I recently put my resume out there because three people in my department have gotten laid off. This is the first time I’ve been on the job search trail since 2007, so I’m a bit rusty at this.
I’m finding that everyone I talk to is asking what my current salary is. This may be a new development… but then again, the last time I was on the search I was unemployed and thus did not have a current salary.
The advice I’ve heard, time and time again, is that you’re not really supposed to say how much money you’re after in an interview. At least not until you’re close to an offer. But this is generally the third question they ask, after:
Why are you considering leaving?
What kind of position are you looking for?
I have no trouble with questions one or two. The answer to question three is surprisingly low, so I particularly wish I could steer around it.
How can I artfully dodge this question? I can’t exactly say that my current salary is “negotiable, and one of many factors I consider when I decide whether to go to work each day.”
You can’t say your current salary is negotiable. Your current salary is what it is. Also not a good idea to lie about it. If something on your application is later found to be false, it could be grounds for dismissal. I’ve known of a couple of specific cases where this happened. You could try leaving that space blank, but you’ll probably be asked about it anyway.
I would simply answer truthfully and not be defensive or vague - just wait and see what happens next.
As an interviewer, I have asked the question many times. It is to see if the person’s current salary fits with what we are expecting to offer. If the answer was significantly more than we expected to pay, then it is best for both parties to understand up front. That then might lead to a negotiation at some point. I would not just reject someone because of their current salary - only if the candidate refused to negotiate and it was higher than we were prepared to pay.
Now, if the candidate had a current salary significantly less than we were expecting to pay, then that could save the company money by offering less than we might have otherwise. Some people here might take exception to that, but it’s a fact of life - a company aims to maximize its revenues and minimize its costs, including salaries.
You can give a range of what you want, but I find more and more companies are demanding a specific amount. Especially if you fill out an online application, you have to put in an amount and it can’t be Open or 0.00.
You can fill in 1.00 and hope they think it’s an error an call you, but with so many people looking for work, they’re apt to just throw your application out or to the bottom of the pile and deal with those who answered it as they wanted it.
It’s a just that kind of market the job seeker has no leg to stand on unless your field is one of the few still in demand.
But don’t go too low either. The position is budgeted already and if you lowball yourself, no one gets the extra money. The H/R department doens’t get anything for saving the extra money in salary, so you need to research and just give a figure. You can always refuse if offered the job and hope they’ll counteroffer at that time.
You could be honest with the question, “Why are you considering leaving your current position?” and just say, “Salary too low.”
Then, no matter what you put as your currently salary (add in any bonuses, vacation pay, sick pay, etc.), you have a point of negotiation.
And sure - maybe they normally pay 50% more than you are getting, but only offer you 25% more. That would still be a win-win; they pay less and you get more.
Over the last three years a couple of times I’ve run into “well, you were getting X, but that’s way more than we can pay, so that’s why you weren’t picked.”
Um… I’m unemployed? Or, um… I’m underemployed and getting way less that what I got last time I did this work that you need someone to do…?
In other words - I’m willing to take the same work at less pay (yes, really!) because it would be an improvement over no work or working at minimum wage.
So it isn’t always a matter of saying “I want more” or pricing yourself out of the range. Sometimes, HR just assumes you won’t negotiate, or won’t take less than before, and doesn’t even ask. That can also be a problem.
There seems to be some misconceptions here. It is perfectly acceptable to discuss salary right at the beginning of the interview process. I mean you don’t want to go through half a dozen interviews only to find out the position is half of what you made before.
But when the economy improves, they may not be willing/able to pay you more, but you’ll easily be able to find a job that pays more, and so then you’d leave, and they’d’ve lost all of their investment in you. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong; just that that’s the way it is.
I’ve pushing 50 - finding a new job will never be “easy” for me again as ageism is a real thing in the world, and I’m not high enough up the ladder that it will mitigate against that.
And let’s be real - damn few businesses “invest” in anyone anymore. It’s just an excuse to whittle down the pool of applicants to make a hiring decision easier. Not that I blame them, the number of people that can apply for a single opening these days is staggering.
I’d bet another reason for the question (at least in certain industries) beyond a guage for your salary requirement from the new job is to help the interviewer gather more information about you and your existing job. So, if you say you are currently the head of some major department at some major company but are making minimum wage, then either you really aren’t the head of anything or you have some other problems for being willing to do a job like that for so little.
