Ask HN: Have you ever been demoted months after being hired?

Honestly, if all the compensation details are exactly as agreed and the title doesn't visibly look like a demotion or otherwise undesirable on your CV, I'd consider it a win. More runway for promotion, merit increases, RSUs, etc.

Also, this happens with alarming frequency across firms with nebulous managerial titles. Different firms use titles like VP, Manager, Director, Supervisor, Principal, etc. interchangeably or defined entirely differently from their industry counterparts. One company's VP may be another company's Senior Associate; one company's Supervisor may be another company's Director, etc., so ultimately it's really just the level of responsibility and how you're able to sell it to future firms or partners that matters most.

This happened to me at a Fortune 500 and as long as the pay is great just ignore the title as most other companies will realize your responsibilities are in line with a higher title.

Personally I disagree. There is far less friction within an organization to fill a VP job with someone who is currently (or once was) a VP, rather than "taking a chance" with a candidate who has never previously held that title. Further, I have very rarely seen interviewers actually take the time to learn what your responsibilities are, let alone determine that they are representative of a title other than the one you have.

I'd say the opposite: you're closer to the ceiling for raises. If OP's compensation is mid-range for L+1, it is probably near the top of the range for his actual L. So future raises will not be great (since OP's comp has already maxxed out for his (incorrect) level. You want to be near the bottom of the comp band for whatever level you are at, so there is lots of room for future raises without having to get promoted.

I would seek to correct this for the sake of future raises.

Sounds like:

If you want to coast in your role without promotions but still want raises, object to the structure. Or quit.

If you want promotion potential and the wider raise potential that comes with it, accept it.

I don't know. Faced in a similar position, I'd be grateful for the opportunity to get better raises with promotions rather than raises within my current role.

Maybe it is an Australian thing, maybe I work at the wrong places. But "internal promotion" as it seems to be talked about here practically doesn't exist in my world.

You simply apply/interview/move jobs, preferably to a complete other entity. If you liked a place, apply for a job back there eventually.

The "band of compensation" thing is common though. Once you are at the top of your band, hopefully you get "inflation" top ups but it isn't guaranteed. Hence, get a job elsewhere...

Exactly, hence my comment. Assume you’re never going to get promoted internally, because it’s generally not possible. I’ve been in the industry for 20 years and never got close. It is just very uncommon. You want to start out at the low end of your job’s salary band, giving you lots of runway to get raises. Once you get to the top of the band, just find another job, rinse and repeat. You dont want to be “underleveled” at the top of the band.

Yikes, and here I am as a manager trying to create employee development plans for my team members so I can vouch for their promotions come end of year (or next, depending on the plan and the leveling-up needed).

Sorry you all have had these experiences. In two of the companies I've worked at, I've been promoted to new titles with substantial pay bumps at least once, so this is pretty foreign to me.

You are doing it right. A big problem is that companies are new to having engineering/design/social/digital/whatever teams and do not have much in the way of career tracks in place. So what happens is that you get hired as a software engineer (or some other techy title) and get stuck because there's no upward mobility since no one has taken the time to outline career paths in the org chart for these new roles. This is compounded by the fact that upper management is usually filled with non-tech people who haven't a clue as to what to do with these newfangled roles.

I'm not trying to change the world here, just making a practical utilitarian point: Due to an HR mistake, OP is underleveled and likely at the top of that level's pay band. You don't want to be here because being a the top of your pay band limits your future raises. It's in OP's financial best interest to bring this up with HR ASAP and get it corrected.

If you think promotions are straightforward when you're performing well and found to be underleveled, then the problem is less urgent, but in my experience this is not the case. As the saying among employees goes: "It's easier to get hired at [FAANG competitor] than to get an internal promotion." I know that we HN folks have heard this one before, so I'm kind of puzzled by the downvotes.

I think it is a culture/approach thing.

Where I am, you have a job with a pay band. As time goes by you pretty much automatically go up the pay bands unless you have done something drastically poor. Once you hit the top, that's pretty much it.

"Performance planning" is universally seen as mostly for show, so that HR can say they are implementing best practice. If we didn't have to do it we'd breathe a sigh of relief.

Different horses on different courses.

