if the company lies about it. I realize this is idealistic fantasyland :(
It's hard to make clear in a quick post.  I need a number to discuss/negotiate.  They can give current salary (which sometimes can be checked but rarely is) or they can tell me what they want to be paid.  I always ask what they expect to be paid whether they give their current salary or not.  To be that's the only number I care about because it's what I need to work toward or to simply accept to seal the deal.  So there no power imbalance and we move into standard negotiation.  Some people feel being coy or refusing to name what they want is likely to get them a better offer.  It might, but it might not.  The employee can ask about the pay range, and if they've given me what they want I can tell them if it is in the range.  I'd be stupid to lie about the range because pay grade and then the range is made available to employees during their review.  We tell them they are at 92% of the range or 110% of the range and that goes straight to a matrix that gives us the ability to give them a range based on their performance rating and where they fall in the comp range. 

I would expect a candidate comfortable with their prospects to refuse to work at a company that was not similarly transparent.  I get not all companies are.  I also lean very heavily on the no bullshit scale with my employees so I am open about why they did or did not get what they wanted where some others feel they need to be secretive.  Again, I'm being respectful of everyone's time and I expect them to do the same by naming a salary they want.  I absolutely have pulled an offer if a candidate told me that they'd accept X, we made the offer at X and then they decided to change their number.  Greed is one of the seven deadly sins for a reason.  Ask for what you want and when you get it don't get greedy and ask for more.  I've got no time for that and I'm not going to deal with that in daily discussions.  "When can I expect that project to be done?"  "Friday"  "Ok"  "You know what can we make it next Friday?" 

FINate

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1322
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #52 on: August 23, 2017, 03:27:26 PM »
It's hard to make clear in a quick post.  I need a number to discuss/negotiate.  They can give current salary (which sometimes can be checked but rarely is) or they can tell me what they want to be paid.  I always ask what they expect to be paid whether they give their current salary or not.  To be that's the only number I care about because it's what I need to work toward or to simply accept to seal the deal.  So there no power imbalance and we move into standard negotiation.  Some people feel being coy or refusing to name what they want is likely to get them a better offer.  It might, but it might not.  The employee can ask about the pay range, and if they've given me what they want I can tell them if it is in the range.  I'd be stupid to lie about the range because pay grade and then the range is made available to employees during their review.  We tell them they are at 92% of the range or 110% of the range and that goes straight to a matrix that gives us the ability to give them a range based on their performance rating and where they fall in the comp range. 

I would expect a candidate comfortable with their prospects to refuse to work at a company that was not similarly transparent.  I get not all companies are.  I also lean very heavily on the no bullshit scale with my employees so I am open about why they did or did not get what they wanted where some others feel they need to be secretive.  Again, I'm being respectful of everyone's time and I expect them to do the same by naming a salary they want.  I absolutely have pulled an offer if a candidate told me that they'd accept X, we made the offer at X and then they decided to change their number.  Greed is one of the seven deadly sins for a reason.  Ask for what you want and when you get it don't get greedy and ask for more.  I've got no time for that and I'm not going to deal with that in daily discussions.  "When can I expect that project to be done?"  "Friday"  "Ok"  "You know what can we make it next Friday?"

Asking what a candidate expect to be paid is one thing. I was talking specifically about asking for current salary. I've been on the receiving end of this before...very uncomfortable position because, on the one hand you know you're about to get screwed but on the other hand you need a job and offers are not easy to come by (particularly true in a down economy). And a lot of companies don't publish pay ranges internally. The power imbalance comes from reality that an employer can usually bide their time as an open position is not an existential crisis, whereas that's exactly what it is for most candidates. Yet another advantage of having FU money is that you're not subject to this imbalance and can negotiate aggressively.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2017, 03:29:16 PM by FINate »

Gronnie

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 267
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Orange County, CA
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #53 on: August 23, 2017, 06:40:03 PM »
@Zamboni I do want to offer the other side of "getting other offers".  In every company I have been a part of an employee coming to us and wanting a counter offer was put on a plan to be replaced.  This is a slippery slope and I'd advise anyone to tread lightly.  Even when you are fed up and leaving with no intent of staying and the company tries to counter, you need to understand it for what it usually is; a way to mitigate the impact to the organization by keeping you on while they immediately begin the search for your replacement and then lay you off when they find them.

I've seen much more success with market surveys and external "proof" being provided to get market adjustments.  I got a programmer of mine a 15% bump once to move him up.  Now, even in this scenario, he then felt he had an "in" on how to work the process and when he tried it again, he was given another increase (about 8% that time) but told very clearly by my boss that if he tried it again, he'd be out of a job, that this was the last time we were going to be tossed a "I need to be paid market rate or I'm leaving".  So remember also that you only get to go to the well so many times, so use them strategically.

Or.... your company could just pay market rates when you are an employer in a field where it is very easy for an employee to jump ship, unless you want to be constantly finding new employees.
You are correct.  And some companies choose or pay below market and deal (or do not deal with it because I believe most people grumble more than that actually take real action on that grumbling, i.e. too lazy to find another job so it's not enough of a problem for them to actually DO something about it). 

I also wonder when I see comments like this which I believe are meant to point out the stupidity of a policy if the poster actually works in an organization and hires staff.  In every case I've ever dealt with the salary you get when you come in is not determined by the market rate but based on what you made last and what you are willing to take.  As an example, we pay market to our developers, but I had a new developer we just hired who made $50K at their last job, for a position that we have budgeted in the $75-90K range which is the market rate for that job.   I wanted to offer them something in the range and  HR said no way we are giving them that big of a pay bump.  Since this thread has gone into gender gap, this is a male employee.  We hired him for $60K.  He was tickled pink because it was a jump up from his last role and the company felt great because we saved money.  I've had even more disparate examples over my career.  It's hard to argue that if I can buy an employees services for a cheaper rate than market that I would not do that. It's a truly interesting discussion particularly on this site where we all focus on maximizing our savings that we are OK paying below market for everything, but when it comes to people's pay, the rules change.  Why is that?  Because we are talking about people rather than things?  If I hire a contractor to chop a tree down in my yard and one charges me $1,000 but another comes in and offers to do it for $500 if I selected the $1,000 contractor and told you I did it because I wanted to pay market rate you'd all face punch me.  So why would I not hire a below market employee if they are willing to take it?  Why are the rules different?

I definitely understand what you are saying, that's why I added the "unless they want to always be having to hire new people" qualifier. Not sure how it is in your industry (although I thought you said tech), but in the tech industry I know lots of people jump ship for huge raises.

IRT to the "no way we are giving them that big of a raise".... well that's just stupid. WTF does their last salary have to do with this one? Good for the company that they were able to find a sucker, but I know exactly what the market rate is for something before I go into negotiations for anything.

Finances_With_Purpose

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 624
    • Finances With Purpose: deploying resources wisely to live vigorously
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #54 on: August 24, 2017, 01:58:11 AM »
Comparison is the thief of joy. 

It's great to the company to value you more - you're valuing yourself.  But you'll always find someone who's doing marginally better.  Or some sociopath who's literally raking it in and making life awful for everyone.  It's as my dad kept warning me: life isn't fair, and it never will be. 

That may not help the feelings, but I find the less I compare myself to others, the happier I am.  And if I find a need to compare, I think about how thankful I should be that I was born into the wealthiest nation in the world and have had amazing advantages here.  That usually helps. 

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #55 on: August 24, 2017, 09:23:15 AM »
Comparison is the thief of joy. 

It's great to the company to value you more - you're valuing yourself.  But you'll always find someone who's doing marginally better.  Or some sociopath who's literally raking it in and making life awful for everyone.  It's as my dad kept warning me: life isn't fair, and it never will be. 

That may not help the feelings, but I find the less I compare myself to others, the happier I am.  And if I find a need to compare, I think about how thankful I should be that I was born into the wealthiest nation in the world and have had amazing advantages here.  That usually helps.
+1

I learned a long time ago that the whole story is usually not as good as the story you are being told.

Just was arguing with my ex this morning who was trying to explain to me why attorneys at her office had explained to my college bound daughter how if she didn't go to Harvard to get her degree here choices would be poor.  That may be true for them, but for the field she wants to go into and the fact she has zero interest in research of high profile job that's just not true.  She was explaining their billable rates and what a wonderful field it was but when asked how much debt they had accumulated to place themselves in that spot, she was unsure.  As i explained it's entirely possible that her attorneys billing out at $285/hour and no more cash flow positive than a high school drop out with zero debt working on a garbage truck.  The shiny exterior of their life looks great, but when you figure out how they did/are financing it, if you are smart you're not so envious.

