How to approach money when speaking with prospective employer?

[kalrith]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: D1gger

Originally posted by: joshsquall
I figure I'll just tell them I need a 15-20% raise to consider switching jobs. It's not like I need a new job, I just happened to see the ad and figured I'd give it a shot.

From an employer?s perspective, the moment a potential employee made that statement to me in an interview, I would be mentally filing his resume in the trash bin.

I try to only employ people who are interested in; working in a good environment, the challenge of the position, the future potential job growth, and then the money.

If the initial focus is on "I must be paid", then I know that the next time someone offers them an increase across the street, they will be chasing the dollars. I try to make my company a good place to work first, and then make sure that people are paid fairly.

You probably don?t mean it, but in this thread you are coming across as very elitist and egotistical. No employer is likely to want those attributes.

Granted, demanding a 15%-20% raise as incentive to change jobs isn't going to intice any employer. The OP is way way off with his motivations and would be wise just to stay where he's at if he doesn't need a new job, particularly if he is going to make demands of compensation above market like that.
However, and pardon me, but your post is apologist BS. A positive work environment BEGINS with properly and fairly compensated employees. That's why your employees show up to work in the first place. Sorry to break it to you, but people don't go to work for the "challenge of the position" or to "work in a good environment." Those aren't benefits, those are givens, things to be expected. People go to work to get paid. PERIOD. Don't believe me? Do you think any of your employees would keep showing up if you stopped paying them? Hell no, they wouldn't. In fact, they'd sue you, now wouldn't they?

I both agree and disagree with your statements. I agree that people would not spend 40 hours each week at their jobs for free. However, some people would take a pay cut get a more-fulfilling job.

Far-fetched example: You're a factory worker who does heavy labor in a very hot, non-air-conditioned factory. You make $60k per year. You're offered a job as a video-game tester. You would work in an air-conditioned facility for the same number of hours, but you would only make $55k per year. Now tell me how many people here would not choose the pay cut for the more "fulfilling" job.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: kalrith

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: D1gger

Originally posted by: joshsquall
I figure I'll just tell them I need a 15-20% raise to consider switching jobs. It's not like I need a new job, I just happened to see the ad and figured I'd give it a shot.

From an employer?s perspective, the moment a potential employee made that statement to me in an interview, I would be mentally filing his resume in the trash bin.

I try to only employ people who are interested in; working in a good environment, the challenge of the position, the future potential job growth, and then the money.

If the initial focus is on "I must be paid", then I know that the next time someone offers them an increase across the street, they will be chasing the dollars. I try to make my company a good place to work first, and then make sure that people are paid fairly.

You probably don?t mean it, but in this thread you are coming across as very elitist and egotistical. No employer is likely to want those attributes.

Granted, demanding a 15%-20% raise as incentive to change jobs isn't going to intice any employer. The OP is way way off with his motivations and would be wise just to stay where he's at if he doesn't need a new job, particularly if he is going to make demands of compensation above market like that.
However, and pardon me, but your post is apologist BS. A positive work environment BEGINS with properly and fairly compensated employees. That's why your employees show up to work in the first place. Sorry to break it to you, but people don't go to work for the "challenge of the position" or to "work in a good environment." Those aren't benefits, those are givens, things to be expected. People go to work to get paid. PERIOD. Don't believe me? Do you think any of your employees would keep showing up if you stopped paying them? Hell no, they wouldn't. In fact, they'd sue you, now wouldn't they?

I both agree and disagree with your statements. I agree that people would not spend 40 hours each week at their jobs for free. However, some people would take a pay cut get a more-fulfilling job.

Far-fetched example: You're a factory worker who does heavy labor in a very hot, non-air-conditioned factory. You make $60k per year. You're offered a job as a video-game tester. You would work in an air-conditioned facility for the same number of hours, but you would only make $55k per year. Now tell me how many people here would not choose the pay cut for the more "fulfilling" job.

Within the same industry, most people aren't going to find such a discrepancy between two working situations. With everything else the same, people are going to take the job with higher pay. I am a generally happy person and I believe I'd be happy working at either of the two jobs I have available. Therefore, I want the one that pays the most.

 

[kalrith]

I agree that my example was beyond the scope of most people's employment decision. However, my wife and her friend each got the same degree, work basically the same job, but have very different work experiences. My wife's company is very laid back. They have a nature trail and allow the employees to go out for a 30-minute walk if they want to. If they need to do something like running up to the ATM and it takes less than 1 hour, then they don't want them to count that as personal time; they instead get paid for it as though they were working.

Her friend is expected to arrive two hours early for training and take training manuals home at night. They stress being busy all the time a lot more than at my wife's position. It sounds like the kind of place that is still going to require the extra work and hours after the training is done. Even if she's getting paid $5k more per year, I don't think the money outweighs the better work experience that my wife has.

