Posted on 06/04/2013 10:22:02 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
Question: I read your article titled "Keep Your Salary Under Wraps," and I agree completely that there is no good reason (from the employee's perspective) to disclose your current salary to a future employer. A competent business should be able to independently assess a prospective employee's worth without being biased by another data point. Judging from your article, however, you may not be aware that employers require salary information.
For instance, online applications frequently make the "current salary" field mandatory. You cannot proceed without entering a numeric value. Human resources representatives almost always ask about current salary during the initial phone interview, and your refusal to follow protocol could end the interviewing.
How should applicants deal with questions that require an answer about current salary? I am confident that applicants who refuse to answer, no matter how professionally, will have little luck advancing in the application process.
Nick Corcodilos: Employers don't really require your salary history to hire you. But many do like to bully you into disclosing private, confidential information that will give them an unfair negotiating position. So they call it "the policy."
I would never, ever disclose my current salary or salary history to a prospective employer even if it means ending the interview process. That is my advice to job hunters.
Employers use online applications for two reasons. One is that they are expedient. Those poor HR staff have no way to process all the millions of inappropriate applications they solicit from people they don't know. The other reason is that automated forms enable them to intimidate you into sharing information that is none of their business. When employers re-brand their rudeness as "policy," many job applicants will go along. But not all.
Ask The Headhunter readers tell me they say no to the salary question without getting kicked out of the interview process. There are plenty of employers who will respect that position; the rest are playing games. What makes you think playing games will lead to a good job and a good salary with a good employer?
The article you refer to is actually a very abbreviated version of my PDF book, "Keep Your Salary Under Wraps." Here are a few tips from the book about how to deal with inappropriate salary requests from employers. The basic idea is, either walk away entirely, or approach from a direction that avoids such silly obstacles.
You can take a strong position with any employer by putting it all on the line. Tell the employer, "Look, I won't tell you my past salary because I'd like to have an honest, fair negotiation based on what I can do to make your business more successful. If I can't demonstrate my value, then you should not make me an offer or hire me. We can part as friends. But I'd like to show you how I can contribute enough to your business that you'll want to pay me well to do this job." See "That's why it's called compensation."
That's a friendly, assertive way to continue the interview process. If an employer still demands your salary history, I'd walk away. Don't participate in a one-sided negotiation that is not a win-win proposition.
This forces them to compile long lists of candidates and hires indexed by race. For example, for “Sales Associate” they need to tell the government that 89 people applied, 45 Caucasian, 15 Black, 9 Hispanic, etc. Then they have to show that they interviewed enough candidates from each protected group. Then they need to say they hired Jane Doe, a Caucasian female, and justify the reasons they hired her and not the others.
And the only way they can compile race data is to pressure you to self-identify on the website.
Wrong wrong wrong........race and gender are hidden from a recruiter and a hiring manager inside an applicant tracking system and only verified if the candidate refuses to self-disclose, at the face to face interview.
If a job class is underutilized, meaning the companies representation in this job code is below the city/state/location data then then and only then if all other qualifications are equal will a recruiter/hiring manager be asked to hire a minority/protected class.
good way to approach a recruiter.
Many folks with critical skills go the 1099 route.
Don’t know, I pay above market rates.
“If a job class is underutilized, meaning the companies representation in this job code is below the city/state/location data then then and only then if all other qualifications are equal will a recruiter/hiring manager be asked to hire a minority/protected class.”
In the real world HR management tells the recruiters they need to hire more minorities. They have quotas and those are more important then qualification.
I live in a major metropolitain area, and make a better than average salary for my position (my company is generous, plus I work pretty hard for them and they know it).
We have property in a neighboring state with a much lower cost of living, and I’d be willing to take a significant pay cut (on the order of $20-30k, maybe even a bit more for the right job) to relocate.
When an employer doesn’t list a salary range, then they’re practically begging for people to apply who are not going to be happy with the compensation. Most job descriptions are so vague as to make guessing the compensation all but impossible.
When an employer requires my salary up front, and online, I suspect I’m immmediately rejected as being out of their range, even though I’d accept a lot less. But they’re the ones setting the rules to the game. I’m in the fortunate position to be highly valued by my current employer so, it’s their loss.
I really don’t understand the thought process of employers who expect the interested candidate to provide a salary expectation from a minimal job description. The employer knows all the details and is going to be setting the compensation (and the benefits, if any, which can have a huge effect on a salary negotiation) - the onus should be on them to define the salary, or deal with having to sift through a few extra hundred or thousand applications they otherwise could have avoided.
I didn’t say they used the applicant tracking system to discriminate, only that they used it to compile the data they would ultimately need for reporting purposes.
And yes, if you refuse to self-report race, somebody takes a look at you during your interview and marks down their best guess.
Now if you try and end-run the system somehow (i.e. hand carry a resume to a hiring manager) THEN you open yourself to charges of discrimination.
As an employer I ask for this information for two reasons. First to know whether I can afford you, secondly to know what you might find enticing if I decide to hire you.
what is the lowerst base salary I can offer this slob and get away with it.
Yeah you are wrong....most companies have other employees in the job code they are hiring you for...what happens is they do a compensation review of your skills compared to the rest of the folks already employed in that job code and you fall where you fall. If you have more experience and education than the rest of the folks in that job code then the salary calculation tell the recruiter to pay/offer you the most. This only happens after you have been selected for hire and after the interview. Heading into the recruiting for the position a recruiter has a ballpark idea of what the req will allow them to offer but this is a guideline. If you were on the high end I would still recruit you because there may be other things that drive your decision making, location of the job, the scope of work, the client you are working for......you assume every offer is a lowball offer...they are not.
The hiring process is about ruling people out. So all these steps are designed to disqualify people under the theory that anyone left is the ideal candidate.
not sure what your background is but wanting to get you for the cheapest price is a joke of a statement. I want you to come on board, be happy, be successful, be paid fairly and to be happy with that $$....I don’t want to have to go back open a new req 6 months later and find someone else like you....your statement is emotionally driven.
““As the employer I am the buyer.””
“As the candidate I am the seller. Try to lowball me or treat me unethically and I’ll take
my services where somebody isn’t trying to screw me.”
I am the consumer of what you produce or the service you provide. If I and other consumers do not purchase what you are offering for sale then both of you are out of business and job.
The majority of jobs are never really advertised. The average successful candidate usually only meets about half the requirements of the job description. In most large companies there is a range for salaries. If you are above or below that range you will probably be disqualified.
For smaller companies the salary is highly variable. If you accuse me of treating you unethically just because I made an offer you don’t like, after you refused to provide your desired salary, then I sure as hell don’t want you in my company.
This isn’t new. This question was on paper applications 30-40 years ago.
Yeah some recruiters do this but in today’s environment that recruiter would not last long at any F500 company.
If you advertise the salary then you tend to get a LOT of submissions from people totally unqualified but dreaming about making $100,000 a year.
not at the real-world F50 company I work for...the data is collected and reported and effort are made to expand the pool of qualified applicants through extensive mining of and attendance at diversity events but once we have loaded the database with resumes (the pool in which recruiters fish) then the obligation is met and there is ZERO hiring based of race and gender until the situation I described to you presents itself.
I don’t seem to get as many, but still get a few. I read somewhere the average time spent on resumes is around 7 seconds. Seems kinda high to me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.