#JobSeekers #SalaryTransparency #RecruitmentStruggles
Hey everyone! 🌟
I came across a situation that left me scratching my head, and I wanted to see if anyone else has had a similar experience. 🤔 Imagine this: You’re chatting with a recruiter about a job you’re interested in, and they give you a salary range of $55K-$65K. You feel optimistic because that range works for you! So, you confidently state that you’re aiming for $65K—only for the recruiter to say, “Whoa, that’s a bit high.”
Wait, what? If that’s their range, how can it be too high? 🤷♂️
This brings up a couple of pain points that many of us face during the job search:
-
Lack of Clarity: When companies put out a salary range but aren’t willing to pay at the higher end, it creates confusion. Why not be upfront if they’re not ready to pay their listed range?
-
Negotiation Frustrations: It feels like walking into a minefield! If you aim for the top of their range, you might get shut down, even when that’s what they initially set.
- Trust Issues: How can we trust the figures recruiters provide if they can pivot so quickly? This starts to feel less like negotiation and more like a game.
One possible solution? Better communication and transparency from recruiters! 🤝 Here are a few thoughts:
-
Honest Salary Conversations: Recruiters should be clear from the get-go about what they can actually offer and what factors influence salary decisions.
-
Standardized Range Communication: Companies could adopt a standardized policy to prevent mismatches between advertised and actual salaries.
- Feedback Loop: Encourage candidates to share their experiences with salary discussions, creating a more informed applicant pool overall.
So, I’d love to hear from you all—what’s been your experience dealing with salary discussions? Have you faced similar frustrations or found effective ways to navigate these choppy waters? Share your tips and stories below! 🎤👇
Would you have been as interested in the role if they advertised it as $55-60k? Maybe not. I’ve seen this game before—they post a higher salary than they’re actually offering to attract better candidates and then try to lowball you.
So that they can get top rate people in the door then close it behind them.
Literally. Recruiters on this sub have admitted it. Maybe some will here too.
Had this happen to me. Salary posted was $60k-$70k. I was offered (and took, because I was desperate for any job) $55k. I think they knew I was desperate and would take the lowball. Unfortunately they were right.
I just interviewed for a salary listed 60-70k. When the company recruiter & I spoke he said it was 54-60k and asked me if it was ok. I told him no
Its bait. You took the bait, they wasted your time and wore you down, and now they can get you for a discount.
65 might be the salary for somebody. It’s just not the salary for you.
I don’t say that to be harsh. But 55 might be for somebody who meets 100% of the bare minimum qualifications. 65 might be If someone has done the job before at that company and wants to come back.
Or… They are just full of shit
“Construction Corporate TA” here.
I’ll admit that many of our HMs are tied financially to their projects success, and estimating seems to forget to add things into the bid packages that are important. So, a few of them get really tight on pay rates and try to push downward in an attempt to balance their composite pay rate….. like a $ or two less than what the candidate is looking for but within the advertised pay range.
This also theoretically leaves some $ in the bucket for a potential bonus at jobs end.
However, my job is to put the best talent on the shelf for the HM to review, interview, pass or push to hire. I do a deep initial phone call and if I think the guy is worth his asking rate, I’ll puff it a $ or two more when I submit.
You know …… close the customer high and the candidate low, so they’ll meet in the middle.
For a position in operations/C-Suite, the candidate may have a request higher than the advertised pay range.
I’ll tell the candidate as much up front but I have instructions from the Corner Office that if I feel they are worth submitting by experience and skills, then I’m trusted to move the candidate up the chain for an interview. I will caveat our initial conversation that we are open to reasonable salary requests and may be asked for support information to meet or exceed your current rate.
(Please don’t flame me on this. I know it’s verboten to ask for pay verification, but it’s not pressed and can be verified after offer. We just try to mitigate the $100k candidate shooting for the moon and asking for $160k and manipulating the interview/offer process.)
I have to play the best interests of all …. Company, HM, Candidate.
Yes but it could be a role that has applicants with varying levels of experience. Maybe the candidates with 1-2 years are typically $55k and the candidates with 3-4 years are $65k. If you have no experience and ask for the high end of the range, you are pricing yourself out of the opportunity. Why pay someone with no experience $65k when they have this other candidate with 4 years asking for $65k and hundreds of new grads asking for $50-$55k?
It’s not that the company isn’t willing to actually pay the top end of the salary range, it’s that they won’t pay that much for YOU.
Because that’s how ranges work. They aren’t going to be willing to pay the top of their range for everyone.
The top of their range will be reserved for someone they think is absolutely perfect for the role with no other candidates coming in close. The bottom of their range is for the least skilled individual they’ll accept. Most candidates will fall somewhere in the middle.
Well, you asked for the range… Most companies have a Min, Mid, and Max range. It sounds like they quoted you the min and max range, but companies typically won’t bring an internal in above mid range.
My former employer did this. They posted my former position at 100-125k (which is high for the size of their operation but feasible for the industry and position). They then offer a low base pay with a “lucrative performance based bonus package” (which is not advertised just told to you after you interviewed). All of this is fine in and of itself. The problem is, this place is both small and bad at its job so while, if they were run appropriately, one *could make the 100-125k advertised. But since they don’t run it appropriately you end up at 65-75k, and then they sit there and complain about high turnover.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned it’s that employers NEVER want to pay the high number of the salary range. Sometimes it’s like pulling teeth to even get the low number.
My employer has salary ranges for each pay grade that are further broken down into minimum, midpoint, high and exceptional. You might be qualified for the job but not be considered qualified enough for the high end.
This is a game that you haven’t learned how to play yet. You will.
Because that is the legitimate range of the role but accounts for people with years of experience within the company and accounts for raises that can occur over time. I always view this as the potential of future improvement with raises.
Short of you blowing the socks off the hiring manager that they cannot live without you, you are never getting the high end of that salary.
That’s what a salary range is. Companies generally want to get you in at the mid-range (think $60k for the range you shared). They are not looking to screw you. They are thinking of merit increases, how much it costs to hire/onboard you, etc. They are looking at their overall budget. You might (and not wrongly) think you deserve more. Understood – but you shot too high. They were right. Should you be paid more is another story 🙂
You start with the low number and once you get to the signing stage you ask for the high number. They are waaaayyy too lazy to start the process over at that point with someone else. That is when you have leverage.
Whenever they put a range, x to y, I assume they mean x to 1.1x , unless they think you’re a perfect candidate. I’m not saying you’re wrong to ask for the high end. We really shouldn’t let them keep normalizing this.
A few months ago, I applied to a job with a range of $11-15/hr. Yeah, that’s low, but I was looking for a side thing and jobs don’t pay much here. So, they message me back and essentially ask why someone with my experience and qualifications would apply to their posting. They basically told me that I was overqualified. I realized at that point that they had a point and mentioned looking for a job paying about $15. They said that was too much but thanked me for being honest. So yeah, just another example of ranges being a lie.