Now that specific example is of little relevance to this community because everyone here gets the idiocy of that thinking, but we still think there is an infinite pie sometimes and I think not enough people ever establish what is truly "enough".  As you said comparison is the thief of joy, but I'd add a caveat to that that really CARING about what you find in the comparison is the thief of joy.  I have found at various points in my life that someone was/had something more than me.  While it was a data point, if I did not get all upset about them having more and was just happy with that I had, it was not a problem.  Only when envy crept it was it an issue.  Amazing how greed and envy make the list of seven really bad things.  Whoever made up that list knew what they were talking about.

So in these examples, maybe that person who is getting paid more is under a ton more stress and you can relax.  Maybe their projects are more of a challenge to them than yours are to you.  There can be a million reasons why they are paid differently and gender may be one of them.  Serenity prayer.  Focus on what you can do something about.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2017, 09:25:09 AM by caracarn »

simonsez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 778
  • Age: 33
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #56 on: August 24, 2017, 09:48:47 AM »

As a manager I would suggest focusing your next conversations with your boss on setting specific measurable goals or skills to develop so that you will be eligible for the next promotion, raise and hitting bonus. When looking at the 2 of you why did they choose the other employee over you and how can you ensure that you have those skills when it is time for the next promotion.  If they cannot identify specific items then it may be time to look elsewhere.

If both of you are being paid below industry standards I would not get too hung up on being paid less that the other employee. Getting paid the same as someone else under compensated should not make you happy. Either there are non-salary benefits to this employer that other places do not offer, your skills are below industry standards, or your employer is hoping you are too lazy to move.
Thank you, and fair enough. Can confidently answer that both my and the colleague's skills are significantly above industry standards.  Part of the issue is that I don't think the company realizes how good they have it.

This isn't about you or your colleague in comparison to the industry at large or how lucky your company is to have certain staff on board.  It is a comparison with just you and your colleague.  You need specific answers from your management team and/or direct supervisor on how your colleague was better suited to something than you were OR why your "glowing reviews" were not apparently as glowing as they could be.  If they are legitimate reasons for why he was an A+ and you were an A, then you know what areas to improve in so that one day soon you can have the same opportunity.  If they are not legitimate reasons, then either leave or go to HR.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #57 on: August 24, 2017, 09:55:14 AM »
I definitely understand what you are saying, that's why I added the "unless they want to always be having to hire new people" qualifier. Not sure how it is in your industry (although I thought you said tech), but in the tech industry I know lots of people jump ship for huge raises.


I am in IT but within non-tech companies.

So in keeping with "the whole story" that I mentioned in my other response I just posted, these are all one off events people cite.  "I left company A and got a 20% bump going to company B".  Maybe that same person was able to do that say 2, maybe even 4 times.  Eventually logic and the law of supply and demand indicate this is a strategy with a very definite ending point.  The sky is definitely not the limit.  Let's say I'm getting paid under market at $50K and I get that 20% bump by moving and am now at $60K and within market for my position.   The pay grades MIGHT have a 30K-40K range but in most cases more like $15-$25 if you ignore the tails more than a couple standard deviations away.  I stay at my company for three years, get by 2% raises and then get antsy and uppity and say they are not paying me my worth, so I'm now at  $63,700 and moving.  I get $77K at my next job.  At this point I'm probably ALREADY bumping against the ceiling of the market.  This is what gets missed I think in the pursuit of ever more.  The skill set I have to pay an employer is what it is.  If I start sticking my head out of the gopher hole I might get noticed and eaten by the lion next time the CEO is looking to cut expenses and not the target on my back is much bigger than the person who figured out that getting paid market is OK, and they get laid off.  Then they are desperate for work and take what they can get and might lose 10-20%.

I don't know.  Maybe I just had an extremely lucky run in my career.  Maybe I just ignore the comparisons and don't get worked up about it, but I do not recall once in my working career that I felt I was getting shafted in my pay.  Yes I am male, so that gives an advantage that we have discussed here and I do not dispute is very real.  But I also never had to negotiate a job offer up.  For me it was always enough.  I was up front in interviews about what I expected and when they offered it to me (or in some cases more) I said thank you and joined the company.  I now make over 5 times what my starting salary was out of college.  The only time I lost pay was when the company I was with was downsizing and I stuck it out and they cut the pay of the managers and above (again, sometimes it sucks to stick your head out of the gopher hole) by 25% with three months notice.  I stuck around for another year after that and got laid off.  My new job paid more but was still 20% below where I had been at before they slashed me.  After being there a year my boss, without pushing from me and in the normal review cycle, said he liked what he saw wanted me to stay, felt I was below market and bumped me back up to within a few thousand of where I had been at at the old company, even though he had no idea I had made that there because I gave them my current salary when asked.  Next time I was looking, named my price and when someone said "sounds good" I joined them.  Same with this one.  But ALL my largest raises; 63% one year (promotion in there too so not in same position), 21% and 7% were all without changing jobs and just doing mine well.  Many times those jobs came with more crap than I'd prefer.  From the outside looking in it might have appeared pretty cool, but the reality of anyone's job is usually very different than what those who are not doing it think it is. 

Gronnie

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 267
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Orange County, CA
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #58 on: August 24, 2017, 11:36:02 AM »
I definitely understand what you are saying, that's why I added the "unless they want to always be having to hire new people" qualifier. Not sure how it is in your industry (although I thought you said tech), but in the tech industry I know lots of people jump ship for huge raises.


[snip]
I don't know.  Maybe I just had an extremely lucky run in my career.  Maybe I just ignore the comparisons and don't get worked up about it, but I do not recall once in my working career that I felt I was getting shafted in my pay.  Yes I am male, so that gives an advantage that we have discussed here and I do not dispute is very real.  But I also never had to negotiate a job offer up.  For me it was always enough. I was up front in interviews about what I expected and when they offered it to me (or in some cases more) I said thank you and joined the company.
[/snip]

This, in my opinion, is one of the biggest reasons for the gender pay gap. Men, by their nature, are much more likely to ask for what they want. If you don't ask for something, you most likely won't get it.

Counting_Down

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 73
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #59 on: August 24, 2017, 12:16:22 PM »
Hey all,
Thanks for taking some interest in my issue and providing me really helpful and interesting stuff to think about.  I appreciate all advice and guidance on my next steps.

I spoke with the manager who hired me on who is no longer my boss (but he and my current manager gave me my last performance review - which was the promotion).  Conversation was not "official" but a little vague and a little off the record (post-happy hour outside of work sort of thing, not out of the ordinary for the team). A couple great things came out of it: 1) acknowledged an overshadowing issue of valuing years of service a the company more than general experience, and recent efforts to change this, 2) Acknowledged my and colleagues skill-sets are comparable and he views us as equals, 3) Told me if it ever came down to it that he would make a spot for me on his team.  Positive.

Followed up with current manager today.  Merit raises are still on the table for next year, and the expectation is still for my promotion to next level at 2018 cycle.  My value to the team was reiterated with acknowledgement of specific skill sets that are viewed favorably.  I felt that I needed more though, so I ended up being rather forthright about wondering if there was a perceived competency difference with colleague externally. Also that I was concerned because I perceived the promotion to be a value indicator that I was not doing what I needed to be doing and was therefore valued less.  Boss acknowledged that we have different strengths, but ones he (and others) consider equally valuable to a well rounded team.  Also that he is cognizant that it's a little complicated with us being in direct comparison with experience and degree.  He acknowledged that it was easier to put forth colleague for promotion because 1) longer tenure with company with track record showing competency in different roles and 2) colleague had not received a promotion this year already. So, what others posited.

I think my being forthright put a fire in him.  He's followed up on a few things since, asking me for more details of my past experience, confirming that things look good with the level matrix, and that he wanted me to send him some additional documentation because he'd like to start the process early with HR so he could get out ahead of any BS that he might have to negotiate.  Right now I'm feeling much better.  I do foresee a potential issue with HR with being bumped twice in two years, manager echoed this concern as well but had some specifics of how it was going to be addressed in the recommendation.

Doubting my previous instincts this week has been an interesting time to reflect.  I work with genuinely good people, and I think my direct team is solid.  There may be issues with HR, and only time will tell, and there may be changes coming for that team too that will fix some of their issues.  For now I'm confident my manager and others I work with are doing their best to fight for me, and that this whole thing wasn't a big declaration of my status on the team.  I am glad that I asked these questions though and hope things proceed as discussed. Colleague of mention is still on the lam, not sure what's up with that yet.  But today feels like a good day.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2017, 12:19:21 PM by Counting_Down »

Jrr85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #60 on: August 24, 2017, 12:17:01 PM »
I definitely understand what you are saying, that's why I added the "unless they want to always be having to hire new people" qualifier. Not sure how it is in your industry (although I thought you said tech), but in the tech industry I know lots of people jump ship for huge raises.


