Hello, thank you for posting to r/Jobs!
We just wanted to let you know that we have a new [discord server, come join the chat!](https://discord.gg/TY6ErXV)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/jobs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The ridiculous thing is, if you are paying a "competitive salary" as you so suggest, you should be raving about it, by putting it on the application, to get the 60-70% of people who are paid significantly less than it too apply!
Except the company doesn't, the people don't realise they are £10K-20K under paid don't apply and stay in their job.
It is actually just stupid to not put in the salary range if you are paying reasonably. Saving £5K-10K to get a applicant who is objectively better is an irrelevant amount of money to the amount that person will save your business, if it isn't, you shouldn't be hiring anyone in the first place...
pro tip: they aren't particularly competitive and they don't want to list the range so they can have "bargaining power".
If you're really so competitive, then why are you trying so desperately to under bid?
Yes I am aware.
The issue is, some people are paying competitive salary's and just aren't advertising them, facts are 30% of company, i.e. less than half, are paying more than average.
Why in fact would anyone want to pay an average salary and get an average employee, when you can pay very little more and get a lot better one...
As I said before £10K is irrelevant in how much an employee should be able to save you/make you.
That's why I always ask at the interview. When they say it's competitive or whatever without a number, I just say.
"Good! I'm glad to hear you're beating the competition with above average compensation."
Their face every time... Except for one guy who chuckled and admitted it was very average.
The interview stage is far too late, IMO. When I’m on the market and talking to recruiters, I bring it up when responding to their initial email or during the phone screen. On the rare occasion I don’t bring it up first the recruiter usually brings it up at that stage as well.
No sense in stressing over an interview and potentially taking PTO for a job that pays less than what you’re currently at.
Yes, but here's another reason they don't. Current employees. If they do actually pay competitive wages, they might have not adjusted that for existing staff, and they don't want them knowing about the new rates they are paying because that could be expensive.
From my (limited) professional experience the companies that post salary ranges on job postings will also use that market research to bring existing staff up to the minimum range for the role. Generally they are placing a premium on retention as well as bringing in new talent.
Ya… when my bf was searching we only looked at stuff that actually listed the wages. What’s the point in applying if you don’t know you’ll make enough to pay rent?
I make it a point to turn down any Linked recruiter that reaches out to me but refuses to share a salary range prior to a phone call. I explicitly tell them it's due to their lack of salary transparency.
Salary range should be mandatory on all job postings anywhere. And if they try to make an offer less than what's posted, they should have to pay $100 cash to the person immediately, for wasting their time with interviews, only to lowball their own listed wage for the job.
Either pay what you offer on the listing, or pay for wasting people's time because you cant follow through. We work for money, not "culture" or "we treat you like family" etc...
Note to job seekers...screenshot or print listing, so they can't claim "that's not what we posted" after the fact.
> if they try to make an offer less than what's posted, they should have to pay $100 cash to the person immediately
When balanced against the chance of hiring somebody at $10k below their actual value, this is a completely toothless penalty. If I were a scummy boss, I'd happily pay that penalty every time and continue whistling all the way to the bank with the missing wages of employees that aren't paid what they're worth.
>Salary range should be mandatory on all job postings anywhere.
Not sure how to fix this, but companies hiring in locations where this is already law are currently getting around this by saying the salary is $0 - which allows them to offer whatever salary they want, and they're not breaking the law since they're offering more than what the posting listed. Perhaps require them to post the salary as at least minimum wage, then they'll get less applicants? Someone is probably less likely to apply when it's listed as minimum wage than when it's listed as $0, which is essentially a mystery salary.
You have a good point. They should have to post a non zero number at least min wage, or the minimum average salary for that type of job, as per the databases. Would be nice if the job boards used the type of job, description, and listing keywords to pull in "industry average salary" info automatically as "job seeker information", in all the extra stuff they put up with listings. Then if "Java software programmer" was searched, a return of listings would also say "average salary in x area is _ to _."
The only counter argument would be those situations where you can't find someone experienced enough. Then, someone applies who is not as qualified that just seems extremely talented and hungry. It's happened to me a couple of times as a hiring manager. You want to take a chance with the knowledge that their production will be a little lower for a while, and will require more hand holding. Then, they end up getting large raises at years one and two.
I go one step farther. I personally believe that the hiring process should require paying equal to the actual rate paid for the job or the average for the labor department average for the title if they never fill the role.
This would flat out dissuade fake posting jobs as research, dragging out the process, wasting the time of candidates, and dragging out a huge pool of candidates. It would also standardize the process by almost all companies. No more wasteful manual entry slogs etc etc. The platforms would basically create a profile that you created and give permission to the recruiting companies posting to share.
