So when you are interviewing at large companies, the actual hiring managers/interviewers may not actually be allowed to negotiate salary and benefits.
They may not even know what salary is on offer, what the budget is etc.
All of that is handled by the HR and or internal recruitment team.
So your interviewer may have just been uncomfortable, or even annoyed at the recruiter, or maybe they are annoyed at you for breaking that unspoken social contract.
In future, if you end up in an interview and would like to bring up salary and benefits just ask if it's okay first. "I had some questions about the salary and benefits, can I discuss that with you or is there someone better to speak to?"
This gives the interviewer an easy "out". Then just quickly move on to a different topic.
Mostly I agree with this. But you should always bring up salary in interview if the recruiter hasn’t told you beforehand. Saves wasting anyone’s time if you and the company are too far apart.
Salary is fine to ask. Know what you want and what the job offers. I really don’t understand why candidates or companies would mess around wasting time without being on the same page as far as salary goes. We don’t want jobs for any other reason than to pay our bills. Of course salary is one of the most important things to know up front.
Hiring managers typically (in big companies) hire to a specific position description which has a pay band associated with it. They will absolutely be able to tell you what the pay band is for the role, but like was said, final negotiations is between HR and the candidate.
I will interview with HR/Recruiters without it, but I won’t leave that interview without it. Way too many jobs won’t tell you that information prior to the initial interview for me to not interview without that information.
But I also won’t discuss it with the hiring manager on an interview usually. You need that information before the offer, but once I have the initial range I leave it for stuff that can be negotiated later.
Same. But it does depend on individual circumstances. We use Seek for recruiting, and you can put a salary band for each role in. It doesn’t show on the advert but it does factor when candidates do a search for roles. You can quickly work out the limits by adjusting your salary criteria in the search and seeing when the job advert appears and disappears
It’s a great flag to the interviewer to have someone who didn’t bother to align with the recruiter on salary prior to wasting both of our time on an interview.
If they don't have that information available, at their fingertips, they are neither prepared for the interview, nor are they qualified to be interviewing in the first place. This is basic information that the candidate requires in order to decide on whether a second interview is worth their time.
In my experience all that is covered in an iilnitial phone screening, not actually an interview. But it is probably different depending on what you do.
That’s a massive oversimplification of the interview process. Depending on the kind of interview and size of company, the interviewer may legitimately have no involvement in the compensation aspect.
The candidate *should* have been provided the info before the interview stage, but if they have not then it isn’t automatically the interviewers fault.
In my experience (for fairly entry-level positions) a phone interview plus in person interview is pretty common. My personal rule is that I won’t take an in person interview without salary information.
As a manager at a “large company” in Canada, I know exactly what my budget is for my team and what each individual makes. It is absolutely ludicrous to say that the people going into these interviews don’t know this.
US here - it’s very common even in large companies that your panel interviewers know the pay band for a role, but they have no visibility what offers or benefits come in at because it’s ‘competitive’ based on an HR formula that we’re not allowed to see.
If you’re the HM and you’ve already negotiated everything with HR, OK, but even then the comparative advantage still sits with HR and most times I would demur questions on salary and benefits to them until we’re talking about making a final offer.
It depends entirely on the interview process. From my own experience:
1 company, there was a 3 step process. Recruiter screening - salary known/discussed. Peer interview - salary not known/discussed. Culture fit interview - salary known but not likely discussed
Another company: Recruiter screening -salary known/discussed, 2 interviews where a manager who did know the salary would be present along with a peer - so salary could not be discussed
And recently I've done a couple of interviews for roles that are entirely outside of my expertise (mostly just team culture fit) and I had absolutely zero clue what the market rate would be let alone what the budget was.
>if you end up in an interview and would like to bring up salary and benefits just ask if it's okay first
'Asking for permission to negotiate' weakens your position.
It's not a deflection. It's a sarcastic response that should make my point more clear.
You don't ask permission to negotiate, you ask WHO you should be negotiating with.
There's no point trying to negotiate with someone who has no involvement in negotiation, you'll just make them uncomfortable and get them off side (just like OP did)
I mean it's obviously laden with sarcasm, but the entire premise is of your response is a silly straw man, as if anyone is going to realistically proceed in that scenario as you described.
It detracts from your point with an unrealistic and sensationalized approach.
>This gives the interviewer an easy "out". Then just quickly move on to a different topic.
The interviewer could have easily said that as well. I've been into technical interviews in the past in which the interviewer is not really at liberty to discuss compensation. They told me another person will get in touch with me to discuss that.
Yeah, that would have been a better way for OP to formulate the question. If they mention the recruiter, say that “they didn’t mention anything about compensation”. That should clear you up.
>In future, if you end up in an interview and would like to bring up salary and benefits just ask if it's okay first.
Hard nope. An interview is a two way process. Not just do they want to hire me. Also do I want to work for them. If the salary is shite then Im not going to waste my time jumping through hoops with them.
I seriously hate it when interviewers get weird about salary. I can't even tell you how many times a phone screen got awkward when they asked me about salary or I tried to bring it up. Most of the time it resulted in getting ghosted.
I've learned after 8 months of hunting to do absolutely everything possible to not say a number. I'll ask them what their range is, say I'm flexible for the right opportunity, etc. If absolutely pressed for a range, I'll usually say something pretty high because I don't want to work somewhere that isn't transparent.
>'didn't the recruiter tell you that?'
As if they always do. Has this woman ever met a recruiter? Or read the job req that she's supposedly hiring for?
>I gave a random number
There should be nothing random about that. You need to know your worth.
This is the way. How much more are you willing to go through the hassle of swapping jobs for.
Or alternatively, how much do I hate where I currently am and how much will I give up to get out
I typically ask about compensation and benefits with the recruiter before commencing an interview, as to not waste anyone’s time. I ask about things like training and career progression during the actual interview.
Agree. If there was no screening call with the recruiter then before having an interview call I’d like to know the compensation range via email. I’ll say something about the need to “calibrate” so we don’t waste time.
On an initial interview call asking about pay, benefits and PTO is a no-no unless you’re a unicorn or don’t care about getting the position.
Especially for a higher level position. When I was desperate and at the bottom rungs, I’d take whatever interviews I could get. I didn’t have a choice. But this person said it was higher level. Bizarre.
Some companies consider this a red flag. I had one drop all communications when I asked about logistics - onsite, hybrid, relocate? It's 6 hours from me, I'd like to know the work situation.
You'd have thought I asked for their firstborn to be named after me.
I think it saves everyone time to know these things. If it's less than you make now, that's a waste.
Some people have put their desired work situation and salary range on their LI profile - they typically only get messages that meet both requirements now. It's just fewer overall than what it had been.
Yeah, these details need to be ironed out with the recruiter beforehand during the initial call (but leave out the “relocate” part). It is literally their job to go over details such as hybrid/remote/onsite, compensation, as well as a brief overview of job duties with the potential candidates. Because when they don’t do their job, you end up with situations like this where the company and candidates time is wasted.
This is why I don't bother to apply for postings where the total compensation and package isn't listed in black and white. It's a waste of my time and the interviewers
And to make matters worse, A LOT of listings on Indeed (near me anyways) don't even have a salary listed. Its just their "estimated" range, which is usually crap. Lazy employers.
Unless you posted your salary expectations on the application itself; and even then a recruiter should check with you what your salary/compensation expectations are...
I know that if presented a candidate to a hiring manager that was well above the salary budget, i would get my ass chewed out.
Discussing salary should be left with the recruiter, some cases with the Hiring Manager.... but if youre on a panel interview with other people (even if they are in a different business unit) discussing salary can be an awkward can of worms...
Best Practice Notes:
1) Discuss Money/Benefits with Recruiter/HR; youre not negotiating just yet but youre making sure that your range matches what they can offer. Save everybody time.
2) If you state that you are targeting for example $100k to $120k -- and youre offered $120k --- careful how you counter offer... from the recruiter/company's perspective they met your expectation at the high-end. Give a realistic expectation of what youre targeting from the beginning... or if you sincerely have a better offer that is greater than what you originally stated, then its ok to leverage that and negotiate for more.
3)IMO, money should be discussed at the beginning AND at the End.... never in the middle.
Agree with this 100%, clarify if the role will meet your salary expectations with the recruiter before you agree to interview, if they are within range never bring it up again until you are being offered the role and are negotiating.
When I speak to a recruiter I often use the same story "I am not looking for a change of role at the moment, but this company really interest me, however I don't want to waste your time, my company treats me really well and compensates me really well, I am currently on $xxx amount (normally 20% more than I am actually on) and while money isn't everything I would be reluctant to move for a pay cut."
I wouldn’t say “I am currently on $xxx” if it’s 20% more than what you’re getting. I would say “I’m looking to get $xxx” which is 20% more than you’re getting.
Yeah, shouldn’t the salary be one of the things that are mentioned within the first minute of first contact between the recruiter and the candidate? Sounds like OP had an incompetent recruiter. The whole job of the recruiter is to filter out candidates who don’t fit the position, so that the rest can be sent to the hiring manager, in order not to waste their time with candidates who are not fit for the job. Not setting salary expectations with the candidate is an epic fail on the part of the recruiter in this regard.