[snip]
I don't know.  Maybe I just had an extremely lucky run in my career.  Maybe I just ignore the comparisons and don't get worked up about it, but I do not recall once in my working career that I felt I was getting shafted in my pay.  Yes I am male, so that gives an advantage that we have discussed here and I do not dispute is very real.  But I also never had to negotiate a job offer up.  For me it was always enough. I was up front in interviews about what I expected and when they offered it to me (or in some cases more) I said thank you and joined the company.
[/snip]

This, in my opinion, is one of the biggest reasons for the gender pay gap. Men, by their nature, are much more likely to ask for what they want. If you don't ask for something, you most likely won't get it.

I would bet with you on this.  I'm guessing about it's about half differences in approach (so 1.5%-2.5%) and about half is subconscious bias.  Add it together and you get the vast majority of the 3-5% pay gap.   

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #61 on: August 24, 2017, 12:38:50 PM »
I definitely understand what you are saying, that's why I added the "unless they want to always be having to hire new people" qualifier. Not sure how it is in your industry (although I thought you said tech), but in the tech industry I know lots of people jump ship for huge raises.


[snip]
I don't know.  Maybe I just had an extremely lucky run in my career.  Maybe I just ignore the comparisons and don't get worked up about it, but I do not recall once in my working career that I felt I was getting shafted in my pay.  Yes I am male, so that gives an advantage that we have discussed here and I do not dispute is very real.  But I also never had to negotiate a job offer up.  For me it was always enough. I was up front in interviews about what I expected and when they offered it to me (or in some cases more) I said thank you and joined the company.
[/snip]

This, in my opinion, is one of the biggest reasons for the gender pay gap. Men, by their nature, are much more likely to ask for what they want. If you don't ask for something, you most likely won't get it.
I agree that not asking is a reason for the gap, but what I was referring to in these cases was just answering "what pay do you expect?" in the interview.  Yes, if I was moving from one job to another I was asking for a bump but it was not a raise negotiation.  I have not once asked for anything in raises, just took what was given.  Maybe usually being high up in the organization and having more understanding of how compensation works I understood that what I was being given was fair even though most times it was small.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6588
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #62 on: August 24, 2017, 04:44:57 PM »
I definitely understand what you are saying, that's why I added the "unless they want to always be having to hire new people" qualifier. Not sure how it is in your industry (although I thought you said tech), but in the tech industry I know lots of people jump ship for huge raises.


[snip]
I don't know.  Maybe I just had an extremely lucky run in my career.  Maybe I just ignore the comparisons and don't get worked up about it, but I do not recall once in my working career that I felt I was getting shafted in my pay.  Yes I am male, so that gives an advantage that we have discussed here and I do not dispute is very real.  But I also never had to negotiate a job offer up.  For me it was always enough. I was up front in interviews about what I expected and when they offered it to me (or in some cases more) I said thank you and joined the company.
[/snip]

This, in my opinion, is one of the biggest reasons for the gender pay gap. Men, by their nature, are much more likely to ask for what they want. If you don't ask for something, you most likely won't get it.
The last time I did that I was told "well, the salary we are offering is THIS" (which was lower than what I needed to make a switch)

So I declined.

A few years we were hiring a senior engineer.  She gave her price.  We low-balled her.  She declined.  We continued looking.  Found a man to take the job.  He named his price.  We gave it to him.  Want to guess it was higher than hers?

Lather, rinse, repeat, at least one more time in the same year.

Don't simplify it.  Women are *often* penalized for asking for raises, promotions, and more money.  "You 2 career couples have it so good".  "But John has a family to support."  "You make plenty of money."

letired

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
  • Location: Texas
    • Needs More Glitter
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #63 on: August 24, 2017, 08:02:44 PM »
Hey all,
Thanks for taking some interest in my issue and providing me really helpful and interesting stuff to think about.  I appreciate all advice and guidance on my next steps.
[...]


congrats! That's awesome that you were able to have those conversations! It sounds like you did a great job with all of it! I'm very impressed with your approach. It sounds like you were really able to frame things in a really positive light instead of it being a complaint, which is where I feel like I get stuck a lot when addressing these things.

Dicey

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10148
  • Age: 61
  • Location: NorCal
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #64 on: August 24, 2017, 10:17:39 PM »
First of all, yay to OP for the nice update. That info has got to feel good.


Zamboni

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #65 on: August 25, 2017, 05:44:19 AM »
Good job following up about the issues.

It sounds like your boss is a good person and wants to do what is fair and right. He or she did need to know that this was important to you in order to make it a priority right now, so it's good that you did that.

Regarding the "slippery slope" of coming with counter offers, this depends entirely on the company culture. While one place might view it as disloyal and put the person on the "phase out" list (this is actually how I think it should be), other places suddenly think the person is more valuable and put them in higher esteem. My employer is the latter type. When people get competiting offers, their stock goes way up internally. I think it's perverse, and I also think it has not operating in an equitable fashion in the past (men were retained, women were shown the door). Senior women got together and in mass pointed out that inequity in past practices, so now pretty much anyone with a competing offer can expect to be retained with at least a match and with a more fast-tracked career. The funny thing about all of this is that I work for a top employer with median pay way above industry standards already  . . . 

Counting_Down

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 73
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #66 on: March 07, 2018, 05:25:35 PM »
Back for an update.  Closing the gap on historical info, colleague's August raise was 13% compared to my 6.5%.  So I was right to suspect a widened pay gap with his promotion.  He's been advocating that our rank/level disparity be corrected.

So, bonus & raises are out and I did received the promotion and another 12.8%.  Colleague's comp aside, I'm very happy with current comp and it is now very competitive with market rates. In addition, I think my boss went above and beyond to correct past inequities: correct comp relative to market and even things out between me and my colleague.  I suspect my salary and colleagues will be dead on after his cost of living increase, and bonuses (cash and stock) were suspiciously above target - I think to correct for target % discrepancies between levels.   All in all I'm very pleased, even if it was delayed. And I'm very heartened by the moral fortitude of my boss.  At this point he's shown himself to be totally reasonable and interested in doing the right thing, on multiple occasions.  That's a boss to stick around for.

Comparison is the thief of joy*(credit to other posters), but mutual success is a wonderful feeling, too. After all the conversations my direct peer and I have had on the topic, I know we'll celebrate together after all discussions are had (mine was first). 

In other news, my boss is getting dicked around on some title stuff, and my colleague had to talk me down from speaking my mind a little to "unscripted".  I'll figure out a way to advocate for my boss as he's done for me.  I can't wait till corporate bureaucratic BS is no longer a concern of mine.

Thanks all!

Dicey

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10148
  • Age: 61
  • Location: NorCal
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #67 on: March 07, 2018, 06:28:15 PM »
Great update!

Smokystache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 329
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #68 on: March 08, 2018, 04:28:05 AM »
.... And I'm very heartened by the moral fortitude of my boss. 

Unfortunately, that is a phrase that doesn't come up (on the boards or in life) very often. Congrats on the great outcome!

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #69 on: March 08, 2018, 06:09:57 AM »
Congrats on getting what you felt was fair.  Was great your boss could find a way to make it happen as many times the corporate culture works very hard against anything remotely outside the normal bumps. 

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6588
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #70 on: March 08, 2018, 01:12:21 PM »
.... And I'm very heartened by the moral fortitude of my boss. 

Unfortunately, that is a phrase that doesn't come up (on the boards or in life) very often. Congrats on the great outcome!
+1

Finances_With_Purpose

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 624
    • Finances With Purpose: deploying resources wisely to live vigorously
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #71 on: April 07, 2018, 11:56:26 AM »
.... And I'm very heartened by the moral fortitude of my boss. 

Unfortunately, that is a phrase that doesn't come up (on the boards or in life) very often. Congrats on the great outcome!
+1

+1 as well.  Have been there.  Enjoy it.  It's rare. 

BuildingmyFIRE

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • Location: North of the Wall
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #72 on: April 07, 2018, 06:46:37 PM »
I haven't read the entire chain so apologies in advance if this has already been covered. 

Many states over the last few years have been passing pay equity laws that, generally speaking, prohibit paying men and women doing comparable work disparately.  I don't know what state you are in, but you should probably take a peek and see if your state has passed such a law.  You and your coworker are not currently similarly situated, because of the promotion, but you were previously, and you should be making at least as much as he did prior to the promotion (with back pay). 

Make sure you are familiar with the law and what you should have been paid before you present your case to HR -- better yet, you might also consider hiring a lawyer to write a "lawyer letter" to HR on your behalf and file an EEOC / comparable state agency charge of discrimination.  Although the dollars involved may be small, with some of the pay equity laws, attorneys fees are recoverable, such that you could find someone on contingency to help you.

