Isn' it offensive for prospective employers to want my "salary history"?

In My Humble Opinion
41

kaylasdad99 wrote

A decent employer will know very well the market value for the position he is hiring. But what is under discussion here isn’t the market value of the position. It’s the market value of the applicant.

There can be enormous differences between the values of two different potential employees filling the same position. As an example from my field, some Java engineers are fairly compensated at $45k, and some are fairly compensated at $150k. They bring different levels of value, and are compensated accordingly. Generally when you’re hiring you have a much tighter focus in mind, a junior engineer vs. a seasoned architect for example. But even then there is wide variance on what their value is to the company.

42

If the employer knows the fair value, and is competent enough to know the KSA’s involved, and is competent enough to recognize the skills, then the SH is a non issue.

43

Sorry, I’m not comfortable with that approach.

Lessee, Lotto’s predicting $20 Million this time, a 40% payout gets me 8 million bucks. . . I’ll just do that, instead.

44

Blown & Injected wrote

Fair enough. The next time you’re an employer, that’s your option. Just as it’s the option of all other employers.

45

Some notes from the trenches…

I used to get just as upset as the OP and others about employers asking this question. I also used to get upset when I found out that employees in similar jobs/skills were paid more, even if they have less experience.

Now it is water off a ducks back…

I have gotten much better at negotiation. Much MUCH better.

If you are not in a bargaining position (unemployed and desperate, hate your job and must leave etc.) you have weak bargaining postion and will not do well.

This question is now actually a positive to me. If it’s on an application or requested not-in-person, I never answer directly but say it is negotiable based on duties, responsibilities, situation and market salary data.

If you are in a stronger position and are asked this question in person then it provides information about the company. If it is one of the first questions asked, then saving money for the company is a top priority. The company is probably weak financially or overly concerned with getting a ‘good deal’. The sooner they ask the question, the more this is true.

I downgrade a company if they ask this question before serious interviewing has begun. I want to work for a company that does not have to put employee salary cost savings so high. I want to work for a company that wants high performance and is willing to pay for it. If they call you and ask this question, it puts up SERIOUS FLAGS. They must value low employee costs so much that they don’t even want to waste time scheduling an interview! The salary will not be competitive.

If asked this question in person (or on phone) I never dodge it. I give my salary immediately. I then follow up with…

‘My current salary is $x. However, A main reason I am looking for a new position is because I wish to have duties and responsibilities that give me a higher impact into the company’s wellbeing. According to salary.com (or equivalent) the median salary for this position in this area is $y with a one standard deviation range being $r to $t. A salary of $m would be within this range and therefore assure you a reasonable cost and also assure me that the position will fit my need to have a greater impact into the company’s business. Do you agree?’

Something like that. It works wonders for me because it allows an informative and rational discussion about salary. It also allows me to ‘express concern’ that the position is not a higher impact position if their inital salary is too low. I can then say that the position is not a good match and that I should continue to stay with my current position since they have about the same impact into the company and that I am happy with my current employer (strong bargaining position).

I actually have had companies not equate job duties==money and try to convince me that the impact of the position is much greater than my current company even though the salary is about the same! This brings up questions on my part about the company’s financial wellbeing/stability etc. Almost all hiring people know exactly what you are talking about though.

I’m not sure if I am explaining well but hopefully you get the gist. It is a negotiation. If you have a strong position (don’t need the job) you will do well since they have to reward you to get you to leave. If you have a weak position (unemployed and low cash, hate job) then you will not do as well and must market yourself lower.

46

When I applied for my present job, the supervisor wanted to know what I was earning at my last job (as part of a salary negotiation, he wanted to base my salary on what I was already making). I just smiled and told him that I didn’t want to say.

As it happens, he had told one of his vendors (who also was a vendor for my old employer) to the dollar how much he had available in his budget for the job I wanted. It was about $8000 a year more than what I was already earning. I also knew some other guys were also gunning for this position and I didn’t want them to lowball me on a bid–but I definitely wanted more money than I was already earning, otherwise what’s the point?