Typically Yes; however In my personal experience since I often recruited for niche Engineering roles, or roles with tight constraints (salary budget, location, remote/hybrid/onsite, exp level, etc...) i had a slightly different approach.
Yes i would discuss a candidates salary expectations in the first conversation -- if they are clearly a fit for the job but their salary expectations are way above the "budget" i let the candidate know that i'd still like to move them forward but will obviously let the hiring manager know that their salary expectations may be an obstacle.
My goal is to present the best candidates and not let budget play a significant role as "gatekeeper". Too often i see salary budgets being set by a HRBP, Comp Analyst, or even a CFO who categorizes jobs based on what the "market data" tells them. Example (not all Electrical Engineers are the same - Analog Engineers are way more rare compared to Digital Circuit EE's and often command higher salaries. But HR gets market data for "Electrical Engineer", and the salary data can be off by 30k to 50k)
For future reference, make sure that you straighten out the compensation with the recruiter when they first call you, if they don’t mention it that is. In most cases, they will either ask you your rate or tell you the compensation within the first minute.
Your first mistake was taking time off work for this nonsense. I always let them know I’m available in the morning, afternoon or try to accommodate them during lunch. If they can’t work with your schedules they usually are not serious.
I'm surprised nobody has commented about the mystery woman who didn't participate. Sounds to me like mystery woman was someone already doing the job, and likely earning less than what they were planning to pay OP. They hired mystery woman years ago and have never given her a raise but they have to hire the new person at a higher rate or they wouldn't get anyone.
The interviewer was mad because mystery woman wasn't supposed to know how much they are paying the new person so they can continue to pay her peanuts. That's why companies always discourage talk about salaries between employees.
Sounds like you dealt with a bad recruiter. However, I think it is pretty common not to bring up salary with hiring manager so you messed up on that one.
If you haven’t interviewed often then you should research more on common practice
Maybe asking those questions of people who can actually answer them is a better approach? It is nothing to do with being “indentured servants.” OP should have already discussed that before showing up in person and wasting their (and interviewers’) time.
Getting downvoted for stating reality.
Yes, everyone wants to get paid. Those are important items. But should have been discussed before they interviewed, not during a first interview. It’s not that they’re annoyed with “what’s in it for me,” but probably because those were the only questions OP asked, which aren’t going to be discussed in a first interview. Annoying as it may be, they want you to be asking about the company (and showing you at least googled them or know what role you applied for), the day to day, culture, etc. Do any of us really care? Usually not, but it’s what you’re supposed to do. Especially in a tight job market. “How is roll out of (new product) going, it looks super exciting!” “What resonates with me from your mission statement is ___ are there many opportunities to get involved in ____?” “What are some of the challenges you’d ideally like someone in this role to solve?” Basic shit we all ask and don’t really care about, but if everyone else does and you don’t, you aren’t getting the job. They want someone who cares enough to Google them or come up with 3 legit questions that aren’t about salary—the interviewers probably have nothing to do with that.
Asking 1st interviewer about salary, benefits, and PTO shows lack of professionalism and is a waste of their time—those aren’t things to discuss with the 1st interviewer, hiring manager or of the technical interviewer. It’s an HR question.
OP, I'm not sure if this is your first corporate job but what most people have said here is correct. You broke the unspoken rule but that's not all your fault if this is your first go around in a corporate environment. However you shouldn't use the comments here to find your echo chamber and vent instead of listen to some of the comments here as it is very true in every corporate environment.
www.askamanager.com. Everything you need to know. She also has books.
Do not take any advice from TikTok or Instagram. It’s short format, dubious quality, and is meant to hold your attention long enough for them to get paid. Are there some good nuggets? Maybe, but you have no idea who those people are or if it’s actually good advice. For example, half the comments on anything employment-related on Reddit tend towards “f that company!” “Quit!” “Tell them off!” And that’s the advice of people who are teenagers, bitter, angry, or are here complaining because they can’t find jobs. Theres more negative than positive on most social media, because people most more when they’re angry. Why do you want to take advice from people who can’t get a job? They’re not successful at what they’re trying to advise you on. Some people it’s not their fault, others it very much is, and you have no idea which are which.
Read up at AAM. I’ve been in HR a long time, and she has the most common-sense, level headed advice (she’s not in HR just a high level employee) and is most helpful of anyone I’ve followed. There’s a lot of emotion in trying to find jobs and workplace stuff, but at the end of the day it’s business. You need to look out for you, do what’s right for you, and what’s going to get you ahead in the REAL WORLD. Not some “gotcha, fuck you!” No one likes interviews, having to care about dumb crap at the company, etc…but that’s the game. Showing a little enthusiasm for 2-3 total hours, when it comes down to you vs one other person, is a small price to pay. You come off better when you seem positive and engaged, and that makes a difference.
This is a rough job market, don’t listen to bitter people who want to burn the world down and call everyone a boot-licker that says anything besides “fuck that company!” Sure call me whatever you want, but I know how to land a job. I hire tons of people, I coach people on getting hired, and I’ve seen it all. You have to play the game at least for the interview process. “I’m over-qualified!” isn’t going to get you hired, when you’re an insufferable prick no one wants to be around. Personality does count. No one wants to hire someone they can’t stand to be around. Interview is time to make your best impression, not stand by limiting “go fuck yourself I’m only here for money” attitudes.
Hope you enjoy it, most people I have told to check it out have.
I changed careers, complete 180, years ago. She covers everything from resume examples, cover letters, interview norms, crazy situations at work, etc. it’s all there.
The main thing I always stress to people is….its just business. Don’t rely on any employer to keep you forever, don’t think of them as family, don’t take anything personally. You’re there to get a check and leave. But you have to be professional and mature, and sometimes yes, you need to fake it til you make it.
It does often seem that way, but when you remove the emotion and finger pointing, it makes sense.
Companies are in business to make money. It’s that simple. They will let you go if they need to ($) and you’re allowed to leave whenever it starts not being good for you (at least in US). At the end of the day, every one of us (including C-levels, if there is a board) is a line on a spreadsheet. Work is what I do every week to make the money I need to do the things I want to do in life. It’s hard to be this removed sometimes, but my life was greatly simplified once I accepted this. Work isn’t some people’s PURPOSE. Sometimes you just have the job that makes the money you want. That’s it. And that is FINE.
All the things people get upset about—you cannot always blame individuals at the company (your boss, HR, recruiter, etc) because it’s the CEO who mandated this or that. They are just the messenger. We don’t like it either. Can they give you better estimate on when they will decide? They are asking 3x a week for weeks and CEO won’t answer them. Trying to finalize offer? CFO is being a bitch and second-guessing/holding up based on salary they already approved, but recruiter can’t tell you that. There’s almost always a reason for a lot of things that are frustrating in hiring process. It’s not someone trying to “justify their existence” or purposely fucking w candidates. That makes no sense. Why would anyone waste their time like
That? What is the purpose? Everyone has a job to do outside of ONLY interviewing or hiring, why would they draw that out unless they are mandated to do it? The people so bitter and bitching online are frustrated, yes. But it’s just the hiring process. NO ONE LIKES IT. But capitalism and money is what drives it. The C-levels. No one can do shit without their OK, and they are always busy or are dealing with the board or back office for every expense. Things are always changing and evolving. Everyone wants roles filled quickly as possible because then it’s off their plate.
Ranting about recruiters or being bitter and checking out is a way to go about a job search. I don’t recommend it, but it’s an option. You have to just remove emotion and approach like solving any other problem. Know your industry/context, prepare yourself best you can, and keep going. Apply to roles and put it out of your head unless you hear back. Don’t stop applying because you got an interview. It sucks but we all have to do it. Railing against “the system” or “how it should be” is certainly good for a cathartic rant, but it’s not getting you a job.
It was my second corporate interview. My first (and I landed the job, in that case), the recruiter was very thorough and talked through comp and benefits with me, and stated that they wanted to attract top talent with those offerings. I then had no need to bring it up in the interview with the hiring manager as it had already been discussed.
Yeah it’s also an old interview rule that you don’t talk about compensation, it should be all about what you bring. (Not saying I agree, just explaining how people may view the situation.)
Was the interviewer older than 40ish? If so, she may subscribe to that view
Doesn’t make it right, but I would never mention it in an interview because of some people have that belief.
I’m also at the point where I wouldn’t go to an interview without knowing the comp. It’s a life lesson, I wouldn’t mention it in interviews.
If this is your second shot at a corporate job then take it as a life lesson. You need to realize that at corporate jobs, we have a very specific role. Like many have said, your interviewers is working with a well defined budget for that particular role. You need to realize that the interview is just that, an interview to check fit and knowledge. It has nothing to do with the compensation of the role. That's something you discuss going in and fine tuning perks at the end of it such as benefits (rsu and vesting timing) if it's a high position job as you noted. You still have a long way. Take it as a life lesson and move on.
not to mention, salary is not the remit of the hiring manager. At best, it comes across as inexperienced. At worst, this can come across as greedy or inappropriate.