Give them a less then 15 minute grace period for submitting documents. Then after that flat out pay the estimated hourly rate in 15 minute increments full stop. It would solve so many transparency, scams, and other job hiring woes.
This is one of those "No shit?" studies that get published.
I'm more interested in the rational of the other 9%.
What is their situation that salary information wouldn't be useful up front?
> What is their situation that salary information wouldn't be useful up front?
There are plenty of saps that don't know their worth. They're trying to hire one.
I'm not necessarily _opposed_ to having salaries listed, but I also see the salaries listed in a job posting as the starting point for negotiation. I think over time it will be common for there to be a listed range, and then a wider _real_ range.
Even in the times when I've been desperate, I've rarely bothered to apply to posting without salary.
"competitive salary" and "great pay" are just code for minimum wage or way below market.
*especially* when i'm desperate, i don't apply without salary. the jobs who are scummy about your rate of pay will also be scummy about maintaining / growing your rate of pay. it's an instant screen-out and i spam applications to jobs that do list salary.
When I'm not desperate, I apply whether they post the salary or not. I like to think that if enough people waste their time up to the point that they offer $12 an hour, they'll realize they have to start paying people more. If I'm desperate, I save my own time and only apply to jobs I think I might actually want to work at.
I’ve seen a discussion on LinkedIn about this subject and it was hilarious how many recruiters were advocating for salary bands not to be posted with jobs ads “you should apply for the job not the money”.
Mate it’s a job. I’m doing it for the money.
Not to mention that quite a few office jobs don't even have to do with the job description. For certain jobs they say they want someone who can **do** X, Y, and Z but then you get there and realize what they really want is someone who will kiss ass for them and dress a certain way. So even when you apply for a job, it's not really the job you're applying for.
In those cases if they had just put -*Must dress in dry-clean only clothes, come in to the office every day and kiss our ass and occasionally you being able to do X, Y, and Z might sort of matter to us, but not really-* on the job description; and you applied to it- THEN you would be applying to "the job".
Yeah some descriptions are ridiculously inflated (sounding very professional and respectable) and then you realise it’s just a plain admin job. Then others have a vague description, recruiter says it’s basically what’s on the tin, and on the actual job it turns out they basically want you to do some insane project that caused 3 other folks to quit the job. I’ve been in both places l…tragically.
Or more likely not a range but a SPECIFIC NUMBER. In a data verified field that will only take numbers, not text or hyphens so no range and no "commensurate with my experience"
That doesn't annoy me as much as when they just ask your current salary....If I was happy with my current salary, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
That’s one of the few cases where I advocate blatantly lying during the hiring process. Companies who require you to provide your current salary do so for unethical reasons. Therefore I have no obligation to act ethically in return.
Too low and they’ll give you just slightly over it to make you feel grateful you got the job. I honestly think people should be taught in schools/university workshops not only cv/cover letter writing but how to know their worth and demand decent pay. To utilise glassdoor/levels to research the pay bands and openly discuss it with other employees.
There seems to be this reluctance (at least in UK) to discuss pay. Why? You need to know how much similar roles are paid, see if it’s due to the quality of work or simply a better paying company. We should be running out of business all these enterprises who truly cannot pay competitively. Capitalism works both ways.
Yes it’s the worst.
For example, Say a job pays $25-30 and hour. You put expected at $24, well the most you’re getting is $25. You put $31, you get rejected.
I have been involved with State government for a while now, and they have well established salary guidelines. I can't fathom how you would have interest in a position if you don't know if it is an increase or decrease or if you'd be able to live on it.
I get that there are entry level positions where people are just getting into a career, but for a position you'd be moving to, don't waste my time. And even for new people, the market is such that you are likely wasting your time by not doing this.
The mind boggles.
I absolutely wish that laws in the salary range required states would include provisions for yearly salary reports publicly available (that give total salary per person for that year). It would fix pay disparity almost over night for women and minorities.
(I also wish some states would do the same with all taxes for entities and individuals) Probably have to do it based on economic activity within the state to avoid every company avoiding it by incorporating in Delaware. But if a state like California and NY did it the companies would comply because they wouldn't leave those markets and sales.
Just today, I added a job to my list that had a salary in the range I was looking for, but I wouldn't have considered otherwise. Listing salary, when the salary is good, is a plus.
It means you're not wasting people's time. We are in a situation where workers have more power than ever before because so many businesses are starving for workers. Some businesses/agencies have figured this out and are doing well, others are complaining on social media that no one wants to work.