I split the difference and asked for 4 grand more than my old salary. If he’d known my old salary, he would have said “no.” He didn’t know what the going rate for my technical specialty was, he just knew that if he hired me, he could tell his boss that he was saving 4 grand a year.

You are under absolutely no obligation to tell a prospective employer your salary history. In fact, I strongly recommend against it. They may think they want to hire a doormat, but they really don’t, and you absolutely don’t want to be one.

47

“No one said the world was fair”, right? The fact that the practice is widespread does not mean it isn’t unfair. Rape and murder are still doing fine in the real world, last I checked.

And the fact that you and all the higher-ups have to go selling themselves also is completely irrelevant.

48

With all due respect, that is crap. If I finish grad school and have student loans coming due, no savings and need a start, and take a low ball offer. Why is job number two dependant on that set of circumstances that made me take low ball offer?

49

China Guy,

If I was in that situation (and I was…)

I would actually tell the employer this. I would (and have) said that I took the position because the company was a good place to learn all aspects of the business, that I researched it carefully and choose that position, even though it had a lower salary, because I thought it was good experience.

I would then bring up all that I have learned and how well rounded, trained and ‘proven’ I now am compared to when I started.

I would also bring up my requirements that I need a position that has more input into the company’s success and that 3rd party salary information says that the median and 1-deviation range is ***.

If they insisted on basing their offer on my current below-market salary level then buh-bye!

50

Original question: Isn’t it offensive for employers to want to know my salary history?

Yes, if you take it that way. It’s a jungle out there. They can ask whatever they want, within reason; you don’t have to answer directly. Some employers may take this as being evasive and untrustworthy, others (the minority) as having the guts to be different. The wrong answer could scupper the whole interview.

Employers ask for previous salary to see whether your profile fits and in order to be better informed, not offensive, but if you think it’s offensive, say so. Just don’t expect the job offers to come thudding through the letterbox.

51

China Guy
Member

Registered: Mar 2001
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2395

quote:

Originally posted by Blown & Injected
A company should pay a fair salary and that is dependent on “salary history.”

With all due respect, that is crap. If I finish grad school and have student loans coming due, no savings and need a start, and take a low ball offer. Why is job number two dependant on that set of circumstances that made me take low ball offer?
Damn I made a mistake. I meant to say is not dependent on SH

My other replies should have made this obvious

52

muttrox wrote

I’m sorry. Did you really just equate researching the value of a potential employee with rape and murder?

53

Of course. The next step is to compare you to a Nazi, and then we can invoke Godwin’s law and go home.

For the record, I’m an employer and we look at salary histories, and neither I nor any of my potential employees ever thought it was a big deal. I haven’t chimed in on this thread because I can’t say anything Bill H. hasn’t already said better, but I’ll take sides now that this is getting ugly. I get a lot of resumes that say a person participated on a team that did such-and-such. I have no way of knowing whether the person was a team leader or a gofer. Most of the applicant’s references won’t go into too much detail because legal liability has gagged them, but salary history can tell me a lot. If someone says they helped implement an enterprise-wide database system linking wireless data entry to real-time reporting but they only got paid $20K, I might guess they were pulling wires and not designing system architectures. I might be wrong, but that’s what interviews are for. I don’t look solely at salary history, but it’s certainly a useful data point in evaluating an applicant, and I don’t think it’s any more personal or confidential than a person’s college grades or standardized test scores.

54

i believe muttrox was just pointing out that just because it is done does not make it a good or right thing to do. Might have also been trying to show that you don’t always get what ya pay for.

I know people that made massive amounts of money doing the simpleest of things - they were as dumb as a bag of rocks but made lots just delivering office furniture.

55

I think muttrox was obviously making an analogy rather than drawing a direct comparison, but the use of such loaded analogies is a logical trick to attack someone who disagrees with you. For example, I could say “just because it’s done doesn’t make it right” or I could say “the Nazis thought the same thing about genocide, we’ve been doing it everywhere so it must be okay”. The latter derails any useful discussion by implying that anyone who disagrees with you is a monster even though it’s not an explicit ad hominem attack.