 

[realEZE]

Originally posted by: mooglemania85

Originally posted by: joshsquall
I really don't want to waste my time or the prospective employer's time with formal interviews and such if they are looking to pay someone less than what I'm currently earning.

Don't mention $. At least not during the early interviews (assuming there will be more than 1). Although you don't want to waste your time, it's important to show / give the impression that you're interested in the position and not solely motivated by $$. Most employers should have an idea of what compensation level would be appropriate depending on your work history/educ/exp., and if after interviewing you feel that the initial offer you receive is somewhat low, that is the time to start negotiating a better package.

If your research on the co. indicates that their pay scale is lower than what you are making now, then you need to ask yourself whether there are other intangibles which warrant sending your resume.

I'm somewhat in disagreement here. I think this is a natural response, which is to convey to the employer that you are above material concerns. In many cases, this can be counter-productive.

Employers pay for talent. Every prospective employee has a minimum salary expectation, and I would be wary of any that did not. Top talent demand top dollars.
An employee that is driven by monetary rewards is a known quantity. Many performance management techniques are based on these types of employees.

You are completely within your rank to ask about pay range for any position. Whether you get a straight answer, well that's a story for another day...

 

[SSSnail]

That's what offers and counter offers are for. Typically, they'd pay you what they think you're worth base on the interview and your resume. Anything after that is up for negotiation, I'd worry more about how to sell myself during the interview.

 

[realEZE]

Originally posted by: D1gger
I try to only employ people who are interested in; working in a good environment, the challenge of the position, the future potential job growth, and then the money.

How do you reward your top performers?
Sorry to sound trite, but my experience says you will not retain talent with that lure.

Someone said it before already, within a given industry and company size, you will be hard pressed to find much disparity in working conditions and job growth potential.

 

[yowolabi]

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: D1gger

Originally posted by: joshsquall


I figure I'll just tell them I need a 15-20% raise to consider switching jobs. It's not like I need a new job, I just happened to see the ad and figured I'd give it a shot.

From an employer?s perspective, the moment a potential employee made that statement to me in an interview, I would be mentally filing his resume in the trash bin.

I try to only employ people who are interested in; working in a good environment, the challenge of the position, the future potential job growth, and then the money.

If the initial focus is on "I must be paid", then I know that the next time someone offers them an increase across the street, they will be chasing the dollars. I try to make my company a good place to work first, and then make sure that people are paid fairly.

You probably don?t mean it, but in this thread you are coming across as very elitist and egotistical. No employer is likely to want those attributes.

How am I coming across as elitist and egotistical? I have a job where I'm happy. More money is the only thing that would lure me away. I don't want to waste my time (taking a day off from work, preparing, getting dressed up, driving there, etc.) and their time (preparing to interview me, interview me, decide if they want to hire me) if they aren't going to offer me enough money to make me leave my current job. That isn't elitist or egotistical, that's just logical.

That's not the way things are done, and it is egotistical of you to think a company will change it's hiring process just for you. The issue of money will be brought up, just not this quickly. If it's not worth 1 day out of your life to actually go through a first interview unless you get a money guarantee, be prepared for a lot of missed opportunities.

Someone who better understands the process and is willing to work within it will get both the job and the higher pay. These things tend to work themselves out.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: yowolabi

Originally posted by: joshsquall

Originally posted by: D1gger

Originally posted by: joshsquall


I figure I'll just tell them I need a 15-20% raise to consider switching jobs. It's not like I need a new job, I just happened to see the ad and figured I'd give it a shot.

From an employer?s perspective, the moment a potential employee made that statement to me in an interview, I would be mentally filing his resume in the trash bin.

I try to only employ people who are interested in; working in a good environment, the challenge of the position, the future potential job growth, and then the money.

If the initial focus is on "I must be paid", then I know that the next time someone offers them an increase across the street, they will be chasing the dollars. I try to make my company a good place to work first, and then make sure that people are paid fairly.

You probably don?t mean it, but in this thread you are coming across as very elitist and egotistical. No employer is likely to want those attributes.

How am I coming across as elitist and egotistical? I have a job where I'm happy. More money is the only thing that would lure me away. I don't want to waste my time (taking a day off from work, preparing, getting dressed up, driving there, etc.) and their time (preparing to interview me, interview me, decide if they want to hire me) if they aren't going to offer me enough money to make me leave my current job. That isn't elitist or egotistical, that's just logical.

That's not the way things are done, and it is egotistical of you to think a company will change it's hiring process just for you. The issue of money will be brought up, just not this quickly. If it's not worth 1 day out of your life to actually go through a first interview unless you get a money guarantee, be prepared for a lot of missed opportunities.