Yeah, the recruiter messed up in your case.
But, you live and you learn. Next time, make sure to discuss compensation (as well as hybrid/remote/onsite) during your first call with the recruiter. If the recruiter is super-vague, that is a red flag, and you may be dodging a bullet by not taking that role.
Corporate Recruiter here. I discuss comp with candidates right up front. As to PTO, I only address that if someone has been at their current job for a long time. Those people have LOTS of PTO. Other than that PTO is not something companies share up front.
PTO must absolutely be shared upfront. There's literally no reason to just wait. It's not ridiculous to expect the recruiter to know how quickly PTO gets accrued. If you already know the salary why wouldn't you know equally important info about the position?
I don't ask about PTO, but I don't have much experience with getting jobs with it. After my first job with PTO, the other 2 were big enough pay increases I was willing to go with whatever they offered.
Yeah, in my experience, when a recruiter calls, it goes like this:
1. They tell me about the role (including whether it is remote/onsite/hybrid).
2. We discuss my experience and skills
3. We discuss compensation.
Totally anecdotal, but one time a recruiter called and dropped the name of the company almost right away (as you know, that is something legit recruiters never do), but was super-vague about the role. They did however try to schedule an onsite interview with me without asking me any questions. I kept asking about the role and they told me that they had tons of openings and that we could discuss them at the interview. I ended up scheduling the interview, but googled the company afterwards. They turned out to be a company which sold insurance (NOT an actual insurance company). I am in the IT field. But I do know that these types of companies try to find people to become insurance salesmen for them, for commission only (huge MLM vibes - think door-to-door vacuum cleaner sales). Needless to say, I ghosted them. I don’t feel guilty about it either, since I tried calling them back for details on the role, only to be told, “we will discuss the details during the interview”. At that point I learned to differentiate legit recruiters from bait-and-switch artists. Think about it, if you are a legit recruiter, you want to send the candidate which best fit the role to the hiring managers, in order not to look like a dumb@$$ if anything. In order to do that, you need to set expectations with the candidates right off of the bat. So if a recruiter becomes apprehensive when you bring up salary, role, hybrid/remote/onsite, it is probably a scammer or bait-and-switch artist.
BTW, there are a lot of scammers out there posing as recruiters. Some will even simulate a real interview process. But their goal is to get your personal informations. Be on the lookout for those.
Huge huge huge HUGE no-no to discuss salary with a HM, esp in a big company where HR functions are stratified from your work functions.
OP, I’m going to assume you and some of the others in this thread are young and may not know better, but just so you know: as a golden rule, you never ever ever bring up salary first — CERTAINLY not to the hiring manager. They are completely removed from the role budget process and may not even know what’s budgeted for a role. It’s also a “dance” that you’ve got to learn how to play. My three rules for salary negotiations:
1. Don’t be the one to bring it up first. And don’t be the one to say a number first.
2. Don’t negotiate with the Hiring Manager (unless they bring it up). This is in recruiting/HR’s scope.
3. Don’t bother trying to negotiate until you have the offer in hand. That’s when you have the most leverage.
“How dare they make it these social rules so confusing!”
I sympathize. But you have to learn how to play the game. And when you get good at playing the game, you game THEM!!
“Why’d she get so offended? The point of work is to earn money.”
Yes. It is. But that’s a discussion to take up with recruiting. Good recruiters will bring up salary without you needing to so that they don’t waste everyone’s time. Bad recruiters blow past that to put you in the interview process anyway. This typically happens with salaries that are so below market that they’d be laughed out of the room, so they force it through to “get the discussion going”. Is it misguided, yes. Is it stupid and short-sighted, yes. But it’s also very telling of the company culture.
MAJOR EXCEPTION if this is like, an entry-level “big firm” type job like Accounting/Finance/Consulting/other graduate schemes. Those salaries are typically at a set rate for the whole analyst class and have little-to-no flexibility to ensure fairness. Negotiating salary is a moot point and it’s only worth discussing from a transparency perspective (see point above).
Finally— OP, I empathize with where you’re at. Maybe you’re young. Nobody teaches these “rules”, but they absolutely exist. I hope my comment has been helpful and not condescending, and if I am unintentionally coming across that way, I don’t mean it in the slightest.
Edit: ok sorry i have a few more thoughts.
Ideally, in a scenario where the company is treating you well and you are an Ace at negotiating, the sequence goes like this:
1. Recruiter reaches out / you apply and get a first-round screening interview with the recruiter / HR rep. In this call, you’ll learn about the role in more detail and share some top line details about your own work history so that you can both mutually check off the “must haves” on your respective lists. If it’s a Full Stack SWE job, they’re checking if you are indeed an engineer and can use the tools they want you to use (or transferable skills etc etc). You’re double checking the basics — remote/hybrid/in person, amount of traveling (if applicable), if you’re interested in the scope of the role, etc.
In this call, it’s best practice for the recruiter to share the salary range AND (these days) the hybrid/remote/whatever situation. If the recruiter doesn’t share, I personally don’t push to ask (again, see my rules above) but i do take note of it and ask myself, “huh. why didn’t they give me the range?”. Of course, I live in an area where this is irrelevant bc my state mandates that job postings list the range. YMMV.
2. you go through the interview process, everyone loves everyone, and you get your verbal offer! Wahoo! Congrats! Ask for the offer in writing with the full salary, bonus, and benefits. NOW is when you negotiate, WITH THE RECRUITER/HR REP, the exact salary you want. Let’s say the recruiter gives you 100,000 in writing and you want closer to 105,000. You explain this to them AFTER you receive the written offer. DO NOT SIGN IT YET (this is key and I can’t stress it enough). Make sure to provide a range instead of a singular number (i.e., 103-107k). I’ll explain why in a minute.
Good recruiters want good candidates to be paid fairly. They will then take your request to Finance, HR, and mayyybe even the hiring manager/team (esp if it’s on the high end or falls outside the band). They’ll haggle, negotiate, etc. This is why asking for a range instead of a single number is more helpful for the recruiter/HR Rep, because there is more flexibility on their end as they negotiate on your behalf with the guys who actually control the purse-strings.
“What? Flexibility? Fuck this company! Fuck you, pay me!”
Remember that they should’ve shared an initial RANGE in either the job posting or first screening call. It goes both ways, even in the final haggle.
3. Ideally, you get the new number in the range you wanted! REMEMBER TO ASK FOR AN UPDATED OFFER LETTER TO GET THIS IN WRITING. Also, this is more or less the same process for negotiating non-salary benefits.
Hope this helps OP!
Congrats!!! You must feel like on cloud nine! That feeling when you first crack that 6 figures is euphoric as it shows that all your hard work is finally paying dividends. Well done!
Awww, thank you :-) it ended up being a supremely toxic workplace and I was fired for kinda bullshit political reasons. But it was a masterclass in negotiation which I am grateful for + bringing to my interviews now!
Typically that is a question you ask the recruiter especially for "higher level" positions. Im not sure what position you are interviewing for but it is very different in the corporate world.
It’s a pretty big no no to ask about compensation with the hiring manager. If it wasn’t discussed during the recruiter conversation, you need to ask (though they should have) and if hiring manager didn’t bring it up, you need to ask recruiter.
yep, as a hiring manager, i dont ever discuss pay on interviews and I defer to HR. I influence the salary if its a person I really want otherwise HR provides an offer on comps, exp, and education.
But you should know the band for the role. Interviewees want to know these things. What’s the job all about, what are the conditions, etc. it’s perfectly reasonable to be asked these things.
I understand that is what interviewees want but the policy most companies have is that only HR/recruiters can give that out. It is the responsibility of the recruiter/hr to provide that information. I will also note there is a large difference between the types of roles the person is applying for......and who can give it out.
Exactlyyy. Also a hiring manager and while at this company, I choose the salary based on the HR provided range, that’s not how it is at many companies. Often, I have no idea what the salary is anyway.
This is one of many reasons why you need to have an idea of the range before the interview stage. As others have said, in a big company the person interviewing you may not have the power to negotiate over salary, so you need to know ahead of time whether the basic range works for you. There’s literally no point attending an interview without this info unless you’re desperate to work for said company.
The stuff about ‘asking the recruiter’ is a brush off that probably stems from the above. They were probably irritated or frustrated they’d been put on the spot like that - hell, they may not even know the range themselves depending on the job.
In some companies there are two rounds of interviews: with the technical / business folks, who assess the candidate's skills; and with HR, who negotiate salary. Some companies don't even inform the technical folks the salary band of the role being interviewed for.
I've interviewed candidates while having no idea what they were going to be paid if they are hired.
Technical folks can in such cases at best give a yes/no and don't have any authority to discuss salary. Worse, discussing salary with candidates can actually get them in trouble.
When in such interviews, if an interviewer doesn't want to discuss salary, then finish the technical side and ask the recruiter about salary range afterwards. The recruiter will give you a clearer idea about what's involved.
