Online Job Posts Contain Little Wage Information [pdf]
nber.org
nber.org
So for a job that you'd see list at $140-180k, I'm guessing they are looking to pay $60-80k. It just doesn't seem worth the time to craft a cover letter, application, couple hours of interviews...
That seems about what I'd expect. From the entire universe of job postings, I'd expect jobs at the lower end of the compensation range to have less potential for productivity differences among employees and, therefore, less range in posted compensation.
Roles with higher likely productivity variability among employees would be likely to fall into one of two buckets: variability ranging from some middling amount to very high, where firms would try to find those high-performing employees who could perform at the higher end of the range and variability ranging from some middling amount to very low, which roles would tend to have narrow ranges and companies hoping to find adequate employees to fill them and perform at the middling performance.
IMO, software engineer is also among the jobs where a wide range of performance is evidenced from among the people who are qualified to hold the position.
None of those titles exist if the individuals are spending their days growing their food.
Capitalism only exists as a socialized meme there’s a communal upside to capitalism. What’s the communal value to propagating Bezos and Belichick types specifically deserve special privileges if they’re so dependent?
New idea; if Musk can survive in the wilds of Alaska for a month he can stay rich. Let them prove it’s not just propagation of memes via media that keeps us talking about how great they are.
Cumulative productivity gains from valuable inventions and systems are the reason that we aren't all spending our days growing food to survive. IMO, that's a very, very good thing and society should support those advances to be created.
Because we have accumulated less need for data entry and content jobs thanks to AI office workers could do more of the real work to provide for their real needs to afford manual labor class time to focus on the abstract.
The god father of capitalism, Adam Smith, is said to have written that division of labor taken to the extreme will result in humans dumber than the lowest animal.
Kind of feels as if, while we ride career escalators, externalization of all our other work, is fostering a prisoners dilemma society finds itself in as the number of have nots rapidly outpaces the haves. The majority are all “this is all I know, I can’t get off the debt service tread mill.”
Put some of the real work of keeping themselves alive on billionaires and they’re too busy to spend all their time propagating their Ponzi schemes.
Including those of us who hold the position but are not qualified.
Maybe not every single person, but certainly outliers who are making way more than their peers get a new job, or the same job title with "principal" or "executive" slapped on front.
Do you really think a wide base salary range makes sense for the same job title and responsibilities, aside from maybe any location-based differentials? I don’t.
For most other roles, compensation is largely based upon negotiation (which is not a core job skill for a random engineer), and variability in salary tends to be more inequitable — if they have he same job title and responsibilities, metrics on performance are not going to be clear cut like sales numbers, but be more subjective and interpreted by management.
Also, $600k-1M seems insane to me. Those can't be more than a fraction of 1% of the tech market.
Otherwise we both waste each other's time if it's not up to their expectations. What is the benefit of obscuring it until it's time to present an offer?
This then generally leads to another message where they say oh we can't and I say hey that's fine, best of luck.
Basically for me to consider moving I would need to make at least 1 extra month's worth of money every 6 months, so two extra months per year.
on edit: maybe it is different for people in the U.S / Bay area? That is to say maybe there are regulations or just a general cultural thing that means the recruiters here (Denmark) are more straightforward
edit: to avoid confusion, I'm talking about "a job" as "a collection of similar positions", an Job Analysis as a "a family of procedures to identify the content of a job in terms of the activities it involves in addition to the attributes or requirements necessary to perform those activities"
Wage-based employment is not subjective, it is a formally defined and legally-regulated practice. You can call contract work a "job" but it's not relevant to the topic at hand—wages.
In the context of HR, a "Job" is a collection of similar positions, an Job Analysis is "a family of procedures to identify the content of a job in terms of the activities it involves in addition to the attributes or requirements necessary to perform those activities".
Why would you think this is relevant?
</s>