No one likes to be the one to sue an employer, but you are entitled to a work environment free of discrimination.  Good luck.

boridi

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #73 on: April 09, 2018, 05:03:35 AM »
No one likes to be the one to sue an employer, but you are entitled to a work environment free of discrimination.  Good luck.

Isn't the male colleague being discriminated against if he receives the same pay as someone with fewer years experience at the company?
I can't imagine complaining about someone making 2k more than me when they have 5 more years of experience. Yes, time at the current company matters more than time at any company. People always complain about employers having no loyalty. Now, they have loyalty, and they're being threatened with discrimination lawsuits.

BuildingmyFIRE

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 94
  • Location: North of the Wall
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #74 on: April 09, 2018, 06:37:06 AM »
If the employer has an established metric which provides for greater pay to reflect seniority, which is applied across the board, and accounts for the $2K pay difference between OP and her male co-worker, then there will be no disparate treatment and no need for a salary adjustment. 

The common scenario, however, is that there is no explanation for a pay difference between male and female employees who have comparable experience and who are doing comparable work.  Moreover, women who move from employer to employer tend to be re-victimized by the discriminatory pay practices of a previous employer, because job offers are frequently based on a percentage over existing salary, rather than "market" rates.  These new pay equity laws are intended to give women an equal playing field in part by eliminating the cycle of pay discrimination, but also by eliminating systemic, unexplainable pay differences.  As a result of these new laws, many employers are currently doing salary audits and performing salary adjustments to square up the salaries of female co-workers where there is no legitimate (i.e. experience, performance, or other established metric) explanation for the disparate pay. 

There is no issue of potential discrimination against the male co-worker.  The only question is whether our OP is being treated fairly and lawfully by her employer.  She should not be afraid to explore that question.  Frankly, neither should her employer, if it is paying her fairly.

   

civil4life

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 406
    • My Journal
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #75 on: April 09, 2018, 07:08:28 AM »
First I will say I did not read all of the responses.

I agree with $2k is not much to complain about on the grand scheme of life, but I definitely understand the frustration.

However if you are $2k under everyone at the same level it seems really petty that the company could not give you that bump.  If it were me I would definitely be asking all the why questions and demanding responses.

If you do not get a truly legitimate excuse I would consider an EEOC complaint.

Counting_Down

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 73
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #76 on: May 08, 2018, 03:41:06 PM »
Thanks for the new follow up and comments.  I didn't know about the ability to file complaints with EEOC and appreciate that being brought up.

To address Boridi's concern/statement that tenure at a company meant higher pay - everything I've seen in my field is that having varied experience usually brings a higher salary. Job hopping (within limits) usually ensures newest people to a company are better paid.  Certainly performance and experience come into play.  BuildingmyFIRE clearly explained the common gender pay discrimination situation that I have heard of, seen, and been vigilant about in my own career.

For my specific situation, it was an apples to apples comparison between me and my colleague from education to years of experience to job title & duties.  I now think it originally stemmed from a series of boneheaded HR moves from initial salary (my hesitance to hard line negotiate - learning experience not to be repeated) and lack of cost of living increase my first year (again, something I learned to ask up front) that got perpetuated into the future.  Not truly a gender issue, although I'm only certain of that now after many discussions.  I'm also certain it only got corrected because my boss was paying specific attention, HR could have easily corrected and did not, I know my boss went out of the way to do so.  The colleague's earlier promotion than mine was a symptom of tenure.  But at a certain point, 3 years tenure difference will lost in the wash, and I think we're nearly there.  Thanks to all!

Flynlow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 79
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #77 on: May 08, 2018, 06:48:16 PM »
.... That person has worked at this company since graduating several years ago.  I graduated at the same time, and worked elsewhere, coming over as an experienced hire to the current company after a few years. Same years of experience, same job title, except I have experience working a different, more financial function ...

To begin, I believe that gender inequality exists and it certainly may be at play here.

With that said, I happen to work at an organization that values "years worked here" over years of experience. Yes, you can be hired with experience, but they never value it as much as the actual years worked at our institution. Someone could work at a similar organization for 5 years and then be hired to my organization - but they would not be "credited" with 5 years of the same pay at my organization. Is that wrong? Maybe, but it is the way they do it for everyone. (My organization happens to publish salaries so we know this and we know that women are paid the same as men for same title and years of service - but only if those years of service are at this institution.

All of that to is to suggest that they may be thinking of this not as "Dude deserves more than Dudette" - but they may legitimately see it as:
Employee A (who happens to be male) has worked here 5 years
Employee B (who happens to be female) has worked here 3 years (with 2 years of experience somewhere else). They perform equally. We can promote one of them.

I see them going with Employee A all day long.

Or put another way: You have worked for a company for 5 years. Company then hires Sally with 5.5 years of experience. A year later and they are handing out raises and promotions. Are you OK if the company promotes Sally but not you? By your current logic, if there is only money or space for one promotion, it should go to Sally even though she's only been around for 1 year compared to your 6. She has more total years of experience. I think some companies reward loyalty this way.

Just quoting this because it sums up very nearly what I was going to say, and seems to be ignored in favor of more gender discussion.  I went through this at my first job.  Went from 12/12 on the totem pole to 2/12 in about 3 years, and was surprised/a little hurt when my performance didn’t merit a bump to “engineer II”.  A friend and mentor explained that the first several bumps in the company were like working for the government: much more important to put time in than stand out.  Once you started hitting “senior engineer II” (3 levels up), you needed to start being a rockstar. Frustrating, but learning that saved me some consternation.  Sure enough, I got promoted right at the # years worked he said, along with almost everyone I started with. 

All that being said, gender issues are still important to be aware of and improved upon, just trying to explore the possible other side of the coin.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2018, 06:51:06 PM by Flynlow »

nick663

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
  • Location: midwest
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #78 on: May 08, 2018, 08:32:54 PM »
Is how much you made in your previous job a common question in job interviews?
I don't have a lot of experience with interviewing for industry jobs, having spent many years in academia before my current job. But I have never been asked this question. I've been contacted by recruiters since being in my current job, and I have interviewed for a few competitors, but none were offering enough incentive to move. But I have only been asked how much I would expect to be paid, no one has ever asked me how much I am currently paid. I would expect to be paid at minimum 10K more to be worth the hassle.
Yes, in fact HR requires an answer before we will make any offer.  It is also on the paper application and they need to fill it out for the most current job at least.  People try to be evasive and they also know if they are found to have lied in the interview or application that can cause the offer to be rescinded or their employment terminated.  At a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I'm up front if this gets difficult.  I do not want to waste my time going back and forth negotiating salary.  They have no reason not to tell me what they want to get paid.  If they do it starts to create questions in my mind about what type of employee they will be.  In bognish's example I'd be fine with "I am currently getting paid $50K but I think that is low compared to the industry and I would not accept an offer less than $65K".  I'm not going to offer them $55K in that case because they've already told me they would not take it.  Now if I think $65K is out of the range then I also tell them.  In the end it's about each of us being respectful of each others time.
They have very good reasons not to tell you what they want to get paid.  As previously mentioned, that kind of information is ammo for an employer to low ball you on salary.  You wouldn't walk into a car dealership and tell them "I have 20k to spend on a car."

I leave that question blank on every application I fill out.  If HR made it a requirement that I gave up that info I wouldn't want to work for your company as you must be some penny pinching SOBs. :P

.... That person has worked at this company since graduating several years ago.  I graduated at the same time, and worked elsewhere, coming over as an experienced hire to the current company after a few years. Same years of experience, same job title, except I have experience working a different, more financial function ...

To begin, I believe that gender inequality exists and it certainly may be at play here.

With that said, I happen to work at an organization that values "years worked here" over years of experience. Yes, you can be hired with experience, but they never value it as much as the actual years worked at our institution. Someone could work at a similar organization for 5 years and then be hired to my organization - but they would not be "credited" with 5 years of the same pay at my organization. Is that wrong? Maybe, but it is the way they do it for everyone. (My organization happens to publish salaries so we know this and we know that women are paid the same as men for same title and years of service - but only if those years of service are at this institution.

All of that to is to suggest that they may be thinking of this not as "Dude deserves more than Dudette" - but they may legitimately see it as:
Employee A (who happens to be male) has worked here 5 years
Employee B (who happens to be female) has worked here 3 years (with 2 years of experience somewhere else). They perform equally. We can promote one of them.

I see them going with Employee A all day long.

Or put another way: You have worked for a company for 5 years. Company then hires Sally with 5.5 years of experience. A year later and they are handing out raises and promotions. Are you OK if the company promotes Sally but not you? By your current logic, if there is only money or space for one promotion, it should go to Sally even though she's only been around for 1 year compared to your 6. She has more total years of experience. I think some companies reward loyalty this way.