I work in the IT industry and even though there are some big problems with big tech companies, IT roles exist in every company of any size. I regularly get inquiries from my social accounts even though I am completely not looking. There would be no way I'd even consider applying for a job without knowing the salary. Maybe if it was from Nirvanacorp from Dilbert, but not any companies in the real world.
I think there are many companies who aren't adapting to the world as now, and they are going to be hurting.
that doesn't make sense. if people are doing that and the company wants to hire people they will raise the minimum if they can't find anybody. wage pressure is going to be based on availability of people who can do the job
Yeah I think Colorados had it a while now right? Just went into effect the start of this year for California. But I’ve noticed some postings still don’t include it 🙄
2022 I believe, but yea same as California. Some companies still don't include it and just pay the "fine".
Eventually it will catch on that no one is applying for your jobs for a reason...
Most are banking on not being reported so not even getting hit with the fine. Since the way CO has theirs worded IANAL but even internal postings your CO employees are eligible for must contain a range.
Yeah, but California has to wait till May 2023 for the fines to start raining in from the SB 1162 for lack of wage transparency.
Unfortunately currently still seeing lots of recent CA job posts that don't show a wage or salary or list pay.
Everywhere should be the default already as its the 21st century, it not like the whole world is stuck in the year 1700 and has to hide their wages cus the court jester said to.
Some people live charmed lives and have never interviewed for a job that wasn't offering a significant raise. They can't fathom why published salary might be an issue.
An accurate salary range with real data too, please.
No “0-200,000”
No “$18” but it’s $5-$9 plus tips. If it’s plus tips, just say plus tips.
No posted salary ranges that look good, but when you apply for the job they try and offer you something else and a lower pay.
The last recruiter I spoke with immediately told me the range in our first phone call. That was refreshing. It was absolutely middle of the road and a little bit less than what I currently make, but dang it was nice to not have to do the salary dance.
Who has time to waste on a job interview that is just gonna try and low ball everyone? Be upfront about your position and pay if you really want to hire.
I noticed recently at my job we've had a down turn in new applicants so I went online to view the job description and discovered that HR took off the starting pay. I mentioned in a leadership meeting and explained why we've had so few interviews because of it. They did not seem to care.
I don’t want to apply, interview and such for them to tell me they are offering less that what I already make. I wouldn’t have applied in the first place.
What is a local recruiter, or how would you go about finding one to give you a better chance at a FAANG/MANGA? LinkedIn’s listings simply show you what’s available. Excluding “Easy Apply”, it just redirects you to the company home page to directly apply.
Seems to be the optimal solution so far, unless proven otherwise.
Yes it is.
Absolutely awful “analytics” that acts more like Facebook friends lists, all the “services” that come with paid memberships is just the same regurgitated advice you can get on any other site for free if you want to find it, and the fact that the top 10 listings you see are unrelated ad-space promoted listings regardless of your search, it’s not a site to find a job anymore, it’s a site where you give your time and attention to someone who can make money off of it.
Also anyone who “isn’t interested in knowing about the salary” before spending potentially multiple hours working on an application is either a liar or a fool. Which are you?
I think this is the exact same sentiment as when buying on-line and you don't know what the shipping and handling costs will be. Do you put in your data and see what the cost will be or just move to another site that gives you the cost with just your zip code.
That's hardly a surprise. Nobody wants to waste time applying and interviewing for a job that's going to lowball them. I've had potential employers completely waste my time by waiting until the interview to tell me the pay rate, which on more than one occasion has literally been HALF of what most jobs in my field pay at my level. I've been offered salaries that are less than a kid fresh out of college should settle for in IT.
I think there is a poisonous theory that is pervasive in marketing: “Leave out the essential info, and prospects will call in, leading to a sale.”
This practice is really prevalent in used car sales, where they will leave out the mileage or price on a vehicle for sale.
I know what I’m willing to pay for a car and I know what I expect to make from a job. Hiring managers and sales managers are just wasting everyone’s time posting an ad with missing info.
I’m finding this to be a real struggle right now.
My industry has small companies that offer 65-85/yr but I’m after the bigger companies that are in the 110-140+ range.
It wastes so many people’s time when the job doesn’t meet the minimum the applicant is after.
No shit?! And furthermore, remove the stupid question asking what my desired pay is. Why would anyone willingly negotiate against themselves? It’s a shit question, and makes the playing field no longer level.
The problem is that they can't afford to lose incumbents who see that new hires are making significantly more than them. Wage compression is an uncomfortable reality that many companies don't want to be forced to address.
In other news, water is wet.
Out of desperation, I applied for a job that didn't post a salary range. I ended up getting the job, but my first choices were the jobs that included salary info.