Truth is that if you are getting good performance reviews and not being promoted, you need to find another job at a higher level to get that promotion. Your current company is happy to keep you placated and working at your current level.

Yep, time to start interviewing. Tangentially, Always Be Interviewing.

Tangentially, that must be miserable life.

Possibly for introverts. I see a few 15-30 min Zoom calls a month as industry comp due diligence and ground truth. Don’t know what’s out there, if you’re underpaid, and by how much if you’re not looking. With everyone WFH, you can do it over lunch or whenever you can squeeze it in, no on site or PTO required.

If it’s not for you, and you’re comfortable leaving money and opportunities on the table, you do you. Everyone has to do what’s best for themselves.

A few 15-30 min Zoom calls a month seem like a ton of time investment. It's one thing if it truly is 15-30 min, but typically one would prepare a bit for interviews. Tech work, reading up on the company, etc. As you mentioned below you're in infosec so maybe it's less; for SWE there is the tech/code prep and then there's also purely the handling of the stress of answering tech interview questions. Not to mention many even want a take-home code exercise done which can take 2-3 hours. (You could argue that you wouldn't even interview at those companies casually unless you're really committed) Honestly, the amount of work to do for even one interview is so much that if I'm happy at my job, I don't even want to do one a year. Of course it's a different story if you're unhappy though, I'd be interviewing regularly too in that case.

> It's one thing if it truly is 15-30 min, but typically one would prepare a bit for interviews

If you’re happy in your current role and just looking for the perfect situation to move to, there’s nearly no prep needed for the first interview (assuming the technical/coding interview comes later int he process). Just grill the person who’s interviewing you and get the info you want.

Be glad you've never set foot in finance.

> and you’re comfortable leaving money and opportunities on the table

There are all sorts of things you can do to get the money and opportunities that don't involve perpetual interviewing.

You don't have to be introvert to not like sort of police interrogation.

I recommend negotiating from a position of power whenever possible (in this case, a BATNA) [1]. If you're interviewing when you want, while you're employed, it's on your terms. Don't like how the interview is going? "This isn't a good fit, have a great day" and move on to the next opportunity. It's only an interrogation if you let it be. Don't let it be.

I do agree with you that money and opportunities can be had without perpetual interviewing. The goal is to increase the number of dice rolls to maximize your chances of success. If you can do so without interviewing constantly, absolutely! Do it! But if you're comfortable constantly exploring work opportunities, and you have the time, I recommend doing so.

[1] https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/negotiation-skills-daily/e... ("Your best alternative to a negotiated agreement, or BATNA, is often your best source of bargaining power. By cultivating a strong outside alternative, you gain the power you need to walk away from an unappealing deal.")

(While we're here, here are two great resources on salary negotiations as well [2] [3])

[2] http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/ (patio11 on salary negotiation)

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=JoshDoody (Josh Doody, whom I have no affiliation with, has tons of quality material on negotiating roles and comp in general)

Of course that you should always look for new work when you are still employed, unless in rare cases when you have hell.

But as interview is interrogation, its unpleasant and its doubtful how much do you learn about opportunities or how high is your chances of success with taking into account lost time and energy. Making it perpetual sounds like a horror to me, and that is true for me even from the position of power. I'll rather go different route any time if possible.

Interviewing has to be one of the higher ROI activities you can do when it comes to the upside vs time invested.

It really depends on what you’re optimizing for. If it’s money and FIRE, sure I guess.

What do you find works best for short bursts of interview prep, a quick leetcode before lunch?

I am in infosec (primarily, there's a lot of similar work I do that doesn't neatly bucket into that including finance). No leetcode required (except for security engineering roles, possibly). This obviously does not apply to SWEs, so plan accordingly. The interviews are the practice/prep for each subsequent interview. Think of it like Toastmasters [1] but for your career. Leetcode polishing does sound like it might work for SWEs, but I cannot speak to it, and don't want to provide bad advice (which can be worse than no advice).

[1] https://www.toastmasters.org/

I was hired as a senior security engineer at $143k salary. 2 months later the employer told me the client wants a much more junior person and they needed to reduce my salary by $53k per year immediately. I then spent the next 2 weeks applying for new jobs and taking certification tests and left.