Just quoting this because it sums up very nearly what I was going to say, and seems to be ignored in favor of more gender discussion.  I went through this at my first job.  Went from 12/12 on the totem pole to 2/12 in about 3 years, and was surprised/a little hurt when my performance didn’t merit a bump to “engineer II”.  A friend and mentor explained that the first several bumps in the company were like working for the government: much more important to put time in than stand out.  Once you started hitting “senior engineer II” (3 levels up), you needed to start being a rockstar. Frustrating, but learning that saved me some consternation.  Sure enough, I got promoted right at the # years worked he said, along with almost everyone I started with. 

All that being said, gender issues are still important to be aware of and improved upon, just trying to explore the possible other side of the coin.
I've run across this as well and generally it's because when you are hired in with experience your title/salary matches that experience.  As OP mentioned, she came into the company with pay on par with someone that had been there for years.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #79 on: May 09, 2018, 11:35:28 AM »
Is how much you made in your previous job a common question in job interviews?
I don't have a lot of experience with interviewing for industry jobs, having spent many years in academia before my current job. But I have never been asked this question. I've been contacted by recruiters since being in my current job, and I have interviewed for a few competitors, but none were offering enough incentive to move. But I have only been asked how much I would expect to be paid, no one has ever asked me how much I am currently paid. I would expect to be paid at minimum 10K more to be worth the hassle.
Yes, in fact HR requires an answer before we will make any offer.  It is also on the paper application and they need to fill it out for the most current job at least.  People try to be evasive and they also know if they are found to have lied in the interview or application that can cause the offer to be rescinded or their employment terminated.  At a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I'm up front if this gets difficult.  I do not want to waste my time going back and forth negotiating salary.  They have no reason not to tell me what they want to get paid.  If they do it starts to create questions in my mind about what type of employee they will be.  In bognish's example I'd be fine with "I am currently getting paid $50K but I think that is low compared to the industry and I would not accept an offer less than $65K".  I'm not going to offer them $55K in that case because they've already told me they would not take it.  Now if I think $65K is out of the range then I also tell them.  In the end it's about each of us being respectful of each others time.
They have very good reasons not to tell you what they want to get paid.  As previously mentioned, that kind of information is ammo for an employer to low ball you on salary.  You wouldn't walk into a car dealership and tell them "I have 20k to spend on a car."

I leave that question blank on every application I fill out.  If HR made it a requirement that I gave up that info I wouldn't want to work for your company as you must be some penny pinching SOBs. :P
I totally disagree.  I said at a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I also provided a very clear example about how you would not get lowballed.  Tell me what you expect to get paid.

The only way we'd lowball you on your salary is if you offered a lowball number.  How does your inability to ask for what you want become my problem?  The example you offer is also just as ridiculous.  Walk in and tell them you have $5K to spend on the car.  If you're poor enough with common sense answers to respond to the most you'd be willing to pay as to respond with a number below what you want to get paid then you deserve what you get. 

Raenia

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 972
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #80 on: May 09, 2018, 12:06:57 PM »
Is how much you made in your previous job a common question in job interviews?
I don't have a lot of experience with interviewing for industry jobs, having spent many years in academia before my current job. But I have never been asked this question. I've been contacted by recruiters since being in my current job, and I have interviewed for a few competitors, but none were offering enough incentive to move. But I have only been asked how much I would expect to be paid, no one has ever asked me how much I am currently paid. I would expect to be paid at minimum 10K more to be worth the hassle.
Yes, in fact HR requires an answer before we will make any offer.  It is also on the paper application and they need to fill it out for the most current job at least.  People try to be evasive and they also know if they are found to have lied in the interview or application that can cause the offer to be rescinded or their employment terminated.  At a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I'm up front if this gets difficult.  I do not want to waste my time going back and forth negotiating salary.  They have no reason not to tell me what they want to get paid.  If they do it starts to create questions in my mind about what type of employee they will be.  In bognish's example I'd be fine with "I am currently getting paid $50K but I think that is low compared to the industry and I would not accept an offer less than $65K".  I'm not going to offer them $55K in that case because they've already told me they would not take it.  Now if I think $65K is out of the range then I also tell them.  In the end it's about each of us being respectful of each others time.
They have very good reasons not to tell you what they want to get paid.  As previously mentioned, that kind of information is ammo for an employer to low ball you on salary.  You wouldn't walk into a car dealership and tell them "I have 20k to spend on a car."

I leave that question blank on every application I fill out.  If HR made it a requirement that I gave up that info I wouldn't want to work for your company as you must be some penny pinching SOBs. :P
I totally disagree.  I said at a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I also provided a very clear example about how you would not get lowballed.  Tell me what you expect to get paid.

The only way we'd lowball you on your salary is if you offered a lowball number.  How does your inability to ask for what you want become my problem?  The example you offer is also just as ridiculous.  Walk in and tell them you have $5K to spend on the car.  If you're poor enough with common sense answers to respond to the most you'd be willing to pay as to respond with a number below what you want to get paid then you deserve what you get.

Every time I have been truthful about what salary I would expect, I have been offered 5-10% less than that number.  I've learned that I have to give a number 10-15% higher than what I would expect in order to get an offer I can actually accept.  I've also been lied to by the management to get me to take a job at a lower salary, because "it's 3-month contract to hire, you'll get X salary once you're permanent" only to offer me exactly what I was making on 'probation' as my permanent salary, once they thought I was too invested to back out.  Needless to say, I didn't stay there long.

Just because you and your company would not lowball someone when they gave you a truthful salary requirement, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.  It happens all the time.

BoonDogle

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 126
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #81 on: May 09, 2018, 01:02:42 PM »
Say what you want about it, but most companies are only going to pay you just enough to hire you and just enough to keep you from leaving.  I would never recommend anyone put on the job application what they think they should get paid.  If you are lower than what they were going to offer, you just gave them bargaining room and they are likely to start low.  If you are higher than they were going to offer, you are unlikely to be seriously considered for the position.

Car Jack

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1121
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #82 on: May 09, 2018, 01:49:15 PM »
As someone who got his first raise in 10 years this year, I'll say to rejoice in your new, higher pay.  If you don't like it, there's a very easy way to see if you are, indeed underpaid.  Look around, interview and find a higher paying job.  If you can't then you're wrong.  If you can, then take the higher paying job.

Even when companies have a pattern of targeting certain classes of people and discriminating against them, it's very hard to prove anything.  Remember, HR is not only NOT on your side, they are the enemy and will absolutely first tell your supervisor exactly what you said before going into cya mode.

As someone who was pushed out of megacorp just for my age (and I've found dozens of others who had the same experience), good luck.  My solution was to find a different job.  Life ain't fair.

nick663

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
  • Location: midwest
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #83 on: May 09, 2018, 04:40:09 PM »
Is how much you made in your previous job a common question in job interviews?
I don't have a lot of experience with interviewing for industry jobs, having spent many years in academia before my current job. But I have never been asked this question. I've been contacted by recruiters since being in my current job, and I have interviewed for a few competitors, but none were offering enough incentive to move. But I have only been asked how much I would expect to be paid, no one has ever asked me how much I am currently paid. I would expect to be paid at minimum 10K more to be worth the hassle.
Yes, in fact HR requires an answer before we will make any offer.  It is also on the paper application and they need to fill it out for the most current job at least.  People try to be evasive and they also know if they are found to have lied in the interview or application that can cause the offer to be rescinded or their employment terminated.  At a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I'm up front if this gets difficult.  I do not want to waste my time going back and forth negotiating salary.  They have no reason not to tell me what they want to get paid.  If they do it starts to create questions in my mind about what type of employee they will be.  In bognish's example I'd be fine with "I am currently getting paid $50K but I think that is low compared to the industry and I would not accept an offer less than $65K".  I'm not going to offer them $55K in that case because they've already told me they would not take it.  Now if I think $65K is out of the range then I also tell them.  In the end it's about each of us being respectful of each others time.
They have very good reasons not to tell you what they want to get paid.  As previously mentioned, that kind of information is ammo for an employer to low ball you on salary.  You wouldn't walk into a car dealership and tell them "I have 20k to spend on a car."

I leave that question blank on every application I fill out.  If HR made it a requirement that I gave up that info I wouldn't want to work for your company as you must be some penny pinching SOBs. :P
I totally disagree.  I said at a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I also provided a very clear example about how you would not get lowballed.  Tell me what you expect to get paid.