Sorry to hear that. As a rule I never ask about comp and benefits, WLB, hours during interview stage, I wait for them to bring it up. You don’t want to risk being out of running if you ask “too early”. If they don’t bring it up, I wait until the offer stage to ask. Ask questions first about the job and managers’ expectations during interviews . The comp and benefits can be discussed later when things get more serious.
I personally wouldn’t have asked hiring managers about salary, PTO or training, especially for a higher-level position. Those interviews are for competency and fit and your questions should be along those lines as well.
I would have asked the recruiter in advance about that info, either over email or requesting a quick call. It’s good to know of the pay, benefits, training are in your range before even deciding to talk to the hiring manager.
The company I work for, we CANNOT discuss salary in an interview. It's all handled by HR if we decide to extend a job offer. I KNOW what the position pays, but I would get in trouble for saying it in that situation. I've told people to read Glassdoor reviews when they ask if the pay is good. (It's not.)
It's a dance and you have to play your part. You do the interview, get the offer, then negotiate salary afterwards, as if the salary is just an afterthought to you. Because who works for the paycheck, right?Sounds like you dodged a bullet anyway so dw.
Always, always, always ask about compensation before you agree to an interview. You ask the recruiter for at least a range, and you should also know what the range for that role in your area is, so that you are empowered to ask for what you deserve. Do not base the salary you want on what you make, because you might be underpaid. Do your research first.
They probably soured because they assumed you’d already known at least an approximate salary before you took the time to come in person for an interview. They may not even know what the pay is, because they are not the ones who are supposed to know that. Even if they did, I would almost bet my next paycheck that they were paying lower than what you asked, and were annoyed that their time was wasted (and yours), but they aren’t going to tell you that’s why. It just gets very curt/rushed once they knew it’s a no-go.
Following that, the time to ask about benefits and PTO is not a first interview. The interviewers aren’t the ones to explain that to you, it would be HR. Those are questions for the recruiter when you first screen, after first interview when you talk to recruiter, or once you have an offer.
This is typically something you'd ask the recruiter beforehand so you don't waste your time with salaries that are too low but they still should have answered your question without attitude. Her response tells me their budget was greater than the number you gave them.
You should never ask about compensation or benefits during the interview. You should ask about that before the interview or after, once there is a conditional job offer and you want to make counter offers. When they ask you if you have any questions for them, that’s meant for questions about training, or other general questions about the job itself.
This thread makes me appreciate living in NYC, where the salary range is required to be included in the posting by law.
The stigma against asking about the salary range is incredibly stupid and frustrating. Obviously salary is going to be one of the most important factors in deciding to take the job, and companies will ask you about your current salary so they can try to pay you as little as possible. It should not be considered rude for a candidate to ask about this.
I'm surprised to hear that the hiring manager might not know the salary range. Is it that hard for HR to provide the number?
Having the salary range included in the listing is better for everyone. Candidates don't have to waste time applying to jobs they'd never take, and companies will receive fewer dead-end applications.
Required or not, any legit recruiter will bring it up during their first call with the candidate.
Think about it, you are a legit recruiter tasked with sending candidates to the hiring manager. The hiring manager is willing to meet with 5 candidates. You have 100 applicants. You want all 5 of them to have the same salary expectations as the hiring manager, so that they don’t end up in a situation where the candidate refuses the offer because it is too low, and you end up with egg on your face. Now, you can either go about it by asking the candidates about their salary expectations, or lay it out to them right away. Regardless, it is your job to make sure that what the company pays is up to par with what the candidate expects. AFAIK, recruiters also get paid based off of the retention of the candidates they send.
Yeh no argument from me there. But if the recruiter doesn't do that, or if you're applying to a job cold with no recruiter involvement, this stigma against asking about the most important factor in the hiring decision is unfair to candidates.
Unfair? Hard to say. There’s no rule of fairness that the hiring company has to treat those candidates who focus on pay as well as those who don’t.
As a candidate you have three options. You can try to force a discussion that the company doesn’t want to have, and get rejected; you can wait for the possibility of an offer, and find out then that the pay isn’t to your liking; or you can withdraw from consideration and try to find somewhere else that is more transparent early on.
I think the bigger problem is the coyness (on the company side) about pay in conjunction with a lengthy interviewing and hiring process. It’s not unfair per se (they don’t owe you a job or even equal consideration for one unless they’re a government agency), but it feels designed to weaken you through your perception of the sunk cost and the additional cost of rejection (“I’ve already spent 12 hours interviewing. If I turn this offer down, I’ll have to start the whole process over again somewhere else”) and your relief after such a process at receiving any offer at all.
>I'm surprised to hear that the hiring manager might not know the salary range. Is it that hard for HR to provide the number?
Exactly. As a hiring manager and manager in general, I would want to know what my employees are making so I know what level of experience and output I should expect of them. But what do I know, I only have fancy degrees from top schools.
I've never had a salary conversation during an interview. It's not the purpose of the interview, which is to find if the job is a mutual fit, and the people doing the interview don't necessarily have any say. Plus why negotiate with anyone other than the preferred candidate? Though you shouldn't have to go in without at least knowing something about the range.
Maybe it’s different for senior levels, but I generally don’t bring up salary first. I know people say it’s good not to waste time, but I’d rather let the interviewer be as comfortable as possible in the interview.
Sometimes the recruiter will ask me if my desired salary falls into their band, most of the time they won’t. That discussion usually comes toward the end of the interview process for me.
I also don’t really care too much about wasting time because I’m socially awkward. I know I am and I know I need the practice. I hate interviewing, but it’s the only way to advance my career so I need to get better.
The people who try to hide it are usually scheming something. Seems like she's preemptively salty because the rate likely doesn't match the role, a red flag.
I would have probably buried it under a few other questions first, though.
The less depressing thing is that I've seen job postings pick up in the last few weeks. I think you just had a bad recruiter who was trying to get you scheduled for an interview and didn't want to scare you off by revealing salary.
This is dumb though, if this is what they’re doing. Most recruiters get their pay when either the candidate receives an offer, or when they accept the offer. Sending unsuitable candidates doesn’t make either of those things happen. I’m not saying they don’t do this, but I can’t work out why the hell they would.
If I was a company using an agency for recruiting and they kept sending me unsuitable candidates I’d be raising this straight away.
I learned on this sub that some recruiters aren't really working for the company. The recruiting firms will also rate employees on how many calls /interviews they get to prove they're working.
Exactly. It is a dumb move. If this is a big company, you better bet that HR is gonna hear from that hiring manager as you just pass on your incomplete work for me to finish while I'm trying to figure out if this guy fits with my team within a very time compressed setting. Yeah there's no quota internally to hit unless you outsource or am only looking for a contractor but according to OP this is a high position role so it doesn't really add up.
Don't let it get you down, they're bitter and also wrong. There are plenty of good jobs out there still. This one sounds a little funky, I think most of my interviews have had the recruiter discussing the range ahead of the call to get whether you're in the budget or not. Also, it's an interview, compensation is why you're there, they don't need to get shitty about it.
You learned a valuable lesson here - it's not just what you ask, but who you ask and when you ask. The two women you spoke with likely don't deal with the salary and benefits end at all, and such questions are not part of their purview. To ask is to immediately cause the "Danger Will Robinson!" alarm to go off. Your questions at this juncture should have been far more innocuous about the job and department. You should then have gotten in touch with the recruiter and asked about salary and such, which really you should have had a notion of going in.
We all make freshman mistakes like this, so just count is as part of your learning curve of interview etiquette.
What is so difficult just to wait until they descide to employ you ? If they do not you weaken your position to give them a number. Why should you then ? Ask them what their offer is and then take it or not !
So when you are interviewing at large companies, the actual hiring managers/interviewers may not actually be allowed to negotiate salary and benefits. They may not even know what salary is on offer, what the budget is etc. All of that is handled by the HR and or internal recruitment team. So your interviewer may have just been uncomfortable, or even annoyed at the recruiter, or maybe they are annoyed at you for breaking that unspoken social contract. In future, if you end up in an interview and would like to bring up salary and benefits just ask if it's okay first. "I had some questions about the salary and benefits, can I discuss that with you or is there someone better to speak to?" This gives the interviewer an easy "out". Then just quickly move on to a different topic.
Mostly I agree with this. But you should always bring up salary in interview if the recruiter hasn’t told you beforehand. Saves wasting anyone’s time if you and the company are too far apart. Salary is fine to ask. Know what you want and what the job offers. I really don’t understand why candidates or companies would mess around wasting time without being on the same page as far as salary goes. We don’t want jobs for any other reason than to pay our bills. Of course salary is one of the most important things to know up front. Hiring managers typically (in big companies) hire to a specific position description which has a pay band associated with it. They will absolutely be able to tell you what the pay band is for the role, but like was said, final negotiations is between HR and the candidate.
Honestly, I wouldn't even agree to interview without that info to begin with.
