Sometimes, sure, but more often than not, I see salary range: 80k-180k depending on experience.
Not very useful, that.
Not very useful, that.
So the data says it is useful
Where are the requirements actually accurate?
For what it's worth, the actual written requirements for many tech jobs are very questionable. In many cases, there's a big disconnect between the people writing the job ads and the people who actually communicate what they want.
And out of sheer laziness or lack of knowledge, there are plenty of recruiters that do things like post JavaScript jobs as Java jobs, as one example I've seen.
I'm not defending it, I'm pointing out, that when a company tells you this is how they want to be seen by potentially new recruits then listen to them.
It is a red flag for one of two reasons:
- It is intentionally misleading (i.e. top of range is pure fiction).
- Upward mobility is so terrible, that they comingle multiple different tiers of expertise into the same job title.
There is no positive look from this.
One could break it up into separate jobs for the different levels but that's also misleading if you are considering 3 PhD experts and 2 mid-level or 7 juniors and 3 seniors, etc.
In theory its not all that bad when such a post is true, in that it means an individual contributor role might be higher than anywhere else in the industry.