The only way we'd lowball you on your salary is if you offered a lowball number.  How does your inability to ask for what you want become my problem?  The example you offer is also just as ridiculous.  Walk in and tell them you have $5K to spend on the car.  If you're poor enough with common sense answers to respond to the most you'd be willing to pay as to respond with a number below what you want to get paid then you deserve what you get.
"Lowball" meant you give an offer well under what the salary range is on the job.  You claimed there was "no reason not to tell you what they want to get paid" and not only can I think of a couple reasons not to tell you... I am struggling to find a reason to give that information up outside of satisfying an overly restrictive HR office.

If you were so worried about "not wasting each other's time" you would just give the salary range of the job posting to the candidate.

Freedom2016

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 602
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #84 on: May 10, 2018, 06:24:58 PM »
Congrats to the OP!

As for caracarn's perspective, I find it odd. Are you in HR, caracarn? I've interacted with a lot of HR folks in my work as a negotiation adviser and I don't find that attitude to be common in folks who make a career of hiring people. Maybe you sit in a business unit?

As others have said, there is rarely (if ever) a benefit to the interviewee to put the first number on the table; it becomes a screening device for the employer. Too low a number and subsequent salary offer will be lower than it would be otherwise; too high a number and it becomes a reason to move on to a different candidate with "more reasonable expectations." I find it disingenuous to hear "I need a number to work with" on the employer side. Make an offer based on the candidate's qualifications and then go from there. If an employer "needs" a number from a candidate to get that conversation rolling, I would gently suggest the employer is unprepared, inexperienced, or strategically fishing for information to use to the employer's advantage.

Beyond that, MA recently passed legislation that makes it illegal for employers to ask about salary history precisely because of the adverse impacts on the candidate. An employer has a planned salary range for the job; the candidate's history has absolutely no relationship to what they should be paid for the job they are interviewing for. I would argue the same logic applies to asking what a candidate "expects" to earn.  How to answer it? "I expect to be paid a competitive market-based salary based on my qualifications, experience, and fit for the role."
« Last Edit: May 10, 2018, 09:14:02 PM by Freedom2016 »

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #85 on: May 11, 2018, 10:51:39 AM »
Is how much you made in your previous job a common question in job interviews?
I don't have a lot of experience with interviewing for industry jobs, having spent many years in academia before my current job. But I have never been asked this question. I've been contacted by recruiters since being in my current job, and I have interviewed for a few competitors, but none were offering enough incentive to move. But I have only been asked how much I would expect to be paid, no one has ever asked me how much I am currently paid. I would expect to be paid at minimum 10K more to be worth the hassle.
Yes, in fact HR requires an answer before we will make any offer.  It is also on the paper application and they need to fill it out for the most current job at least.  People try to be evasive and they also know if they are found to have lied in the interview or application that can cause the offer to be rescinded or their employment terminated.  At a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I'm up front if this gets difficult.  I do not want to waste my time going back and forth negotiating salary.  They have no reason not to tell me what they want to get paid.  If they do it starts to create questions in my mind about what type of employee they will be.  In bognish's example I'd be fine with "I am currently getting paid $50K but I think that is low compared to the industry and I would not accept an offer less than $65K".  I'm not going to offer them $55K in that case because they've already told me they would not take it.  Now if I think $65K is out of the range then I also tell them.  In the end it's about each of us being respectful of each others time.
They have very good reasons not to tell you what they want to get paid.  As previously mentioned, that kind of information is ammo for an employer to low ball you on salary.  You wouldn't walk into a car dealership and tell them "I have 20k to spend on a car."

I leave that question blank on every application I fill out.  If HR made it a requirement that I gave up that info I wouldn't want to work for your company as you must be some penny pinching SOBs. :P
I totally disagree.  I said at a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I also provided a very clear example about how you would not get lowballed.  Tell me what you expect to get paid.

The only way we'd lowball you on your salary is if you offered a lowball number.  How does your inability to ask for what you want become my problem?  The example you offer is also just as ridiculous.  Walk in and tell them you have $5K to spend on the car.  If you're poor enough with common sense answers to respond to the most you'd be willing to pay as to respond with a number below what you want to get paid then you deserve what you get.

Every time I have been truthful about what salary I would expect, I have been offered 5-10% less than that number.  I've learned that I have to give a number 10-15% higher than what I would expect in order to get an offer I can actually accept.  I've also been lied to by the management to get me to take a job at a lower salary, because "it's 3-month contract to hire, you'll get X salary once you're permanent" only to offer me exactly what I was making on 'probation' as my permanent salary, once they thought I was too invested to back out.  Needless to say, I didn't stay there long.

Just because you and your company would not lowball someone when they gave you a truthful salary requirement, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.  It happens all the time.
And I would guess then you have not gone back and made the clear statement, "I told you the salary I needed to have to take the job.  If we cannot agree to that I will have to pass".  An employer that changes the deal is a poor employer I'd agree.  I get it happens all the time.  When you are looking for a job you are also interviewing the company.  If you sense crap, then there is probably in fact a pile of shit waiting for you.  If you find places offering you 5-10% lower without what you feel is a reasonable explanation (we offer exceptional benefits such as 11% 401(k) that requires no match, no employee contribution for medical (so 100% paid medical) so we have a few times offered a little less in base because we more than made up for it in the benefits), then move on.

Negotiating in bad faith is a two way street.  I have done what I explain in multiple employers so I would say that it happens all the time because you are running into terrible managers.  They are telling you what your experience will be working for them by how they handle the salary negotiation.  If you do not read that message and run, why are you blaming the process?

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #86 on: May 11, 2018, 10:55:08 AM »
Say what you want about it, but most companies are only going to pay you just enough to hire you and just enough to keep you from leaving.  I would never recommend anyone put on the job application what they think they should get paid.  If you are lower than what they were going to offer, you just gave them bargaining room and they are likely to start low.  If you are higher than they were going to offer, you are unlikely to be seriously considered for the position.
I never said put it on the application.  I said I ask for it when I interview so that when/if I make them an offer I know what they want and I can hire the candidate not screw around with negotiating for a week.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #87 on: May 11, 2018, 10:57:40 AM »
Is how much you made in your previous job a common question in job interviews?
I don't have a lot of experience with interviewing for industry jobs, having spent many years in academia before my current job. But I have never been asked this question. I've been contacted by recruiters since being in my current job, and I have interviewed for a few competitors, but none were offering enough incentive to move. But I have only been asked how much I would expect to be paid, no one has ever asked me how much I am currently paid. I would expect to be paid at minimum 10K more to be worth the hassle.
Yes, in fact HR requires an answer before we will make any offer.  It is also on the paper application and they need to fill it out for the most current job at least.  People try to be evasive and they also know if they are found to have lied in the interview or application that can cause the offer to be rescinded or their employment terminated.  At a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I'm up front if this gets difficult.  I do not want to waste my time going back and forth negotiating salary.  They have no reason not to tell me what they want to get paid.  If they do it starts to create questions in my mind about what type of employee they will be.  In bognish's example I'd be fine with "I am currently getting paid $50K but I think that is low compared to the industry and I would not accept an offer less than $65K".  I'm not going to offer them $55K in that case because they've already told me they would not take it.  Now if I think $65K is out of the range then I also tell them.  In the end it's about each of us being respectful of each others time.
They have very good reasons not to tell you what they want to get paid.  As previously mentioned, that kind of information is ammo for an employer to low ball you on salary.  You wouldn't walk into a car dealership and tell them "I have 20k to spend on a car."

I leave that question blank on every application I fill out.  If HR made it a requirement that I gave up that info I wouldn't want to work for your company as you must be some penny pinching SOBs. :P
I totally disagree.  I said at a minimum they need to answer what they expect to be paid.  I also provided a very clear example about how you would not get lowballed.  Tell me what you expect to get paid.

The only way we'd lowball you on your salary is if you offered a lowball number.  How does your inability to ask for what you want become my problem?  The example you offer is also just as ridiculous.  Walk in and tell them you have $5K to spend on the car.  If you're poor enough with common sense answers to respond to the most you'd be willing to pay as to respond with a number below what you want to get paid then you deserve what you get.
"Lowball" meant you give an offer well under what the salary range is on the job.  You claimed there was "no reason not to tell you what they want to get paid" and not only can I think of a couple reasons not to tell you... I am struggling to find a reason to give that information up outside of satisfying an overly restrictive HR office.

If you were so worried about "not wasting each other's time" you would just give the salary range of the job posting to the candidate.
We do.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #88 on: May 11, 2018, 11:51:27 AM »
As for caracarn's perspective, I find it odd. Are you in HR, caracarn? I've interacted with a lot of HR folks in my work as a negotiation adviser and I don't find that attitude to be common in folks who make a career of hiring people. Maybe you sit in a business unit?