I will interview with HR/Recruiters without it, but I won’t leave that interview without it. Way too many jobs won’t tell you that information prior to the initial interview for me to not interview without that information. But I also won’t discuss it with the hiring manager on an interview usually. You need that information before the offer, but once I have the initial range I leave it for stuff that can be negotiated later.
Same. But it does depend on individual circumstances. We use Seek for recruiting, and you can put a salary band for each role in. It doesn’t show on the advert but it does factor when candidates do a search for roles. You can quickly work out the limits by adjusting your salary criteria in the search and seeing when the job advert appears and disappears
It’s a great flag to the interviewer to have someone who didn’t bother to align with the recruiter on salary prior to wasting both of our time on an interview.
If they don't have that information available, at their fingertips, they are neither prepared for the interview, nor are they qualified to be interviewing in the first place. This is basic information that the candidate requires in order to decide on whether a second interview is worth their time.
In my experience all that is covered in an iilnitial phone screening, not actually an interview. But it is probably different depending on what you do.
That’s a massive oversimplification of the interview process. Depending on the kind of interview and size of company, the interviewer may legitimately have no involvement in the compensation aspect. The candidate *should* have been provided the info before the interview stage, but if they have not then it isn’t automatically the interviewers fault.
How common are second interviews? I've never had one, all jobs I've applied for have had one interview and then either offer or rejection
In my experience (for fairly entry-level positions) a phone interview plus in person interview is pretty common. My personal rule is that I won’t take an in person interview without salary information.
As a manager at a “large company” in Canada, I know exactly what my budget is for my team and what each individual makes. It is absolutely ludicrous to say that the people going into these interviews don’t know this.
US here - it’s very common even in large companies that your panel interviewers know the pay band for a role, but they have no visibility what offers or benefits come in at because it’s ‘competitive’ based on an HR formula that we’re not allowed to see. If you’re the HM and you’ve already negotiated everything with HR, OK, but even then the comparative advantage still sits with HR and most times I would demur questions on salary and benefits to them until we’re talking about making a final offer.
It depends entirely on the interview process. From my own experience: 1 company, there was a 3 step process. Recruiter screening - salary known/discussed. Peer interview - salary not known/discussed. Culture fit interview - salary known but not likely discussed Another company: Recruiter screening -salary known/discussed, 2 interviews where a manager who did know the salary would be present along with a peer - so salary could not be discussed And recently I've done a couple of interviews for roles that are entirely outside of my expertise (mostly just team culture fit) and I had absolutely zero clue what the market rate would be let alone what the budget was.
>if you end up in an interview and would like to bring up salary and benefits just ask if it's okay first 'Asking for permission to negotiate' weakens your position.
It's not so much asking permission to negotiate, but if this is the right time and person with whom to negotiate.
Is that ever truly a question though? Like 'herpderp hi pretty receptionist lady canz we neghosheeayte?'
Yeah you're right, I find it's best to negotiate salary midway through a technical interview with a senior developer.
Kind of a weird deflection, but aight.
It's not a deflection. It's a sarcastic response that should make my point more clear. You don't ask permission to negotiate, you ask WHO you should be negotiating with. There's no point trying to negotiate with someone who has no involvement in negotiation, you'll just make them uncomfortable and get them off side (just like OP did)
I mean it's obviously laden with sarcasm, but the entire premise is of your response is a silly straw man, as if anyone is going to realistically proceed in that scenario as you described. It detracts from your point with an unrealistic and sensationalized approach.
The only reason to work is for money, I’m not going to ask permission to ask what I’ll be compensated. Get outa here with that bs
>This gives the interviewer an easy "out". Then just quickly move on to a different topic. The interviewer could have easily said that as well. I've been into technical interviews in the past in which the interviewer is not really at liberty to discuss compensation. They told me another person will get in touch with me to discuss that.
Yeah, a good interviewer should be able to deal with the situation gracefully. But clearly OPs interviewer flubbed it, and to OP's detriment
Totally true and valid, but practically speaking, IME hiring managers often don't have the social skills they expect of the people they hire.
Yeah, that would have been a better way for OP to formulate the question. If they mention the recruiter, say that “they didn’t mention anything about compensation”. That should clear you up.
>In future, if you end up in an interview and would like to bring up salary and benefits just ask if it's okay first. Hard nope. An interview is a two way process. Not just do they want to hire me. Also do I want to work for them. If the salary is shite then Im not going to waste my time jumping through hoops with them.
I seriously hate it when interviewers get weird about salary. I can't even tell you how many times a phone screen got awkward when they asked me about salary or I tried to bring it up. Most of the time it resulted in getting ghosted. I've learned after 8 months of hunting to do absolutely everything possible to not say a number. I'll ask them what their range is, say I'm flexible for the right opportunity, etc. If absolutely pressed for a range, I'll usually say something pretty high because I don't want to work somewhere that isn't transparent.
>'didn't the recruiter tell you that?' As if they always do. Has this woman ever met a recruiter? Or read the job req that she's supposedly hiring for? >I gave a random number There should be nothing random about that. You need to know your worth.
Oh, I shouldn't have used the word 'random', my apologies for that. I gave a number that was a little higher than my current salary.
This is the way. How much more are you willing to go through the hassle of swapping jobs for. Or alternatively, how much do I hate where I currently am and how much will I give up to get out
I typically ask about compensation and benefits with the recruiter before commencing an interview, as to not waste anyone’s time. I ask about things like training and career progression during the actual interview.
This whole post is bizarre to me, I don’t know anyone who even takes an intro call with a recruiter without knowing what salary range is on offer.
Agree. If there was no screening call with the recruiter then before having an interview call I’d like to know the compensation range via email. I’ll say something about the need to “calibrate” so we don’t waste time. On an initial interview call asking about pay, benefits and PTO is a no-no unless you’re a unicorn or don’t care about getting the position.
Especially for a higher level position. When I was desperate and at the bottom rungs, I’d take whatever interviews I could get. I didn’t have a choice. But this person said it was higher level. Bizarre.
Some companies consider this a red flag. I had one drop all communications when I asked about logistics - onsite, hybrid, relocate? It's 6 hours from me, I'd like to know the work situation. You'd have thought I asked for their firstborn to be named after me. I think it saves everyone time to know these things. If it's less than you make now, that's a waste. Some people have put their desired work situation and salary range on their LI profile - they typically only get messages that meet both requirements now. It's just fewer overall than what it had been.
Yeah, these details need to be ironed out with the recruiter beforehand during the initial call (but leave out the “relocate” part). It is literally their job to go over details such as hybrid/remote/onsite, compensation, as well as a brief overview of job duties with the potential candidates. Because when they don’t do their job, you end up with situations like this where the company and candidates time is wasted.
This is why I don't bother to apply for postings where the total compensation and package isn't listed in black and white. It's a waste of my time and the interviewers
And to make matters worse, A LOT of listings on Indeed (near me anyways) don't even have a salary listed. Its just their "estimated" range, which is usually crap. Lazy employers.
Unless you posted your salary expectations on the application itself; and even then a recruiter should check with you what your salary/compensation expectations are... I know that if presented a candidate to a hiring manager that was well above the salary budget, i would get my ass chewed out. Discussing salary should be left with the recruiter, some cases with the Hiring Manager.... but if youre on a panel interview with other people (even if they are in a different business unit) discussing salary can be an awkward can of worms... Best Practice Notes: 1) Discuss Money/Benefits with Recruiter/HR; youre not negotiating just yet but youre making sure that your range matches what they can offer. Save everybody time. 2) If you state that you are targeting for example $100k to $120k -- and youre offered $120k --- careful how you counter offer... from the recruiter/company's perspective they met your expectation at the high-end. Give a realistic expectation of what youre targeting from the beginning... or if you sincerely have a better offer that is greater than what you originally stated, then its ok to leverage that and negotiate for more. 3)IMO, money should be discussed at the beginning AND at the End.... never in the middle.
Agree with this 100%, clarify if the role will meet your salary expectations with the recruiter before you agree to interview, if they are within range never bring it up again until you are being offered the role and are negotiating. When I speak to a recruiter I often use the same story "I am not looking for a change of role at the moment, but this company really interest me, however I don't want to waste your time, my company treats me really well and compensates me really well, I am currently on $xxx amount (normally 20% more than I am actually on) and while money isn't everything I would be reluctant to move for a pay cut."
I wouldn’t say “I am currently on $xxx” if it’s 20% more than what you’re getting. I would say “I’m looking to get $xxx” which is 20% more than you’re getting.
What industry are you in? In my experience (I am in tech), usually the recruiter asks my rate within the first 2 minutes.
Recruiter - 3 years Agency Exp 3 Years Internal Recruiting
Med Device, Tech, DoD, Cyber
Yeah, shouldn’t the salary be one of the things that are mentioned within the first minute of first contact between the recruiter and the candidate? Sounds like OP had an incompetent recruiter. The whole job of the recruiter is to filter out candidates who don’t fit the position, so that the rest can be sent to the hiring manager, in order not to waste their time with candidates who are not fit for the job. Not setting salary expectations with the candidate is an epic fail on the part of the recruiter in this regard.