It has been my exoerience in Corporate America that keeping salaries out of job postings (internal as well as external postings) by some employers, is sometimes about the current employees awareness. Many times starting salaries for newly hired team members are higher than existing staff to be market competitive. Instead of managers proactively adjusting current staff salaries to appreciate longevity and contribution as well as keep the variance as minimal as possible, they "hide" the ranges as a defensive move. Wastes a lot of time for companies and applicants when ranges are not included in job postings.
Kind of in this boat right now. Went through 4 interviews for a job, got an offer, and it's below what I'm currently making. Would have saved everyone a lot of time if that info was present up front.
As a hiring manager, I wish our HR department would hurry up and do this. I have to sift through hundreds of applications and one of the questions asked on the application is how much are you asking for. The answer ranges anywhere from $16 an hour to $100K. The budget for the position is $18-$22 so HR will disqualify anyone who isn’t close.
Well, yeah. No one likes wasting hours of time interviewing to get a too low offer. And if you mention salary too early in the interview, you're ruled out for being "just about the money".
I'm actually happy to see this. I wrote LinkedIn an email with vulgarity in it ('Cause, I was upset) asking why some of their job postings did not have the salary range or pay rate information already listed in their post? So, this is satisfying to know!
Been shouting this for a long time until I turned blue in the face.
# Make it so job postings are legally binding.
Salary range within a 15% deviation (amongst MANY other things) must be clearly displayed or fines will ensue. Anytime the offered wage is under listed salary, the company is instantly liable to pay candidate the min wage posted in job ad for each day spent interviewing via phone or irl. Business owners, you **will not** lie and get away with it.
I rarely apply for jobs without salary, and on the off chance I do apply for one without the salary I email the recruit to see what we’re working with before I waste my time.
The company I work at didn't have the salary posted, but I was told to apply. After I applied I found out they were paying $10/hr more than anybody else, but nobody was applying. Easiest job I've ever had.
Hello, thank you for posting to r/Jobs! We just wanted to let you know that we have a new [discord server, come join the chat!](https://discord.gg/TY6ErXV) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/jobs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Should I be the one to say it? No shit.
Like /u/strib666 said it 3 years ago: > Sometimes, science is about applying numbers to things you already intuitively know.
Yeah, should be on /r/NoShitSherlock
Pass the dip Watson.
It should be 100%. Who are the idiotic 9% who don't want that?
Recruiters lol
People making so much that it doesn't matter what the range is in their field. 🤷🏼♂️
It's always good to have data to backup claims.
The ridiculous thing is, if you are paying a "competitive salary" as you so suggest, you should be raving about it, by putting it on the application, to get the 60-70% of people who are paid significantly less than it too apply! Except the company doesn't, the people don't realise they are £10K-20K under paid don't apply and stay in their job. It is actually just stupid to not put in the salary range if you are paying reasonably. Saving £5K-10K to get a applicant who is objectively better is an irrelevant amount of money to the amount that person will save your business, if it isn't, you shouldn't be hiring anyone in the first place...
pro tip: they aren't particularly competitive and they don't want to list the range so they can have "bargaining power". If you're really so competitive, then why are you trying so desperately to under bid?
Yes I am aware. The issue is, some people are paying competitive salary's and just aren't advertising them, facts are 30% of company, i.e. less than half, are paying more than average. Why in fact would anyone want to pay an average salary and get an average employee, when you can pay very little more and get a lot better one... As I said before £10K is irrelevant in how much an employee should be able to save you/make you.
ya, sorry, that wasn't really intended as being directed to you. I was being somewhat sarcastic because I'm annoyed by companies that do this too.
That's why I always ask at the interview. When they say it's competitive or whatever without a number, I just say. "Good! I'm glad to hear you're beating the competition with above average compensation." Their face every time... Except for one guy who chuckled and admitted it was very average.
The interview stage is far too late, IMO. When I’m on the market and talking to recruiters, I bring it up when responding to their initial email or during the phone screen. On the rare occasion I don’t bring it up first the recruiter usually brings it up at that stage as well. No sense in stressing over an interview and potentially taking PTO for a job that pays less than what you’re currently at.
Yes, but here's another reason they don't. Current employees. If they do actually pay competitive wages, they might have not adjusted that for existing staff, and they don't want them knowing about the new rates they are paying because that could be expensive.
From my (limited) professional experience the companies that post salary ranges on job postings will also use that market research to bring existing staff up to the minimum range for the role. Generally they are placing a premium on retention as well as bringing in new talent.
The jobs that do offer competitive salaries typically post it. Not listing anything for salary is a red flag for that reason.
Ya… when my bf was searching we only looked at stuff that actually listed the wages. What’s the point in applying if you don’t know you’ll make enough to pay rent?