As others have said, there is rarely (if ever) a benefit to the interviewee to put the first number on the table; it becomes a screening device for the employer. Too low a number and subsequent salary offer will be lower than it would be otherwise; too high a number and it becomes a reason to move on to a different candidate with "more reasonable expectations." I find it disingenuous to hear "I need a number to work with" on the employer side. Make an offer based on the candidate's qualifications and then go from there. If an employer "needs" a number from a candidate to get that conversation rolling, I would gently suggest the employer is unprepared, inexperienced, or strategically fishing for information to use to the employer's advantage.

Beyond that, MA recently passed legislation that makes it illegal for employers to ask about salary history precisely because of the adverse impacts on the candidate. An employer has a planned salary range for the job; the candidate's history has absolutely no relationship to what they should be paid for the job they are interviewing for. I would argue the same logic applies to asking what a candidate "expects" to earn.  How to answer it? "I expect to be paid a competitive market-based salary based on my qualifications, experience, and fit for the role."
I am not in HR, have been the top level IT person in the last four companies I have been a part of and utilized this process and as often times as not I am fighting my HR department to get the right candidate.

It would be disingenuous to not realize that any discussion with two parties over a common good is not a negotiation.  My negotiating process just does not want to waste time with a bunch of dancing.  I'd like someone to explain to me how, in a position where both parties know what they want (you know what you want to make, and I know what I can/am allowed/am willing to pay) how going back and forth three, four or more times is better?  If each side sticks within their range you're either going to get to an overlap point or the negotiation will end and we will walk away from each other, so why not get where both sides are happy faster? 

Our hiring process here for example is identify the candidates we want to talk with, HR does a base phone screen (does not require any salary info but it is asked).  If they offer that up it certainly sets a baseline.  We'd all be fools not to understand that.  If you are willing to work for $50K why would I offer you more than that?  I'm also not a jerk and understand that dynamic so that's why I specifically do not ask for previous salary, I ask what I need to offer them so they will take the job.  I will admit, most candidates have never heard this before, so they start to offer up what they were paid in most cases.  I then ask, "Thanks for that, but I did not ask what your last job paid, I'm asking what you need us to offer you that would get you to take the job."  Sometimes they offer the same number.  Sometimes they offer less.  Again, I can't control if people are uncomfortable asking for what they really want, and since I'm not a fool if they do offer less, then I certainly accept their position as truthful and we move on.  Sometimes they offer more, and in that case I also take them at their word.  I then ask if there are any other demands that need to be met that I should be aware of (I'm looking for changes they may want to vacation, etc.).  Again the goal is to keep this process moving.  We're both busy people and exchanging phone calls and e-mails is wasteful.  If they need outside our range (not all employers published the range) I will tell them so but leave it at that.  Some say they are flexible or that is close enough and would be willing to take that.  Others reestablish the importance of their number.  At some point in this process I also will likely have stated my goal to not waste either of our time if we can't come to a salary that works for us.  To your point, we should both know a general thing about the right ranges, so this really should not be that difficult or uncomfortable.  I really do not see how it is any different than what most of us do with cars these days where we walk into a dealer knowing what a good price is and getting it or walking out.  I do agree if one or the other party is unprepared, then that will likely be to their detriment.  I'm not looking to hire people who do not know how to prepare, so maybe it weeds out the bad apples.

So at times I will have a candidate I want that exceeds our range.  It's my job then to build the case with HR (and my manager) on why this stretch makes sense.  If I can't do that, I've at least been upfront with the candidate that they were out of the range the company had budgeted.  On the flip side, I most certainly have had people that we would have paid more to, had they asked, but they did not.  Again, I think is makes little sense to say the process is broken when the clear failure here is in the candidate asking for what they want and knowing the ranges they can command in the market.  I have usually not been in companies that pay much if any above the midpoint, so it does at times amaze me when people lowball themselves.  I also use this same process when I look for a job, and in my case I also know I'm a rare bird, because with the MMM focus on my expenses I can make a lot less than I make now, but that gives me the choice to interview for less stressful jobs that of course pay less.  I have had many conversations with employers who were confused as to why I would be willing to take a 40%+ paycut, but I was upfront.  I'm at the point in my life where I'd be perfectly fine with a lower paying (yet still higher than average) individual contributor role where I can be a rock star because of the experience I bring to the table that their other candidates likely will not have because they have not had the senior level experience I have had.  But I also know the market for those roles and the pay I ask for is in the range that I know a good employer would be comfortable with.  A senior project manager does not pay as much as a senior executive.  I get that's how the world works and I approach it accordingly.  In my last job change I had an offer for a PM at a great company and a senior executive role at what seemed like a great company (private so harder to assess without access to financials).  If I felt the senior exec role would have been the same corporate BS I wanted to be done with I would have gladly taken the other offer, but the firm needed help I could provide and I love mentoring a staff and so I took that role (where they offered me 6% more than what I asked for by the way, so it can work the other way). 

So that has been my experience with my methods on both ends.  If you bring unique value to the table (which I assume my current employer saw with the higher offer to make it easier not to consider others), a good manager will not screw with you and will pay what you ask.  If you lack the confidence to ask for what you want in salary, how can you blame anyone but yourself?  It certainly helps to not be living paycheck to paycheck.

I just think it is just as interesting the concern about this approach.  If you did not offer me an number and I made you what you considered a lowball offer, our you still not come back with a counter and ask for something more in line with what you need to take the job anyway?  All what I am doing does is get the negotiation out in the open, and really the only way you lose is if you do not have the courage to actually answer my question of "What do I need to pay you to accept the offer?" with the number you want.

FIRE 20/20

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 278
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #89 on: May 11, 2018, 01:07:57 PM »
caracarn, I really appreciate your inputs on this topic.  They've been fun to read, and I appreciate the tone in which they've been presented.  Thank you for presenting a contrary view without getting defensive or trolling.  I think I agree with most of what you've written, although I do have two problems with it as well.  First, there is always a huge disparity in the information the company has and what the individual has.  When I was an individual contributor, I had no idea what the salary ranges were or what the requirements were for the various grade levels were.  Even websites like Glassdoor and others are only a minor step above having zero information.  With such a wide disparity on the level of information that most employees have compared to what hiring managers have it does not make the negotiations an even playing field.  After I became a technical lead and then program manager, I realized that there were some enormous pay disparities.  I had people who were very close to being put on performance improvement plans being paid more than top performers.  I could always understand how we got into that situation, but it didn't make it any easier to take.  As an engineering manager I wanted to pay people according to how well they did the job, not according to how much they knew about pay scales, labor categories, and how well they negotiated.  Those skills and knowledge have nothing to do with the engineering work they did but had a huge impact on how they were paid.  And the excellent engineers who just focused on doing great engineering work got screwed.  Even if they didn't know about it, I hated to see it and did what I could in my little area to fix it.  Fortunately I had a Director who agreed and helped make things as "right" as we could. 
Second, there is a lot of information that has come to light over recent years/decades about how unconscious bias, outright discrimination, and gender traits like reluctance to negotiate (whether socialized or genetic - it doesn't matter) negatively impact the pay of groups like minorities and women.  This one reason that some states are looking at or implementing rules that prohibit using prior salary information as an input into setting salaries for people being hired for a new position.  That's also the reason I take issue with the "comparison is the thief of joy" comments.  Whenever there is a real instance of discrimination going on, comparison is necessary to remedy a real problem.  Using prior pay either directly (by asking on an application) or indirectly (asking someone what they want to be paid, knowing that their primary input is what they were previously paid) reinforces those ugly biases.  Adding the information disparity only makes things worse. 

me1

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 109
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #90 on: May 11, 2018, 01:52:41 PM »
I guess I don't know how one is supposed to know what a particular job pays. It pays how much someone is willing to pay you to do it. I will give you my very weird example.
I had a relatively well paying job out of undergrad. After a few years I quit that job and spent almost a decade as a virtual serf in academia, where I was paid well less. When I finally applied for an industry job, I had no idea of the salary ranges for this very niche, and new to me industry, in which I knew no one. The actual work would require less brain power, but some shifting of focus and I knew it had to pay more than what I was paid in academia. I also knew it paid more than my job before I went into indentured servitude. Glassdoor told me that people in the same company /different department were paid about double what I was being paid.
Was I glad when they offered me triple! And I am glad they didn't ask me to give them a number, because I would have way lowballed it!
I was understandably in shock by their offer and couldn't get over the excitement of finally being compensated for years of hard work.
But I do regret not negotiating that original offer in retrospect. I am sure all the other new hires did.

Freedom2016

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 602
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #91 on: May 11, 2018, 02:12:09 PM »
caracarn you're taking one thing I said and extrapolating a whole lot more from it than intended.

I was strictly talking about first numbers on the table, which is less related to how much additional negotiating takes place after that and much more related to where the numbers are likely to land. You've heard of anchoring, yes?