This was 6 years ago. I now make $180k - with bonuses often pushing me close to $220k.

Go apply for other jobs and see what others are willing to pay you

Is this consulting? Your company was supposed to eat the cost, or have hired someone junior for clients like that. Funny they never raise your pay when client pays well.

That's just messed up. Saying you are a lower level on some HR chart is one thing, but cutting your salary is just unreasonable. What choice does anybody have apart from immediately looking for a new job?

My guess is that your salary fit into the band of the lower title. And somebody thought they were doing you a favor by creating room for promotion. Very odd that nobody would have said anything, though. You mention salary is as promised. Are there any other differences, like number of options,bonus calculations, etc?

I suspect it's something along these lines, that the OPs salary and title somehow aren't lining up. Either what you describe or the opposite where their salary was higher than their level specified and the offer letter was fudged.

The former is probably a good situation to be in. The latter is less good as even if one gets the promotion to that next level, if you're salary is already in that band you won't see a corresponding pay increase.

Nope, everything monetary was just as agreed. It's an interesting take and I haven't though about it this way. I have always seen it as a sign of mistrust from the company, which had its consequences on morale etc.

The "extra cycle for a raise" is an upside. You can get promoted into something you're already qualified for. Though I get that there's downsides. Some loss of positional authority, maybe issues getting a new job at a place that uses similar names for levels, etc.

> working on various internal company side projects on my own time

Maybe they love that you’ll work for free if they keep dangling the carrot in front of you.

If it’s going to take you years to get what you’re qualified for, then doesn’t it make sense to find a new job at the appropriate level? It should only take a few months.

To move up, you often have to move out.

I'd cut my losses and move onto a different company, especially after your comment:

> although I could probably get 50% more without much effort at other places.

Unless you're perfectly happy with your job and your pay (it doesn't sound like you are) I'd start looking. If you can find more intellectually stimulating work elsewhere at better pay, that seems like a win-win.

Yes, this happened to me when I joined google. I think there was a mixup with someone hired at the same time with the same name. So I was told I was being hired at L5 but was in the system as L3. I raised it as a problem and tried to resolve it.

Management response: I was asked to resign (in the most clear terms possible).

That's odd they would ask you to resign although 2 levels lower is weird.

I had something similar happen to me last year. When receiving an offer, I was told I would be at L6 but found out after I was hired at L5 (both levels are considered Senior Engineer). The title is the same and the comp was as agreed, just that I thought the level would be higher.

Lesson learned for next time. Always get something like that in writing.

What was on the offer sheer?

I've had it happen before. After I joined the company HR rep our team used for hiring even complained to my manager that my salary was out of the band for my level. They also had zero motivation to fix it. My manager (who was a great manager) just said that this was one HR battle that wasn't worth the effort.

Forget your title. Are you happy with your salary and job? If no, move on. It's not like your next company can verify your current level or they even really care (outside of salary requirements). I ended up leaving the job because my great manager left and my new manager was horrible. It had nothing to do with level, and everything to do with job satisfaction.

I took a job at university as a senior sysadmin. On my first day at work, my boss explained: "Your job title may be senior sysadmin; but in fact I am the senior sysadmin".

I lasted just 3 weeks in that job.

No, that's unacceptable. Would have raised the issue immediately.

Was it just title, or did you not get the money originally offered? Is your role not the same as they said in the interview?

Deep down I would have a trust issue with the company. Although often titles are handed out as fake promotions and have little meaning. Senior developer vs junior analyst vs architect. They all sound different but could be the same job as there are little / no laws regulating titles.

Do you enjoy your job? Do you like your pay? Depending, I would start shopping your resume.

Yeah, compensation is what we've agreed. The title is lower, as well as the scope of work you are trusted with, so I need to get +2 levels to get to the most interesting, impactful and technically challenging work, which will probably take years at this pace. The pay is good, although I could probably get 50% more without much effort at other places.

Glad to hear the came through on pay. But a major part of compensation, if you are paid enough, is job satisfaction.

If you can get the SAME or better pay, with more job satisfaction then I would consider doing that. But if your current job does not have you doing that, then they clearly do not believe you are ready, especially if it is 2 levels higher.