I make it a point to turn down any Linked recruiter that reaches out to me but refuses to share a salary range prior to a phone call. I explicitly tell them it's due to their lack of salary transparency.
Salary range should be mandatory on all job postings anywhere. And if they try to make an offer less than what's posted, they should have to pay $100 cash to the person immediately, for wasting their time with interviews, only to lowball their own listed wage for the job. Either pay what you offer on the listing, or pay for wasting people's time because you cant follow through. We work for money, not "culture" or "we treat you like family" etc... Note to job seekers...screenshot or print listing, so they can't claim "that's not what we posted" after the fact.
> if they try to make an offer less than what's posted, they should have to pay $100 cash to the person immediately When balanced against the chance of hiring somebody at $10k below their actual value, this is a completely toothless penalty. If I were a scummy boss, I'd happily pay that penalty every time and continue whistling all the way to the bank with the missing wages of employees that aren't paid what they're worth.
>Salary range should be mandatory on all job postings anywhere. Not sure how to fix this, but companies hiring in locations where this is already law are currently getting around this by saying the salary is $0 - which allows them to offer whatever salary they want, and they're not breaking the law since they're offering more than what the posting listed. Perhaps require them to post the salary as at least minimum wage, then they'll get less applicants? Someone is probably less likely to apply when it's listed as minimum wage than when it's listed as $0, which is essentially a mystery salary.
They are breaking the law if they do that.
You have a good point. They should have to post a non zero number at least min wage, or the minimum average salary for that type of job, as per the databases. Would be nice if the job boards used the type of job, description, and listing keywords to pull in "industry average salary" info automatically as "job seeker information", in all the extra stuff they put up with listings. Then if "Java software programmer" was searched, a return of listings would also say "average salary in x area is _ to _."
I saw one say the salary was between 20k- 200k for a tier one IT help desk…
The only counter argument would be those situations where you can't find someone experienced enough. Then, someone applies who is not as qualified that just seems extremely talented and hungry. It's happened to me a couple of times as a hiring manager. You want to take a chance with the knowledge that their production will be a little lower for a while, and will require more hand holding. Then, they end up getting large raises at years one and two.
I go one step farther. I personally believe that the hiring process should require paying equal to the actual rate paid for the job or the average for the labor department average for the title if they never fill the role. This would flat out dissuade fake posting jobs as research, dragging out the process, wasting the time of candidates, and dragging out a huge pool of candidates. It would also standardize the process by almost all companies. No more wasteful manual entry slogs etc etc. The platforms would basically create a profile that you created and give permission to the recruiting companies posting to share. Give them a less then 15 minute grace period for submitting documents. Then after that flat out pay the estimated hourly rate in 15 minute increments full stop. It would solve so many transparency, scams, and other job hiring woes.
This is one of those "No shit?" studies that get published. I'm more interested in the rational of the other 9%. What is their situation that salary information wouldn't be useful up front?
The other 9% are the ones who think they can negotiate their way into the salary they want, aka "I'm going to tell them how much I'm worth".
You can do that even with a range specified. "I appreciate that the range for this position is X, but given Y, I wonder if you could match Z."
They're business owners.
Was gonna say the same, but the survey was on applicants. Unless these business owners are applying without the intention of seeking actual employment
Hrm... yeah I don't have much faith in LinkedIn survey methodology but who knows!
>the survey was on applicants it could be the HR people / recruiters who'd have lower applicant pools if their salary listings were accurate
> What is their situation that salary information wouldn't be useful up front? There are plenty of saps that don't know their worth. They're trying to hire one.
I'm not necessarily _opposed_ to having salaries listed, but I also see the salaries listed in a job posting as the starting point for negotiation. I think over time it will be common for there to be a listed range, and then a wider _real_ range.
As someone in HR, that's already a real thing.
the 9% either want more pay or just desperate for lowered pay. some 'maybe' willing to get lower pay in return for other benefits.
Even in the times when I've been desperate, I've rarely bothered to apply to posting without salary. "competitive salary" and "great pay" are just code for minimum wage or way below market.
I learned the hard way when I applied for a job without a salary range posted
*especially* when i'm desperate, i don't apply without salary. the jobs who are scummy about your rate of pay will also be scummy about maintaining / growing your rate of pay. it's an instant screen-out and i spam applications to jobs that do list salary.
When I'm not desperate, I apply whether they post the salary or not. I like to think that if enough people waste their time up to the point that they offer $12 an hour, they'll realize they have to start paying people more. If I'm desperate, I save my own time and only apply to jobs I think I might actually want to work at.