Who should put the first number on the table is a common question in all kinds of negotiations, and my generic advice is "it depends." But when you have less information than the other party about relevant benchmarks/criteria, you do NOT want to put the first number on the table because it's uninformed and being too far off in one direction or the other comes with the hazards I've described above. Thus, in salary negotiations I always advise interviewees to deflect requests for salary expectations and work to get an initial offer from the employer, and then negotiate the salary - and benefits - from there.

I don't understand your complaint that you don't want to negotiate for a week. Somewhere else you say if somebody isn't smart enough to negotiate their salary then that's their problem, and I got the impression that you have negotiated hard on your own behalf. These two sentiments seem to be at odds. And again I don't see 'who puts the first number on the table' as affecting how much more time the parties spend negotiating as much as anchoring the numbers around which they will subsequently negotiate.


caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #92 on: May 11, 2018, 02:45:26 PM »
caracarn, I really appreciate your inputs on this topic.  They've been fun to read, and I appreciate the tone in which they've been presented.  Thank you for presenting a contrary view without getting defensive or trolling.  I think I agree with most of what you've written, although I do have two problems with it as well.  First, there is always a huge disparity in the information the company has and what the individual has.  When I was an individual contributor, I had no idea what the salary ranges were or what the requirements were for the various grade levels were.  Even websites like Glassdoor and others are only a minor step above having zero information.  With such a wide disparity on the level of information that most employees have compared to what hiring managers have it does not make the negotiations an even playing field.  After I became a technical lead and then program manager, I realized that there were some enormous pay disparities.  I had people who were very close to being put on performance improvement plans being paid more than top performers.  I could always understand how we got into that situation, but it didn't make it any easier to take.  As an engineering manager I wanted to pay people according to how well they did the job, not according to how much they knew about pay scales, labor categories, and how well they negotiated.  Those skills and knowledge have nothing to do with the engineering work they did but had a huge impact on how they were paid.  And the excellent engineers who just focused on doing great engineering work got screwed.  Even if they didn't know about it, I hated to see it and did what I could in my little area to fix it.  Fortunately I had a Director who agreed and helped make things as "right" as we could. 
Second, there is a lot of information that has come to light over recent years/decades about how unconscious bias, outright discrimination, and gender traits like reluctance to negotiate (whether socialized or genetic - it doesn't matter) negatively impact the pay of groups like minorities and women.  This one reason that some states are looking at or implementing rules that prohibit using prior salary information as an input into setting salaries for people being hired for a new position.  That's also the reason I take issue with the "comparison is the thief of joy" comments.  Whenever there is a real instance of discrimination going on, comparison is necessary to remedy a real problem.  Using prior pay either directly (by asking on an application) or indirectly (asking someone what they want to be paid, knowing that their primary input is what they were previously paid) reinforces those ugly biases.  Adding the information disparity only makes things worse.
So I'm going to use the "comparison is the thief of joy" point to really respond, because, at least for me, this is how I process things and usually can frame all people who are unhappy with their salary around that.

Everyone, if asked, could calculate what salary they need to cover their expenses and get a savings level (even if zero) that they are happy with.  Meaning they can set their "joy point", or what I like to tell people is "enough".  If that amount of money makes me content, I think everyone on this board has read enough about money not buying happiness to understand that anything beyond that does nothing for your well being.  If I can then do something that gives me that amount of money I have established I will be content.  Therefore if I find a job at that level, I'm good.  If I then find out someone else doing the same job makes a different amount I really have two choices.  I can shrug it of as irrelevant to me because I am at my joy point already and for me and the life I choose to lead I have enough.  I am avoiding comparing myself to them, in that I do not have an emotional response and my contentment stays where it was.  I set my enough, and I have it, and I am good.  What others have does not matter.  My goal is not keeping up with the Joneses, which is somewhat the basis of MMM as well.  The second choice is to get emotional about it.  Complain about fairness.  Feel cheated.  Now my contentment changes, but usually only in the negative way (again money can't buy happiness for very long).  If I find out I am paid more than everyone it is unlikely to raise my base level of contentment for any period of time, but if I let it I can fume about it for a long time.  I have almost always operated in the first choice way (early in my career I had a few times I let myself do option two), but I do think it is more common to feel option two for most and why that phrase you do not like (which likely means you are an option two person) bugs you.

I also find it intriguing that employees have less information about salaries than employers.  I would agree from one employer to another.  For example I do not know what pay grade the place across the street would slot my role in to, but I should have a good understanding of what the market will bear for my role (and it can vary greatly by industry and geography and we are talking about in the thread about how people make over $100K), but I've never felt I was not aware of market rate for the jobs I was applying for.  I never felt at a disadvantage but I did some work.  Especially nowadays, those sites give you more than enough information if you look across all of them to get a good idea.  It's also pretty common (again a point I cover in the $100K thread) to understand and use basic math that if the average income of a household in the US is $72K that most jobs are not going to pay very well, that the well paying jobs are few and far between.  Supply and demand tell you that too.  Again, there will be bubbles (West Coast) that spring up, but you can find out a lot.  Then I have found that if you couple that with the concept of your enough up above, you can be pretty darn happy most of your career from a comp standpoint if you try a little bit. 

I've had two times when I was at an employer that a large number of employee salaries got out to the company.  You could very quickly see at those times which people were option one people (because they just found out some people in similar jobs were paid more than then but their contentment remained the same) or option two people.  It was there I learned I was the rarer duck.  I had enough and it was all good. 

Not sure if my way of looking at it helped you any but those are my responses to what you posted.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Just got a raise and I'm still angry
« Reply #93 on: May 11, 2018, 03:03:10 PM »
caracarn you're taking one thing I said and extrapolating a whole lot more from it than intended.

I was strictly talking about first numbers on the table, which is less related to how much additional negotiating takes place after that and much more related to where the numbers are likely to land. You've heard of anchoring, yes?

Who should put the first number on the table is a common question in all kinds of negotiations, and my generic advice is "it depends." But when you have less information than the other party about relevant benchmarks/criteria, you do NOT want to put the first number on the table because it's uninformed and being too far off in one direction or the other comes with the hazards I've described above. Thus, in salary negotiations I always advise interviewees to deflect requests for salary expectations and work to get an initial offer from the employer, and then negotiate the salary - and benefits - from there.

I don't understand your complaint that you don't want to negotiate for a week. Somewhere else you say if somebody isn't smart enough to negotiate their salary then that's their problem, and I got the impression that you have negotiated hard on your own behalf. These two sentiments seem to be at odds. And again I don't see 'who puts the first number on the table' as affecting how much more time the parties spend negotiating as much as anchoring the numbers around which they will subsequently negotiate.
Thanks for the response.

I did say it was a negotiation and your points are right.  It is my job to represent my employer, but I also feel that is clearly understood.  We all figure out our BATNA and if yours is that you are willing to not receive an offer from an employer because you refuse to talk about salary first, that's certainly fine.  I at times have that as well, but in my BATNA, that only comes out if I am interviewing for a job and have discerned that the interviewer will use it against me.  Then you are right, I do exactly what you said, but otherwise I am perfectly comfortable stating my expectation.  I eat my own dog food.

If somewhere I said if someone is not smart enough to NEGOTIATE their salary then it is their problem, then I unintentionally misstated by stance.  What I mean is someone is not smart/brave enough to state their salary need then it is their problem.  I've had people be very honest with me and say "I'd be OK with $70K, but I'd prefer something closer to $80K".  The salary I tell HR they asked for is closer to $80K (I offered $78K in that case as I felt that was fair given market and their stated needs).  You are also right that who offers first does not effect the time, except I've found that to be less true when I as the employer do it.  I feel that is because they feel that it's not a negotiation unless we go a few rounds.  Problem is when I give you my offer first as the employer, my second offer if likely to be the same as my first, because I'm still not playing games.  I gave you the chance to set my expectations and now if I do not meet yours, I'm sorry but you asked me to value what you bring to the organization and I did.  And that value now does not change based on your feeling that  the right thing to do is ask for a number higher just because some book told you that's how it works.  If you read any good negotiating text (and I'm re-reading several classics) they all talk about the process I am speaking of where both sides are open with each other on what they need and work together to achieve a win-win.  In the end any employee I am ever going to hire it intelligent enough to know that I want to pay as little as I can to get what I want, and they know the I know they want to paid as much as possible to get to their enough.  I just handle my hiring in that integrative negotiating style that we are both adults.  I do the same thing with vendor negotiations.  I know they need to make a profit.  They know my goal as a fiduciary of the company is to keep expenses down.  I get some great contracts but yet somehow still have happy vendors because they know how we got there and it was enough.  My best employees that I have hired know that too and have a good time working for me.  Negotiation does not have to be adversarial, as any solid negotiation text will attest.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2018, 03:05:25 PM by caracarn »