From a boss perspective, why would they pay you a nice salary to do work below you, that is a waste of money ....

I wish you the best.

"which will probably take years at this pace."

Isn't that pretty normal? My company has an 18 month waiting period between promotions (which they only follow when they want to). I'm a midlevel developer with 9 years experience. I've only even gotten one promotion.

I would have raised it and got it corrected.

Titles are not worth much anyway; one more reason to insist on your title being what agreed. The title is something you can spend (on your CV, in your relationships with other colleagues).

Also, look around and see if you can get a better role somewhere else. No reason not to switch seeing how they're treating you.

In my country it's semi-illegal to demote someone. Sure they can put you in a lower skillset position but by law they cannot lower your existing pay. They would need to fire you (without reasonable cause it's a 3 month payout) and rehire you at that lower position/pay.

Def not illegal in the US. But it would be a weird thing to do, as it would not be great for morale. Can’t think of many reasons to lower someone’s pay. Maybe if entire company takes a 10% cut during a crisis or something.

The pay is the same, so it's not the case here. It's just that the title is different.

Just curious, did you find this job via a headhunter?

Nope, another platform =)

what is the normal amount of time to get promoted from level x to level x+1?

if it's 2 to 3 years, then you're fine -- keep working.

if you're already past the point at which you should have been promoted, then maybe something is up.

i would guess at least half of these cases are "don't worry about the meek guy/girl".

it's not necessarily intentional evil by the managers/company, it's just "the squeaky wheel gets the grease".

so the non-squeaky wheel does _not_ get the grease.

you're the non-squeaky/quiet wheel.

this would seem to comport with those social studies type reports that come out every few months (disclaimer: who knows what percentage of any social studies actually have merit) that say, basically, the worst humans get promoted the most and are the most successful.

i'm sympathetic to that point of view. yes, there are exceptions, obviously, but.

self-promotion, being an asshole, being loud, assertive, etc. -- they matter. if we believe the studies, they matter a lot.

so, you could make noise. and maybe you'd get fired. or forced out. or maybe you'll get promoted next time around.

i'm sure there are books out there on being more assertive. i need to read them myself. sounds like maybe you could use to do the same, tho you got dropped into a tough situation, so it's understandable.

you could try to transfer teams.

you could try to change companies.

i've been interviewing a lot and been getting a lot of grief for 'job hopping'. and my resume could reasonably be described as at least 'bouncy' if not 'hoppy', but the point is that 'stability' (i.e. staying at the same job for a few years no matter how shit) still matters to potential employers.

to stay positive, i would suggest a plan of action -- to take action, if and when you decide things need to change. this will allow you to dwell in a hopeful present.

without that plan, you might wake up one day and find out your life seems over. maybe you're 'just' burned out. maybe you're depressed. and that stuff is real. you think burnout will just take a couple weeks of vacation to cure? you're from a hard-working 'x' background that doesn't believe in things like burnout?

all the more reason to put together that plan. we're all products of our current environments.

think of all the toxic american males who are blowing their brains out every day, before or after they murder a bunch of other people.

that's a bit extreme, but you get the point - don't let yourself fall into burnout/depression. it can happen seemingly overnight. and by the time you post something like this to HN, you might be more than well on your way.

the plan can be simple.

i'm going to:

- read two books on being more assertive (including and especially at work)

- talk to a real career coach, who i will spend real money on, to give me actual-expert advice on how to deal with the specifics of my situation.

- set a deadline for when the promotion needs to happen, and if it does not, you'll start your job hunt in earnest, tho you should start 'getting out there' right away - this will also help preserve your sanity. online meetups/etc. mailing lists. this website. indie hackers. etc.

i tried to move laterally-ish within one company i was at, couldn't make it happen, so split. my mgr was actually trying to help me shift, but it still didn't happen. so i left -- mgr was cool with it/supportive. and that's part of why i'm getting grief today for job hopping. :-D

i think the main caveat/warning here is -- you have to make sure they/the company/manager knows that you want/expect/need to be promoted.

maybe they'll disagree, or just refuse it, etc., but you don't want to end up leaving and then find out that there was a legitimate miscommunication. that would just be weird and stupid and counterproductive for everyone.