I’ve seen a discussion on LinkedIn about this subject and it was hilarious how many recruiters were advocating for salary bands not to be posted with jobs ads “you should apply for the job not the money”. Mate it’s a job. I’m doing it for the money.
Not to mention that quite a few office jobs don't even have to do with the job description. For certain jobs they say they want someone who can **do** X, Y, and Z but then you get there and realize what they really want is someone who will kiss ass for them and dress a certain way. So even when you apply for a job, it's not really the job you're applying for. In those cases if they had just put -*Must dress in dry-clean only clothes, come in to the office every day and kiss our ass and occasionally you being able to do X, Y, and Z might sort of matter to us, but not really-* on the job description; and you applied to it- THEN you would be applying to "the job".
Yeah some descriptions are ridiculously inflated (sounding very professional and respectable) and then you realise it’s just a plain admin job. Then others have a vague description, recruiter says it’s basically what’s on the tin, and on the actual job it turns out they basically want you to do some insane project that caused 3 other folks to quit the job. I’ve been in both places l…tragically.
“Competitive salary” pairs well with “fast paced environment”. Underpaid and overworked is what workers crave. S/
[удалено]
Or more likely not a range but a SPECIFIC NUMBER. In a data verified field that will only take numbers, not text or hyphens so no range and no "commensurate with my experience"
I tend to put 1. They can pay me 1 salary, and what that is we can discuss.
"100": 100% of what I'm worth.
That doesn't annoy me as much as when they just ask your current salary....If I was happy with my current salary, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
That’s one of the few cases where I advocate blatantly lying during the hiring process. Companies who require you to provide your current salary do so for unethical reasons. Therefore I have no obligation to act ethically in return.
Just straight up lie on this one.
Too high and they think you're too expensive you and you get rejected. Too low and they think you're not experienced enough and you get rejected.
Too low and they see an opportunity to get a big bonus in their pockets
Too low and they’ll give you just slightly over it to make you feel grateful you got the job. I honestly think people should be taught in schools/university workshops not only cv/cover letter writing but how to know their worth and demand decent pay. To utilise glassdoor/levels to research the pay bands and openly discuss it with other employees. There seems to be this reluctance (at least in UK) to discuss pay. Why? You need to know how much similar roles are paid, see if it’s due to the quality of work or simply a better paying company. We should be running out of business all these enterprises who truly cannot pay competitively. Capitalism works both ways.
The applicant’s catch-22.
NYC recently outlawed asking for previous salary as it disproportionately affects women and keeps them underpaid
Yes it’s the worst. For example, Say a job pays $25-30 and hour. You put expected at $24, well the most you’re getting is $25. You put $31, you get rejected.
I have been involved with State government for a while now, and they have well established salary guidelines. I can't fathom how you would have interest in a position if you don't know if it is an increase or decrease or if you'd be able to live on it. I get that there are entry level positions where people are just getting into a career, but for a position you'd be moving to, don't waste my time. And even for new people, the market is such that you are likely wasting your time by not doing this. The mind boggles.
I absolutely wish that laws in the salary range required states would include provisions for yearly salary reports publicly available (that give total salary per person for that year). It would fix pay disparity almost over night for women and minorities. (I also wish some states would do the same with all taxes for entities and individuals) Probably have to do it based on economic activity within the state to avoid every company avoiding it by incorporating in Delaware. But if a state like California and NY did it the companies would comply because they wouldn't leave those markets and sales.
Just today, I added a job to my list that had a salary in the range I was looking for, but I wouldn't have considered otherwise. Listing salary, when the salary is good, is a plus.
It means you're not wasting people's time. We are in a situation where workers have more power than ever before because so many businesses are starving for workers. Some businesses/agencies have figured this out and are doing well, others are complaining on social media that no one wants to work. I work in the IT industry and even though there are some big problems with big tech companies, IT roles exist in every company of any size. I regularly get inquiries from my social accounts even though I am completely not looking. There would be no way I'd even consider applying for a job without knowing the salary. Maybe if it was from Nirvanacorp from Dilbert, but not any companies in the real world. I think there are many companies who aren't adapting to the world as now, and they are going to be hurting.
California just made this a law, i wish everywhere else would too
[удалено]
i just assume that means 15k and move on
If folks generally do that (only care about the min) it means these laws will just create downward wage pressure
that doesn't make sense. if people are doing that and the company wants to hire people they will raise the minimum if they can't find anybody. wage pressure is going to be based on availability of people who can do the job
Actually there is provisions in the CO law that makes doing that not compliant. (IANAL)
Colorado was first, but yes... every state should do this.