56

Blown & Injected wrote

His context was clearly: “the world is unfair, but that doesn’t make it right.” My context (to which he supposedly replied) was clearly “the world is fair; stop whining.” I never said the world was unfair, so in addition to his response being inflammatory (implying I approved of Murder and Rape) it wasn’t even relevant.

He also went on to say that it was irrelevant that every employee goes through this. But in fact it’s completely relevant because that’s what “fair” means. Everybody is put through the same process.

As I say, when you (or I) approach an employer, we are selling them our services. It is our job to convince them that we are the right fit for the job and should be compensated as highly as possible. That’s the nature of selling anything. It isn’t the buyer’s responsiblity. It’s the sellers.

To imply that this process is unfair is absurd. What if you were buying a car and the seller refused to answer questions about it? What if you only knew it was a car, not whether it was a ferrari or a toyota? How could you rightfully evaluate what it’s worth? And how comfortable would you be dealing with someone who refused to answer questions about the car?

57

I think job-seekers need to distinguish questions designed to weed resumes out of the mix.

Salary history is one of those questions that HR puts into a job posting to weed out resumes based on what the hiring manager told them the position paid. Requests for salary history should always be turned back to whoever asked it in a way that brings out information. You should be trying to find out if you want to work for the company. Thus, if you send in a resume after the job posting clearly says, “All resumes must include a salary history” and don’t include it, if they call you to find out, that is a very good sign. They are interested. Therefore, the HR person who calls you insisting on a SH should be answered, “It would depend on the job. What kind of responsibilities would I have? Does it fit in with my extensive experience in…” whatever you think they are looking for. If they insist on it, say something like, “I usually make a little above market average. My performance history makes me worth it. For instance, I started at ABC Company, and after a year I did thus and so that added to their market share…blah blah blah.”

The only time you give hard figures is when they are getting ready to make an offer. At that point, the strategy that is easiest for me to implement is to pick a hard figure that would make it worth your while to accept the position. Then stick to it.

If you are desperate for a job, give a vague enough figure that you can negotiate. If you are making 31K, the expression is “mid-30s”. If he then says the position only pays 29K, and you want the job, you can ask about benefits (education allowances, travel bonus, extra time off) and see if that will make up the difference. If you are really desperate, you can always save face by saying, 'That’s a bit of a cut for me, but I really like this company. Could we re-open the question at my yearly review, and I have had a chance to show you what I am worth?"

FWIW. My father used to say, “Nobody has ever been paid less than he was worth for long.” If you need the job that much, that is how much you are worth. If you have managed to get into a position where you can pick and choose, that is synonymous with saying that you are worth more.

Regards,
Shodan

58

Bill H.:

I think a lot of people feel that playing the salary negotiation game is like playing poker. To continue the metaphor, asking for their salary history is asking to see their cards before you place your bet.

59

Hey you! wrote

Hmmmm. Yes, there are some similarities, such as strategy, bluffing, reading the opponent, and knowing when it’s best to fold and try your luck at another table. But I feel there are more dis-similarities. Where poker is a winner-take-all transaction, both parties in a salary negotiation should walk away happy, or if one is not happy, they should agree to disagree and try again with other partners. Salary negotiation is a negotiation and often a compromise.

I’m not sure I see the analogy. Surely feel that an employer should be able to interview you before making you an offer?

60

Bill H.:

Okay.

You know what you would conceivably pay him and what his potential peer group generally make (your cards). You are insisting to see the dollar amount he is coming from (his cards). You have access to all the cards. You know what you’re holding and what he’s holding.

Does your prospective hire get to see your cards (what you would conceivably pay him and what his potential peer group generally make)? If so, then your potential hire has nothing to gripe about. If not, they feel you are asking for a bargaining position that puts them at a disadvantage.

Did I explain it any better?