Could you elaborate on what you mean by FAANG salary? I’ve always heard the prevailing wisdom is that if you’ve got one of those names on your resume you’re basically set.
Oh, this person has worked at Google (for example). Our compensation is good, but not Google-good. I could look that the rest of this resume, if this person is a good fit, have an initial 40-minutes meeting with them to discuss compensation, start the hiring process, and then they will reject us because we're lower than they are accustomed to, or because they have found something that pays more.
Or I could move this resume to the reject pile and move on to the next candidate.
Oh my, look at the time.
Also, there's the issue of fit. Plenty of companies don't operate like FAANG companies do. If a candidate is FAANG-heavy, it raises a serious question about whether or not they'd fit into a non-FAANG company.
Close but not quite. It's more like:
> If someone with FAANG is still applying, it appears they're willing to work for that range.
When I'm willing to go through the job interview process and say no to an offer I don't like, I completely ignore the salary range. I'll get the interviewer and team to love me and then just decline if they won't go above their range. Or I'll take it because they've convinced me the job will be enjoyable enough to offset the lower salary.
Plenty of things in life are flexible if you ask. But plenty of things aren't flexible even when you ask. Sometimes, I'm willing to waste my time to find out which is which.
I replied to:
> If someone with FAANG is still applying, that means they're willing to work for that range.
But even that doesn't mean as much as you might think. Someone might be willing to take a pay cut because they're in dire need of work. But will they be happy with that pay rate in a year or two?
The fact is that FAANGs do things in a very particular manner and on small, focused teams. That's the opposite of how start ups work and applying most of the managerial "skills" that are in place at FAANGs are a good way to apply a ton of unnecessary bureaucracy to a company that doesn't even have an HR department yet.
"Founder is formerly Google and Facebook!" makes me stay very very far away from the company because outside of the VC world the reason those words have power are red flags.
This sounds illegal in the US.
(Also, it's the opposite of the usual illegal ageism we see in post-dotcom tech companies.)
More generally, discrimination in employment is legal by default, unless a specific protected class is created by a specific law. Many classes of discrimination are legal, such as against smokers or obesity.
States and localities may have more restrictions than at the federal level, of course.
As an engineer in my 50s I've never personally been on the receiving end of ageism, but I've definitely seen extremely smart young engineers passed over for opportunities because they were deemed too young/inexperienced
Discriminating against how old someone is is illegal, not usually how young, but this isn't discrimination because of an uncontrollable attribute, it's requiring experience outside of what being a team lead at a FAANG would normally afford you.