Um… I’m not and never have been a department head so your comparison falls flat right there.
Since there is no longer as much demand for my prior position in the corporate world I entered another area at an entry level - thus accounting for entry level salary. In other words, I am getting paid an appropriate amount for my skill level in my new job, which should warm the cockles of your Scrooge-like heart. When I’m applying for a possible position in my old line of work yes, I’d expect to be paid more because I have more skills in that area. I am not expecting my highest salary because it took me over a decade of hard work and producing results to get there. Yet everyone seems to accept it as a foregone conclusion that no one would consider less than their highest prior salary regardless of the economy, differing job requirements, or trade-offs with things other than money (granted, money IS the chief motivator for a lot).
Let me put it another way: suppose you have someone who is an expert in an old-style computer language - COBOL, for instance. At a certain point, the demand for COBOL programmers dried up, at which point said person was laid off and went to work making coffee at Starbuck’s because, hey, you gotta do something. Obviously, a barista isn’t going to make as much as a high-level programmer. However, should someone wish to hire said person as a COBOL programmer (insert reason of your choice) it would be unreasonable to expect them to work with COBOL at minimum wage. It may not be reasonable for the former programmer to expect his prior highest wage, either. However, it should be possible to find a middle ground if anyone wants to bother discussing the matter. If, however, the business just says “Well, we don’t to pay his old salary! Into the the trash heap with this resume!”, that’s not quite the same thing.
I am not a computer programmer, but I am in an analogous position. Much of what I did 20 or 30 years ago has been rendered obsolete by new technology. Rather than bitch, I got a shit job so I wouldn’t starve and am now moving into another area where I will have to work from the ground up. But for damn sure, should anyone hire me to do what I did before I’d want at least 50% of my prior maximum salary, plus benefits. But that’s why I really hate that “how much did you make” question on web forms - there no way to convey that “Yes, I understand circumstances have changed, I really will accept a lower wage and negotiate here”. They just assume that because I made “X” at a prior job I’m too expensive and/or not suitable. Hell, it’s probably not even a human making the cut, it’s probably software. Which is a pity, because they’re missing out on a highly skilled worker due to an arbitrary cut-off.
I only interview managers that would report directly to me, but since most of these guys are already part of the corporate management, I already know what they make, so it’s not a big deal.
However, I would never hire anyone that I couldn’t pay at least what they were previously making. I just do not believe a person could keep their energy level and morale high after having to take a pay cut.
Would you make allowances for relocation? Say, a potential new hire moving from someplace expensive (Silicon Valley) to someplace cheap (the middle of Indiana)? Whenever considering a new job, I plug my current salary into a cost of living calculator (and so some quick Realtor.com searches) to see just what is what.
I’ve never given it any thought. Both corporations that I’ve worked for had a schedule that spelled out the salary adjustments that applied to vastly different cost of living relocations. But I don’t ever recall anyone actually taking a pay cut to move to a lower COL location. Usually the guy just received a smaller raise.
But now that I think about it, if it were up to me I probably would. I know I’ve made adjustments for state tax differentials.
Salary should be discussed early on. It benefits both you and the company to know if there is a mismatch early in the process. So just tell them what you made before. If you are looking for more, gild the lily a little. Mention your salary, then bonuses, retirement contributions, other benefits. If you are too expensive for the market, round down the figure and leave out the perks. You can round up or down a little in either case, just say ‘about xxx thousand a year’.
If the company is looking for some specific amount, and you have made too much for that, there isn’t much you can do when you are still employed. Companies believe that you won’t be motivated to do a good job for less money. If you’ve been out of work for a while, they are more likely to disregard this. Employees who return to work after a long layoff may be grateful for an opportunity and work harder.
If the company isn’t limited in what to pay, then you have to justify your salary based on skills and experience. The first interview is very important for that. If you don’t impress them then as being worth the money you ask for, they won’t bother to look into the details.
Never given it any thought? Perhaps I’m just a hick who moved from nowhere to NYC, and then down to DC, but… damn - cost of living is important (DC area is sooo much cheaper); housing prices are less than half, it seems.
Anyway, not attacking you - I’m attacking the hordes who don’t understand cost of living differentials. Hell, my car insurance was reduced by 2/3 just for not living in NJ.