For instance, if the range published in the job description is $70,000 to $100,000 (£56,4000 to £80,550), a new hire may start the job at $85,000 (£68,500), but make up to $100,000 as they earn raises and bonuses throughout their tenure in the role. In short, the company never intended to hire a new worker at $100,000 – that’s simply where it caps pay for that position.
In other words, they are lying. No reasonable person would expect a job post to show anything other than the hiring range for the job. Otherwise, there is no point to having it. It says nothing. It also says no matter how much money you earn the business, your income is capped. F*** THAT!
Treating applicants like they’re marks drives away the quality candidates.
In one interview, I got to the stage of talking with an AVP, and he asked my salary expectation (rather than stating the amount he wanted to pay). I gave him mid-point on the range, which given my decades of experience, was very reasonable. He was clearly shocked.
If you won’t pay for the expertise, don’t waste my time. Also, he demanded the date of my degree, which is against the law, so he (older than me) was ageist, too.
This company is an international financial institution based in NYC. The mid point of the range was about 10% below where salary surveys said a person at my point in my career should be paid where I live for the job description.
Don’t try to find “good” reasons for this crap. The range went from entry level pay for a non-senior developer to way higher than anyone should expect to get. They maliciously complied with the law, like the employers in this article are doing.
I since got a job for a similar base pay plus bonus (thank God) from a much smaller but fast growing company.
7 year old, goes to school. I save on after-care, which ain’t cheap. Where I am, one can lose their kids for neglect if s/he comes home to an empty house up to 12 years old.
Hell, when I was in grade school, I walked to and from school, got home, got a snack, watched TV, or played with friends until parents got home.
Since there is statistically less crime now than then, I’m scratching my head over why we all have to be so scared of everything.
There’s no getting around day care for pre-kindergarten kids. My son usually plays all afternoon with a few other boys and girls in the neighborhood. I give him a walkie-talkie for simple communication.
There’s no excuse for how our society deals with childcare. It’s too expensive for most, yet the caretakers are extremely low paid. We need to at least consider something like the European approach.
Right now, if we can’t find service, we can’t work a well paying job, so we fall into poverty and need to get welfare. How is that better than the alternative?
[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the author]
Returning to the office is 'wildly more expensive' today than in 2019—here's how much people are spending ( www.cnbc.com )