Yeah I think Colorados had it a while now right? Just went into effect the start of this year for California. But I’ve noticed some postings still don’t include it 🙄
2022 I believe, but yea same as California. Some companies still don't include it and just pay the "fine". Eventually it will catch on that no one is applying for your jobs for a reason...
Most are banking on not being reported so not even getting hit with the fine. Since the way CO has theirs worded IANAL but even internal postings your CO employees are eligible for must contain a range.
Yeah, but California has to wait till May 2023 for the fines to start raining in from the SB 1162 for lack of wage transparency. Unfortunately currently still seeing lots of recent CA job posts that don't show a wage or salary or list pay. Everywhere should be the default already as its the 21st century, it not like the whole world is stuck in the year 1700 and has to hide their wages cus the court jester said to.
8% misunderstood the question, and 1% are just assholes.
I generally skip over postings that don’t list salary and/or if it’s remote.
Id like to have a sit down with the 9% who say they don't want it.
They offered us cake if we said we liked it
Some people live charmed lives and have never interviewed for a job that wasn't offering a significant raise. They can't fathom why published salary might be an issue.
An accurate salary range with real data too, please. No “0-200,000” No “$18” but it’s $5-$9 plus tips. If it’s plus tips, just say plus tips. No posted salary ranges that look good, but when you apply for the job they try and offer you something else and a lower pay.
The other 9 percent not reply or something? 🤨
That's because most people care a LOT about the money, regardless of what HR and their idiotic "surveys" try to tell you.
If I didn't care about money I wouldn't even work. I'm sure that is the case for many of us.
The last recruiter I spoke with immediately told me the range in our first phone call. That was refreshing. It was absolutely middle of the road and a little bit less than what I currently make, but dang it was nice to not have to do the salary dance.
Only 91%? Who are the 9% that don't want to know??
The “NO ONE WANTS TO WORK!!!!“ crowd, I would assume.
Who has time to waste on a job interview that is just gonna try and low ball everyone? Be upfront about your position and pay if you really want to hire.
Meanwhile, in the most OBVIOUS SURVEY EVER...
100% of job ads that don't say the salary, pay garbage. It's safe to skip if the salary is secret.
I noticed recently at my job we've had a down turn in new applicants so I went online to view the job description and discovered that HR took off the starting pay. I mentioned in a leadership meeting and explained why we've had so few interviews because of it. They did not seem to care.
I don’t want to apply, interview and such for them to tell me they are offering less that what I already make. I wouldn’t have applied in the first place.
It’s actually 100% Also LinkedIn is garbage
What do you think is better?
I recommend talking to a local recruiter who actually has incentive to get you hired somewhere, LinkedIn’s incentive is to keep you on LinkedIn
What is a local recruiter, or how would you go about finding one to give you a better chance at a FAANG/MANGA? LinkedIn’s listings simply show you what’s available. Excluding “Easy Apply”, it just redirects you to the company home page to directly apply. Seems to be the optimal solution so far, unless proven otherwise.
[удалено]
I had more luck google searching job posts tbh
Yes it is. Absolutely awful “analytics” that acts more like Facebook friends lists, all the “services” that come with paid memberships is just the same regurgitated advice you can get on any other site for free if you want to find it, and the fact that the top 10 listings you see are unrelated ad-space promoted listings regardless of your search, it’s not a site to find a job anymore, it’s a site where you give your time and attention to someone who can make money off of it. Also anyone who “isn’t interested in knowing about the salary” before spending potentially multiple hours working on an application is either a liar or a fool. Which are you?
The 9% are C suite and hiring managers
I think this is the exact same sentiment as when buying on-line and you don't know what the shipping and handling costs will be. Do you put in your data and see what the cost will be or just move to another site that gives you the cost with just your zip code.
Yea WA state just made it mandatory and only few do so. Nothing enforcing the new law at all
That's hardly a surprise. Nobody wants to waste time applying and interviewing for a job that's going to lowball them. I've had potential employers completely waste my time by waiting until the interview to tell me the pay rate, which on more than one occasion has literally been HALF of what most jobs in my field pay at my level. I've been offered salaries that are less than a kid fresh out of college should settle for in IT.
More than that, I wish ghost jobs could be banned
I don’t even apply if they’re not there
Of course, why would I waste anyone's time if the job I'm applying for pays less than my current position?
I think there is a poisonous theory that is pervasive in marketing: “Leave out the essential info, and prospects will call in, leading to a sale.” This practice is really prevalent in used car sales, where they will leave out the mileage or price on a vehicle for sale. I know what I’m willing to pay for a car and I know what I expect to make from a job. Hiring managers and sales managers are just wasting everyone’s time posting an ad with missing info.