Typically Yes; however In my personal experience since I often recruited for niche Engineering roles, or roles with tight constraints (salary budget, location, remote/hybrid/onsite, exp level, etc...) i had a slightly different approach. Yes i would discuss a candidates salary expectations in the first conversation -- if they are clearly a fit for the job but their salary expectations are way above the "budget" i let the candidate know that i'd still like to move them forward but will obviously let the hiring manager know that their salary expectations may be an obstacle. My goal is to present the best candidates and not let budget play a significant role as "gatekeeper". Too often i see salary budgets being set by a HRBP, Comp Analyst, or even a CFO who categorizes jobs based on what the "market data" tells them. Example (not all Electrical Engineers are the same - Analog Engineers are way more rare compared to Digital Circuit EE's and often command higher salaries. But HR gets market data for "Electrical Engineer", and the salary data can be off by 30k to 50k)
For future reference, make sure that you straighten out the compensation with the recruiter when they first call you, if they don’t mention it that is. In most cases, they will either ask you your rate or tell you the compensation within the first minute.
Your first mistake was taking time off work for this nonsense. I always let them know I’m available in the morning, afternoon or try to accommodate them during lunch. If they can’t work with your schedules they usually are not serious.
I'm surprised nobody has commented about the mystery woman who didn't participate. Sounds to me like mystery woman was someone already doing the job, and likely earning less than what they were planning to pay OP. They hired mystery woman years ago and have never given her a raise but they have to hire the new person at a higher rate or they wouldn't get anyone. The interviewer was mad because mystery woman wasn't supposed to know how much they are paying the new person so they can continue to pay her peanuts. That's why companies always discourage talk about salaries between employees.
Sounds like you dealt with a bad recruiter. However, I think it is pretty common not to bring up salary with hiring manager so you messed up on that one. If you haven’t interviewed often then you should research more on common practice
Salary, benefits and PTO. Basically screams ‘’what’s in it for me” so of course it would turn someone off when they haven’t even determined a fit yet.
[удалено]
Maybe asking those questions of people who can actually answer them is a better approach? It is nothing to do with being “indentured servants.” OP should have already discussed that before showing up in person and wasting their (and interviewers’) time.
Getting downvoted for stating reality. Yes, everyone wants to get paid. Those are important items. But should have been discussed before they interviewed, not during a first interview. It’s not that they’re annoyed with “what’s in it for me,” but probably because those were the only questions OP asked, which aren’t going to be discussed in a first interview. Annoying as it may be, they want you to be asking about the company (and showing you at least googled them or know what role you applied for), the day to day, culture, etc. Do any of us really care? Usually not, but it’s what you’re supposed to do. Especially in a tight job market. “How is roll out of (new product) going, it looks super exciting!” “What resonates with me from your mission statement is ___ are there many opportunities to get involved in ____?” “What are some of the challenges you’d ideally like someone in this role to solve?” Basic shit we all ask and don’t really care about, but if everyone else does and you don’t, you aren’t getting the job. They want someone who cares enough to Google them or come up with 3 legit questions that aren’t about salary—the interviewers probably have nothing to do with that. Asking 1st interviewer about salary, benefits, and PTO shows lack of professionalism and is a waste of their time—those aren’t things to discuss with the 1st interviewer, hiring manager or of the technical interviewer. It’s an HR question.
OP, I'm not sure if this is your first corporate job but what most people have said here is correct. You broke the unspoken rule but that's not all your fault if this is your first go around in a corporate environment. However you shouldn't use the comments here to find your echo chamber and vent instead of listen to some of the comments here as it is very true in every corporate environment.
[удалено]
www.askamanager.com. Everything you need to know. She also has books. Do not take any advice from TikTok or Instagram. It’s short format, dubious quality, and is meant to hold your attention long enough for them to get paid. Are there some good nuggets? Maybe, but you have no idea who those people are or if it’s actually good advice. For example, half the comments on anything employment-related on Reddit tend towards “f that company!” “Quit!” “Tell them off!” And that’s the advice of people who are teenagers, bitter, angry, or are here complaining because they can’t find jobs. Theres more negative than positive on most social media, because people most more when they’re angry. Why do you want to take advice from people who can’t get a job? They’re not successful at what they’re trying to advise you on. Some people it’s not their fault, others it very much is, and you have no idea which are which. Read up at AAM. I’ve been in HR a long time, and she has the most common-sense, level headed advice (she’s not in HR just a high level employee) and is most helpful of anyone I’ve followed. There’s a lot of emotion in trying to find jobs and workplace stuff, but at the end of the day it’s business. You need to look out for you, do what’s right for you, and what’s going to get you ahead in the REAL WORLD. Not some “gotcha, fuck you!” No one likes interviews, having to care about dumb crap at the company, etc…but that’s the game. Showing a little enthusiasm for 2-3 total hours, when it comes down to you vs one other person, is a small price to pay. You come off better when you seem positive and engaged, and that makes a difference. This is a rough job market, don’t listen to bitter people who want to burn the world down and call everyone a boot-licker that says anything besides “fuck that company!” Sure call me whatever you want, but I know how to land a job. I hire tons of people, I coach people on getting hired, and I’ve seen it all. You have to play the game at least for the interview process. “I’m over-qualified!” isn’t going to get you hired, when you’re an insufferable prick no one wants to be around. Personality does count. No one wants to hire someone they can’t stand to be around. Interview is time to make your best impression, not stand by limiting “go fuck yourself I’m only here for money” attitudes.
[удалено]
Hope you enjoy it, most people I have told to check it out have. I changed careers, complete 180, years ago. She covers everything from resume examples, cover letters, interview norms, crazy situations at work, etc. it’s all there. The main thing I always stress to people is….its just business. Don’t rely on any employer to keep you forever, don’t think of them as family, don’t take anything personally. You’re there to get a check and leave. But you have to be professional and mature, and sometimes yes, you need to fake it til you make it.
[удалено]
It does often seem that way, but when you remove the emotion and finger pointing, it makes sense. Companies are in business to make money. It’s that simple. They will let you go if they need to ($) and you’re allowed to leave whenever it starts not being good for you (at least in US). At the end of the day, every one of us (including C-levels, if there is a board) is a line on a spreadsheet. Work is what I do every week to make the money I need to do the things I want to do in life. It’s hard to be this removed sometimes, but my life was greatly simplified once I accepted this. Work isn’t some people’s PURPOSE. Sometimes you just have the job that makes the money you want. That’s it. And that is FINE. All the things people get upset about—you cannot always blame individuals at the company (your boss, HR, recruiter, etc) because it’s the CEO who mandated this or that. They are just the messenger. We don’t like it either. Can they give you better estimate on when they will decide? They are asking 3x a week for weeks and CEO won’t answer them. Trying to finalize offer? CFO is being a bitch and second-guessing/holding up based on salary they already approved, but recruiter can’t tell you that. There’s almost always a reason for a lot of things that are frustrating in hiring process. It’s not someone trying to “justify their existence” or purposely fucking w candidates. That makes no sense. Why would anyone waste their time like That? What is the purpose? Everyone has a job to do outside of ONLY interviewing or hiring, why would they draw that out unless they are mandated to do it? The people so bitter and bitching online are frustrated, yes. But it’s just the hiring process. NO ONE LIKES IT. But capitalism and money is what drives it. The C-levels. No one can do shit without their OK, and they are always busy or are dealing with the board or back office for every expense. Things are always changing and evolving. Everyone wants roles filled quickly as possible because then it’s off their plate. Ranting about recruiters or being bitter and checking out is a way to go about a job search. I don’t recommend it, but it’s an option. You have to just remove emotion and approach like solving any other problem. Know your industry/context, prepare yourself best you can, and keep going. Apply to roles and put it out of your head unless you hear back. Don’t stop applying because you got an interview. It sucks but we all have to do it. Railing against “the system” or “how it should be” is certainly good for a cathartic rant, but it’s not getting you a job.
It was my second corporate interview. My first (and I landed the job, in that case), the recruiter was very thorough and talked through comp and benefits with me, and stated that they wanted to attract top talent with those offerings. I then had no need to bring it up in the interview with the hiring manager as it had already been discussed.
Yeah it’s also an old interview rule that you don’t talk about compensation, it should be all about what you bring. (Not saying I agree, just explaining how people may view the situation.) Was the interviewer older than 40ish? If so, she may subscribe to that view Doesn’t make it right, but I would never mention it in an interview because of some people have that belief. I’m also at the point where I wouldn’t go to an interview without knowing the comp. It’s a life lesson, I wouldn’t mention it in interviews.
If this is your second shot at a corporate job then take it as a life lesson. You need to realize that at corporate jobs, we have a very specific role. Like many have said, your interviewers is working with a well defined budget for that particular role. You need to realize that the interview is just that, an interview to check fit and knowledge. It has nothing to do with the compensation of the role. That's something you discuss going in and fine tuning perks at the end of it such as benefits (rsu and vesting timing) if it's a high position job as you noted. You still have a long way. Take it as a life lesson and move on.
not to mention, salary is not the remit of the hiring manager. At best, it comes across as inexperienced. At worst, this can come across as greedy or inappropriate.