Someone who better understands the process and is willing to work within it will get both the job and the higher pay. These things tend to work themselves out.

So a company would rather waste 10-20 hours of it's employees time trying to interview someone than be up front with a salary range? Don't kid yourself, every company has a salary range in mind when they place an ad for a position. I'd rather they just tell me what the range is so I don't waste their time that could be better spent looking at other candidates who are willing to accept a lower salary. This isn't egotistical. This is business and the way things are done. I'm trying to save them from wasting their time and my time.

To be clear, I'm not talking a difference of two or three thousand dollars. I'm talking about the difference between $40k and $70k.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: purbeast0

Never ... EVER ... tell a potential employer how much you are currently making. Trust me, I learned the hard way.

What you currently make should have absolutely no influence on what they will potentially offer you, and by you telling them how much you make, it will in turn influence their offer.

Exactly. What someone is paid is often really not what they are worth.

I would reply that you feel you are undercompensated and the reason why you are looking for other options. I would go on to say that I am looking for what's typical for my skillset and experience.

If they add-on that they are looking for someone lower than what I would expect, I would simply say that we are not a good match for each other.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: D1gger

Originally posted by: joshsquall
I figure I'll just tell them I need a 15-20% raise to consider switching jobs. It's not like I need a new job, I just happened to see the ad and figured I'd give it a shot.

From an employer?s perspective, the moment a potential employee made that statement to me in an interview, I would be mentally filing his resume in the trash bin.

I try to only employ people who are interested in; working in a good environment, the challenge of the position, the future potential job growth, and then the money.

If the initial focus is on "I must be paid", then I know that the next time someone offers them an increase across the street, they will be chasing the dollars. I try to make my company a good place to work first, and then make sure that people are paid fairly.

You probably don?t mean it, but in this thread you are coming across as very elitist and egotistical. No employer is likely to want those attributes.

Granted, demanding a 15%-20% raise as incentive to change jobs isn't going to intice any employer. The OP is way way off with his motivations and would be wise just to stay where he's at if he doesn't need a new job, particularly if he is going to make demands of compensation above market like that.
However, and pardon me, but your post is apologist BS. A positive work environment BEGINS with properly and fairly compensated employees. That's why your employees show up to work in the first place. Sorry to break it to you, but people don't go to work for the "challenge of the position" or to "work in a good environment." Those aren't benefits, those are givens, things to be expected. People go to work to get paid. PERIOD. Don't believe me? Do you think any of your employees would keep showing up if you stopped paying them? Hell no, they wouldn't. In fact, they'd sue you, now wouldn't they?

QFT...if the previous poster is in the hiring department, they live in a fairy tale.

Also there are employers that want egos and elitest...maybe Walmart doesn't apply though.

For most of the US, compensation is > than any other part of the job. However; those that are looking for any opportunity to raise their pay are often not the best employees.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: joshsquall
Within the same industry, most people aren't going to find such a discrepancy between two working situations. With everything else the same, people are going to take the job with higher pay. I am a generally happy person and I believe I'd be happy working at either of the two jobs I have available. Therefore, I want the one that pays the most.

I beg to differ on discrepancies in the same line of work. Corporate culture is big on my list when I choose to stay or leave a job.

 

[puffff]

Originally posted by: D1gger

Originally posted by: joshsquall


I figure I'll just tell them I need a 15-20% raise to consider switching jobs. It's not like I need a new job, I just happened to see the ad and figured I'd give it a shot.

From an employer?s perspective, the moment a potential employee made that statement to me in an interview, I would be mentally filing his resume in the trash bin.

I try to only employ people who are interested in; working in a good environment, the challenge of the position, the future potential job growth, and then the money.

If the initial focus is on "I must be paid", then I know that the next time someone offers them an increase across the street, they will be chasing the dollars. I try to make my company a good place to work first, and then make sure that people are paid fairly.

You probably don?t mean it, but in this thread you are coming across as very elitist and egotistical. No employer is likely to want those attributes.

Unless you're in non-profit, why wouldnt you want a money driven person? An employee with dollar signs in his head might be more inclined to care about the company's bottom line as well, since if the company becomes more profitable, his slice of the pie gets greater. This would be especially true for small companies.

To answer the OPs question, it's fine to bring up the topic of money in the first interview. Bring it up with the HR representative, not with the potential managers and colleagues.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: puffff
Bring it up with the HR representative, not with the potential managers and colleagues.

That's probably a good way to do it. Meet with your 'boss' then request an HR sit down.

Many larger companies though run you through HR first.

I had my initial phone interview with someone from HR. They were trying to ask me tech questions which they wanted a yes or no type answer when there really wasn't one.

I was able to make it to the 3rd interview and final sit down with management and hiring.