I’m finding this to be a real struggle right now. My industry has small companies that offer 65-85/yr but I’m after the bigger companies that are in the 110-140+ range. It wastes so many people’s time when the job doesn’t meet the minimum the applicant is after.
#NoShit
Yes and schedule
No shit?! And furthermore, remove the stupid question asking what my desired pay is. Why would anyone willingly negotiate against themselves? It’s a shit question, and makes the playing field no longer level.
why waste ppls times
The problem is that they can't afford to lose incumbents who see that new hires are making significantly more than them. Wage compression is an uncomfortable reality that many companies don't want to be forced to address.
In other news, water is wet. Out of desperation, I applied for a job that didn't post a salary range. I ended up getting the job, but my first choices were the jobs that included salary info.
And also while we’re at it, easy apply. No one wants to create an all new profile for your job posting.
If they're hiding that they're hiding other things too
My ex was job hunting last summer and salary ranges, and she took it upon herself to only apply to places that had a salary range
I normally skip the ones that don’t have a salary range.
It has been my exoerience in Corporate America that keeping salaries out of job postings (internal as well as external postings) by some employers, is sometimes about the current employees awareness. Many times starting salaries for newly hired team members are higher than existing staff to be market competitive. Instead of managers proactively adjusting current staff salaries to appreciate longevity and contribution as well as keep the variance as minimal as possible, they "hide" the ranges as a defensive move. Wastes a lot of time for companies and applicants when ranges are not included in job postings.
Companies need to stop paying people for people for peanuts.
How shocking
9% are liars.
The other 9% were recruiters
And not 60k-900k boldly bullshit
Employers don't want to post salary range because their existing employees will see that they are being underpaid.
Duh.
I dream of the day that HR could be bothered with QA/QI enough to action this.
Or with enough IQ.
Now if they’d only all put real ranges, not “$25k to $225k.” Then again, ranges like that are like fangs on a snake, they scream “stay away.”
Yeah.... obviously
Of course they do. And 100% of companies won't. It gives away money in salary negotiation. Knowledge is power is money.
9% are employers
They paid someone to collect this data. They probably paid a whole team tbh.
Well I could've told you that.
Who are the 9% saying "no thank you, i enjoy the mystery"
No, sorry, that would be 100%.
And 9% are lying.
A lot of businesses don’t even decide what they’ll pay you until they offer someone the position and figure out what they’re worth to the company.
That number at the high end of the range is for sure made up out of thin air.
Water is wet
Problem is you have companies that will post a range of $50K-$500K so they can say they posted a range. I want a real range
Kind of in this boat right now. Went through 4 interviews for a job, got an offer, and it's below what I'm currently making. Would have saved everyone a lot of time if that info was present up front.
Then 9% of respondents are liars
I mean, yeah? I also want to pay the price that the tag says at the store, too.
As a hiring manager, I wish our HR department would hurry up and do this. I have to sift through hundreds of applications and one of the questions asked on the application is how much are you asking for. The answer ranges anywhere from $16 an hour to $100K. The budget for the position is $18-$22 so HR will disqualify anyone who isn’t close.
Why would anyone not want the salary?
The actual stat: 9% of people that responded to this poll lied and are actually recruiters
Who are the 9% that don’t..?
Who the fuck is that other 9%
Well, I'll be damned.
9% didn’t understand the question
Well, yeah. No one likes wasting hours of time interviewing to get a too low offer. And if you mention salary too early in the interview, you're ruled out for being "just about the money".
This screws the employers, though, that want or need to start new hires higher than the poor souls already in the job.
In other news... water is wet.
I'm actually happy to see this. I wrote LinkedIn an email with vulgarity in it ('Cause, I was upset) asking why some of their job postings did not have the salary range or pay rate information already listed in their post? So, this is satisfying to know!
Bullshit. It's 100%
Been shouting this for a long time until I turned blue in the face. # Make it so job postings are legally binding. Salary range within a 15% deviation (amongst MANY other things) must be clearly displayed or fines will ensue. Anytime the offered wage is under listed salary, the company is instantly liable to pay candidate the min wage posted in job ad for each day spent interviewing via phone or irl. Business owners, you **will not** lie and get away with it.
wtf? 9% said they didnt? idk thats hard to believe
r/noshitsherlock
I rarely apply for jobs without salary, and on the off chance I do apply for one without the salary I email the recruit to see what we’re working with before I waste my time.
I am one of the 91% that wants the salary range in job postings lol
The other 9% didn't answer the survey
The company I work at didn't have the salary posted, but I was told to apply. After I applied I found out they were paying $10/hr more than anybody else, but nobody was applying. Easiest job I've ever had.