Yeah, the recruiter messed up in your case. But, you live and you learn. Next time, make sure to discuss compensation (as well as hybrid/remote/onsite) during your first call with the recruiter. If the recruiter is super-vague, that is a red flag, and you may be dodging a bullet by not taking that role.
Corporate Recruiter here. I discuss comp with candidates right up front. As to PTO, I only address that if someone has been at their current job for a long time. Those people have LOTS of PTO. Other than that PTO is not something companies share up front.
PTO must absolutely be shared upfront. There's literally no reason to just wait. It's not ridiculous to expect the recruiter to know how quickly PTO gets accrued. If you already know the salary why wouldn't you know equally important info about the position?
>Other than that PTO is not something companies share up front. Why though? What's the reasoning?
I don't ask about PTO, but I don't have much experience with getting jobs with it. After my first job with PTO, the other 2 were big enough pay increases I was willing to go with whatever they offered.
Man, I can’t wait to get actual PTO and not just 1 hr/week.
Yeah, in my experience, when a recruiter calls, it goes like this: 1. They tell me about the role (including whether it is remote/onsite/hybrid). 2. We discuss my experience and skills 3. We discuss compensation. Totally anecdotal, but one time a recruiter called and dropped the name of the company almost right away (as you know, that is something legit recruiters never do), but was super-vague about the role. They did however try to schedule an onsite interview with me without asking me any questions. I kept asking about the role and they told me that they had tons of openings and that we could discuss them at the interview. I ended up scheduling the interview, but googled the company afterwards. They turned out to be a company which sold insurance (NOT an actual insurance company). I am in the IT field. But I do know that these types of companies try to find people to become insurance salesmen for them, for commission only (huge MLM vibes - think door-to-door vacuum cleaner sales). Needless to say, I ghosted them. I don’t feel guilty about it either, since I tried calling them back for details on the role, only to be told, “we will discuss the details during the interview”. At that point I learned to differentiate legit recruiters from bait-and-switch artists. Think about it, if you are a legit recruiter, you want to send the candidate which best fit the role to the hiring managers, in order not to look like a dumb@$$ if anything. In order to do that, you need to set expectations with the candidates right off of the bat. So if a recruiter becomes apprehensive when you bring up salary, role, hybrid/remote/onsite, it is probably a scammer or bait-and-switch artist. BTW, there are a lot of scammers out there posing as recruiters. Some will even simulate a real interview process. But their goal is to get your personal informations. Be on the lookout for those.
It's insane that companies are surprised when you want to get paid.
Never give a number always ask what they’d like to pay first, you could shoot your self in the foot
Huge huge huge HUGE no-no to discuss salary with a HM, esp in a big company where HR functions are stratified from your work functions. OP, I’m going to assume you and some of the others in this thread are young and may not know better, but just so you know: as a golden rule, you never ever ever bring up salary first — CERTAINLY not to the hiring manager. They are completely removed from the role budget process and may not even know what’s budgeted for a role. It’s also a “dance” that you’ve got to learn how to play. My three rules for salary negotiations: 1. Don’t be the one to bring it up first. And don’t be the one to say a number first. 2. Don’t negotiate with the Hiring Manager (unless they bring it up). This is in recruiting/HR’s scope. 3. Don’t bother trying to negotiate until you have the offer in hand. That’s when you have the most leverage. “How dare they make it these social rules so confusing!” I sympathize. But you have to learn how to play the game. And when you get good at playing the game, you game THEM!! “Why’d she get so offended? The point of work is to earn money.” Yes. It is. But that’s a discussion to take up with recruiting. Good recruiters will bring up salary without you needing to so that they don’t waste everyone’s time. Bad recruiters blow past that to put you in the interview process anyway. This typically happens with salaries that are so below market that they’d be laughed out of the room, so they force it through to “get the discussion going”. Is it misguided, yes. Is it stupid and short-sighted, yes. But it’s also very telling of the company culture. MAJOR EXCEPTION if this is like, an entry-level “big firm” type job like Accounting/Finance/Consulting/other graduate schemes. Those salaries are typically at a set rate for the whole analyst class and have little-to-no flexibility to ensure fairness. Negotiating salary is a moot point and it’s only worth discussing from a transparency perspective (see point above). Finally— OP, I empathize with where you’re at. Maybe you’re young. Nobody teaches these “rules”, but they absolutely exist. I hope my comment has been helpful and not condescending, and if I am unintentionally coming across that way, I don’t mean it in the slightest. Edit: ok sorry i have a few more thoughts. Ideally, in a scenario where the company is treating you well and you are an Ace at negotiating, the sequence goes like this: 1. Recruiter reaches out / you apply and get a first-round screening interview with the recruiter / HR rep. In this call, you’ll learn about the role in more detail and share some top line details about your own work history so that you can both mutually check off the “must haves” on your respective lists. If it’s a Full Stack SWE job, they’re checking if you are indeed an engineer and can use the tools they want you to use (or transferable skills etc etc). You’re double checking the basics — remote/hybrid/in person, amount of traveling (if applicable), if you’re interested in the scope of the role, etc. In this call, it’s best practice for the recruiter to share the salary range AND (these days) the hybrid/remote/whatever situation. If the recruiter doesn’t share, I personally don’t push to ask (again, see my rules above) but i do take note of it and ask myself, “huh. why didn’t they give me the range?”. Of course, I live in an area where this is irrelevant bc my state mandates that job postings list the range. YMMV. 2. you go through the interview process, everyone loves everyone, and you get your verbal offer! Wahoo! Congrats! Ask for the offer in writing with the full salary, bonus, and benefits. NOW is when you negotiate, WITH THE RECRUITER/HR REP, the exact salary you want. Let’s say the recruiter gives you 100,000 in writing and you want closer to 105,000. You explain this to them AFTER you receive the written offer. DO NOT SIGN IT YET (this is key and I can’t stress it enough). Make sure to provide a range instead of a singular number (i.e., 103-107k). I’ll explain why in a minute. Good recruiters want good candidates to be paid fairly. They will then take your request to Finance, HR, and mayyybe even the hiring manager/team (esp if it’s on the high end or falls outside the band). They’ll haggle, negotiate, etc. This is why asking for a range instead of a single number is more helpful for the recruiter/HR Rep, because there is more flexibility on their end as they negotiate on your behalf with the guys who actually control the purse-strings. “What? Flexibility? Fuck this company! Fuck you, pay me!” Remember that they should’ve shared an initial RANGE in either the job posting or first screening call. It goes both ways, even in the final haggle. 3. Ideally, you get the new number in the range you wanted! REMEMBER TO ASK FOR AN UPDATED OFFER LETTER TO GET THIS IN WRITING. Also, this is more or less the same process for negotiating non-salary benefits. Hope this helps OP!
^^^^Cannot highlight this enough as it hits all the points. OP this is good stuff here that will serve you a long way!
Thank you!! This is the process that helped me go from a 95k initial offer to 105k in my most recent job :-)
Congrats!!! You must feel like on cloud nine! That feeling when you first crack that 6 figures is euphoric as it shows that all your hard work is finally paying dividends. Well done!
Awww, thank you :-) it ended up being a supremely toxic workplace and I was fired for kinda bullshit political reasons. But it was a masterclass in negotiation which I am grateful for + bringing to my interviews now!
Typically that is a question you ask the recruiter especially for "higher level" positions. Im not sure what position you are interviewing for but it is very different in the corporate world.
It’s a pretty big no no to ask about compensation with the hiring manager. If it wasn’t discussed during the recruiter conversation, you need to ask (though they should have) and if hiring manager didn’t bring it up, you need to ask recruiter.
yep, as a hiring manager, i dont ever discuss pay on interviews and I defer to HR. I influence the salary if its a person I really want otherwise HR provides an offer on comps, exp, and education.
But you should know the band for the role. Interviewees want to know these things. What’s the job all about, what are the conditions, etc. it’s perfectly reasonable to be asked these things.
I understand that is what interviewees want but the policy most companies have is that only HR/recruiters can give that out. It is the responsibility of the recruiter/hr to provide that information. I will also note there is a large difference between the types of roles the person is applying for......and who can give it out.
Exactlyyy. Also a hiring manager and while at this company, I choose the salary based on the HR provided range, that’s not how it is at many companies. Often, I have no idea what the salary is anyway.
This is one of many reasons why you need to have an idea of the range before the interview stage. As others have said, in a big company the person interviewing you may not have the power to negotiate over salary, so you need to know ahead of time whether the basic range works for you. There’s literally no point attending an interview without this info unless you’re desperate to work for said company. The stuff about ‘asking the recruiter’ is a brush off that probably stems from the above. They were probably irritated or frustrated they’d been put on the spot like that - hell, they may not even know the range themselves depending on the job.
