It's not, of course, the only thing I care about, but far too few postings offer this level of transparency. Love the other ideas of work week length and problem to be solved as well.
In the same time I talked to that company, I had had enough time to talk to 5 others and get 5 more offers that were all offering at least as much as I was making or significantly more.
Since I was really interested in company #1, I declined really good offers along the way, hoping I'd get an offer from that company.
You can imagine my elation and subsequent horrors when they told me that they had picked me for the job and showed me their salary ranges. I would never ever in my life want to go through such an experience again and I actively avoid companies that are hiding or avoiding that topic somewhat early in the process.
I don’t knew if this is some new tactic, but the whole think struck me as trying to leverage a sunk cost fallacy to underpay employees.
- This took place in Germany, where salaries don't vary to a very large extent. There are some outliers, but most people know they need to offer a certain amount of $$$ for talent.
- I did my research and assessed the current market. It was on par with my salary at that time.
- They made sure to communicate that there is no equity offered, which made me believe their salaries are adjusted accordingly.
- No, I didn't tell them I was turning down offers. But I did tell them that if they don't move faster, I'm going to accept another offer.
I usually walk away from anyone not announcing salary ranges, because they're also the most likely to negotiate hard.
It's a solid and necessary skill to be able to negotiate hard. But when taken to such extremes as to keep people oblivious about their salary until the end, it's a red flag from the get go.
After suffering a cube farm for the last years I also like companies who have offices or are remote.
Decent vacation is also appreciated.
"California employers can no longer ask job applicants about their prior salary and — if applicants ask — must give them a pay range for the job they are seeking, under a new state law that takes effect Jan. 1."
http://www.calpeculiarities.com/2017/10/12/third-times-the-c...
Land on page for a job on an aggregator board. GeoIP detects if you're in California; asks you confirm if you're interested in the salary range of the job. You click "yes", it submits the request (which requires a response by law). Response is reported back to requestor when it arrives, aggregator board has salary on record.
Second part of the law is brilliant!
Or I'll ask former employees sourced from their Linkedin profiles. Fight information asymmetry whenever possible.
Sadly there is not much of an appetite for truth that affects any business exploits that rely on misinformation.
If you began informing Ethiopian coffee bean farmers of how much Starbucks charges for a cup of coffee for just a few cents worth of coffee beans...
They would find a way to raise their price ;)
Some firms won't list it also for legal concerns as well.
There are two types engagements recruiting firms have with companies:
1. contingency - You only make money when you place someone. This is what triggers the blasting of many resumes over to companies with little vetting. In short, it's a numbers game.
2. retained - This is when a firm pays the recruiter either all or partially upfront. The recruiter is then incentive to their very best to place the candidate.
When you really dig into the recruiting space, it's very interesting and you start to uncover things that create a bad experience for candidates, companies, and recruiters.
In my future postings, I will evaluate the market for the type of position I'm posting, decide on a pretty narrow range (even a specific number), and make it part of the posting and the job overall. It worked well for me and many others, and removes so many issues.