Hacker News Reader

Comment by brushfoot | Hacker News Reader

Think of it as a symbol of what range of experience the company is willing to accept.

Example: A .NET shop uses Oracle. The salary range is $100K–$150K.

- Candidate 1 knows .NET but is new to Oracle. They know RDBMS concepts so they can be brought up to speed, but they start closer to the $100K end of the range because they're less valuable to the company initially.

- Candidate 2 has a long track record of .NET and Oracle work, has spoken at conferences, writes about it on their blog. Candidate 2 is closer to the $150K end.

The company may want a Candidate 2 more than a Candidate 1, but Candidate 2s are in short supply. The range acknowledges that the real candidate may not match the ideal.

View on HN

> - Candidate 1 knows .NET but is new to Oracle. They know RDBMS concepts so they can be brought up to speed, but they start closer to the $100K end of the range because they're less valuable to the company initially.

How long would the ramp-up be? Are we talking an increase from $100K to $150K over a year, two, three? I've yet to encounter an employer ramping me up at even a remotely decent market rate, whereas I can give myself tens or sometimes hundreds of % increases every 2 - 3 years by shopping around.

"Candidate 1 knows .NET but is new to Oracle"

"Candidate 2 has a long track record of .NET and Oracle work"

These should be two different JDs with different stated salaries.

Or explicitly say "+$50K for candidates with a long track record of .NET and Oracle work".

> These should be two different JDs with different stated salaries.

But I'm only hiring one person. Ideally, the one with all the perfectly matching experience. But I'm not going to wait around forever for the unicorn to show up, so I may likely settle for someone promising who doesn't quite have the experience.

> Or explicitly say "+$50K for candidates with a long track record of .NET and Oracle work".

That's the same as giving a range.

Not the same, because giving a range allows you to discriminate on race, gender, and other things. The reality is this actually happens, and that's why this discussion is happening in the first place.

If it's an objective function of qualifications that's a lot more clear-cut.

> "+$50K for candidates with a long track record of .NET and Oracle work"

This also allows discrimination based on "race, gender, and other things" since "long track record" is completely open to interpretation and if the interviewers are already operating in bad faith, they can find any BS reason to try and undermine an interviewee.

"$100-$150k DOE" is exactly the same, if not clearer, than "$100k (+$50k if XYZ)"

For those operating in good faith, it gives an honest comp range depending on experience.

For those who aren't, a format change on job postings isn't going to do anything.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com