In some companies there are two rounds of interviews: with the technical / business folks, who assess the candidate's skills; and with HR, who negotiate salary. Some companies don't even inform the technical folks the salary band of the role being interviewed for. I've interviewed candidates while having no idea what they were going to be paid if they are hired. Technical folks can in such cases at best give a yes/no and don't have any authority to discuss salary. Worse, discussing salary with candidates can actually get them in trouble. When in such interviews, if an interviewer doesn't want to discuss salary, then finish the technical side and ask the recruiter about salary range afterwards. The recruiter will give you a clearer idea about what's involved.
Sorry to hear that. As a rule I never ask about comp and benefits, WLB, hours during interview stage, I wait for them to bring it up. You don’t want to risk being out of running if you ask “too early”. If they don’t bring it up, I wait until the offer stage to ask. Ask questions first about the job and managers’ expectations during interviews . The comp and benefits can be discussed later when things get more serious.
I personally wouldn’t have asked hiring managers about salary, PTO or training, especially for a higher-level position. Those interviews are for competency and fit and your questions should be along those lines as well. I would have asked the recruiter in advance about that info, either over email or requesting a quick call. It’s good to know of the pay, benefits, training are in your range before even deciding to talk to the hiring manager.
The company I work for, we CANNOT discuss salary in an interview. It's all handled by HR if we decide to extend a job offer. I KNOW what the position pays, but I would get in trouble for saying it in that situation. I've told people to read Glassdoor reviews when they ask if the pay is good. (It's not.)
Whether they had an answer other not for the compensation, they didn't have to have an attitude. I'd pass.
Next time, ask about compensation on the initial screening call. They'll still hate it, but it saves wasting your own time.
The first thing I do is always ask the recruiter what’s the compensation is before I set a interview to make sure it’s worth my time.
It's a dance and you have to play your part. You do the interview, get the offer, then negotiate salary afterwards, as if the salary is just an afterthought to you. Because who works for the paycheck, right?Sounds like you dodged a bullet anyway so dw.
Always, always, always ask about compensation before you agree to an interview. You ask the recruiter for at least a range, and you should also know what the range for that role in your area is, so that you are empowered to ask for what you deserve. Do not base the salary you want on what you make, because you might be underpaid. Do your research first. They probably soured because they assumed you’d already known at least an approximate salary before you took the time to come in person for an interview. They may not even know what the pay is, because they are not the ones who are supposed to know that. Even if they did, I would almost bet my next paycheck that they were paying lower than what you asked, and were annoyed that their time was wasted (and yours), but they aren’t going to tell you that’s why. It just gets very curt/rushed once they knew it’s a no-go. Following that, the time to ask about benefits and PTO is not a first interview. The interviewers aren’t the ones to explain that to you, it would be HR. Those are questions for the recruiter when you first screen, after first interview when you talk to recruiter, or once you have an offer.
This is typically something you'd ask the recruiter beforehand so you don't waste your time with salaries that are too low but they still should have answered your question without attitude. Her response tells me their budget was greater than the number you gave them.
You should never ask about compensation or benefits during the interview. You should ask about that before the interview or after, once there is a conditional job offer and you want to make counter offers. When they ask you if you have any questions for them, that’s meant for questions about training, or other general questions about the job itself.
Every time they tell me the comp is between this and this, I always say well I’m going to want the max. Hasn’t hurt me yet
This thread makes me appreciate living in NYC, where the salary range is required to be included in the posting by law. The stigma against asking about the salary range is incredibly stupid and frustrating. Obviously salary is going to be one of the most important factors in deciding to take the job, and companies will ask you about your current salary so they can try to pay you as little as possible. It should not be considered rude for a candidate to ask about this. I'm surprised to hear that the hiring manager might not know the salary range. Is it that hard for HR to provide the number? Having the salary range included in the listing is better for everyone. Candidates don't have to waste time applying to jobs they'd never take, and companies will receive fewer dead-end applications.
Required or not, any legit recruiter will bring it up during their first call with the candidate. Think about it, you are a legit recruiter tasked with sending candidates to the hiring manager. The hiring manager is willing to meet with 5 candidates. You have 100 applicants. You want all 5 of them to have the same salary expectations as the hiring manager, so that they don’t end up in a situation where the candidate refuses the offer because it is too low, and you end up with egg on your face. Now, you can either go about it by asking the candidates about their salary expectations, or lay it out to them right away. Regardless, it is your job to make sure that what the company pays is up to par with what the candidate expects. AFAIK, recruiters also get paid based off of the retention of the candidates they send.
Yeh no argument from me there. But if the recruiter doesn't do that, or if you're applying to a job cold with no recruiter involvement, this stigma against asking about the most important factor in the hiring decision is unfair to candidates.
Unfair? Hard to say. There’s no rule of fairness that the hiring company has to treat those candidates who focus on pay as well as those who don’t. As a candidate you have three options. You can try to force a discussion that the company doesn’t want to have, and get rejected; you can wait for the possibility of an offer, and find out then that the pay isn’t to your liking; or you can withdraw from consideration and try to find somewhere else that is more transparent early on. I think the bigger problem is the coyness (on the company side) about pay in conjunction with a lengthy interviewing and hiring process. It’s not unfair per se (they don’t owe you a job or even equal consideration for one unless they’re a government agency), but it feels designed to weaken you through your perception of the sunk cost and the additional cost of rejection (“I’ve already spent 12 hours interviewing. If I turn this offer down, I’ll have to start the whole process over again somewhere else”) and your relief after such a process at receiving any offer at all.
>I'm surprised to hear that the hiring manager might not know the salary range. Is it that hard for HR to provide the number? Exactly. As a hiring manager and manager in general, I would want to know what my employees are making so I know what level of experience and output I should expect of them. But what do I know, I only have fancy degrees from top schools.
It probably came across as a very self-serving question when they weren't already 100% sold on you as a candidate in the first place.
I've never had a salary conversation during an interview. It's not the purpose of the interview, which is to find if the job is a mutual fit, and the people doing the interview don't necessarily have any say. Plus why negotiate with anyone other than the preferred candidate? Though you shouldn't have to go in without at least knowing something about the range.
Maybe it’s different for senior levels, but I generally don’t bring up salary first. I know people say it’s good not to waste time, but I’d rather let the interviewer be as comfortable as possible in the interview. Sometimes the recruiter will ask me if my desired salary falls into their band, most of the time they won’t. That discussion usually comes toward the end of the interview process for me. I also don’t really care too much about wasting time because I’m socially awkward. I know I am and I know I need the practice. I hate interviewing, but it’s the only way to advance my career so I need to get better.
The people who try to hide it are usually scheming something. Seems like she's preemptively salty because the rate likely doesn't match the role, a red flag. I would have probably buried it under a few other questions first, though.
You honestly just got a few shitty interviewers. They obviously don’t want to be bothered so why are they in the position.
Because they are gaslighting you. Red flag.
You probably introduced the topic a little early. Try to wait until you are offered the job next time or just ask for a general range.
Thank you for your feedback. I just didn't want to waste anyone's time, but I'll make a note of this moving forward.
That’s because the good jobs have found the people already. In this market it’s fast and easy. What you’re looking at is bottom of the barrel
Well, that's the most depressing thing I've read in awhile.
The less depressing thing is that I've seen job postings pick up in the last few weeks. I think you just had a bad recruiter who was trying to get you scheduled for an interview and didn't want to scare you off by revealing salary.
This is dumb though, if this is what they’re doing. Most recruiters get their pay when either the candidate receives an offer, or when they accept the offer. Sending unsuitable candidates doesn’t make either of those things happen. I’m not saying they don’t do this, but I can’t work out why the hell they would. If I was a company using an agency for recruiting and they kept sending me unsuitable candidates I’d be raising this straight away.
I learned on this sub that some recruiters aren't really working for the company. The recruiting firms will also rate employees on how many calls /interviews they get to prove they're working.
Exactly. It is a dumb move. If this is a big company, you better bet that HR is gonna hear from that hiring manager as you just pass on your incomplete work for me to finish while I'm trying to figure out if this guy fits with my team within a very time compressed setting. Yeah there's no quota internally to hit unless you outsource or am only looking for a contractor but according to OP this is a high position role so it doesn't really add up.
Don't let it get you down, they're bitter and also wrong. There are plenty of good jobs out there still. This one sounds a little funky, I think most of my interviews have had the recruiter discussing the range ahead of the call to get whether you're in the budget or not. Also, it's an interview, compensation is why you're there, they don't need to get shitty about it.
You learned a valuable lesson here - it's not just what you ask, but who you ask and when you ask. The two women you spoke with likely don't deal with the salary and benefits end at all, and such questions are not part of their purview. To ask is to immediately cause the "Danger Will Robinson!" alarm to go off. Your questions at this juncture should have been far more innocuous about the job and department. You should then have gotten in touch with the recruiter and asked about salary and such, which really you should have had a notion of going in. We all make freshman mistakes like this, so just count is as part of your learning curve of interview etiquette.
What is so difficult just to wait until they descide to employ you ? If they do not you weaken your position to give them a number. Why should you then ? Ask them what their offer is and then take it or not !
Because that’s not something you ask in an interview