Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

As a hack on this, when negotiating to join a company, you generally want to be at {highest title} + {lowest on pay band for that title}.

Sometimes specific title requirements preclude this (e.g. "We don't give new people X title immediately"), but it's a good rule of thumb.

It makes yearly pay bumps much easier for your manager to justify ("So-and-so is well within salary ranges for their title"), versus them having to fight for an exception to policy.



Why not {highest title} + {highest on pay band for that title}? Why not make more money earlier?


The suggestion would be something to do after the pay is already negotiated. You’d want to leave as much room to grow as possible - both money wise as well as your title.


> {highest title} + {lowest on pay band for that title}.

People would find out about this and would leave resenting that they are underpaid.


Not sure you're understanding the point: it's something you, as the employee, request when you're negotiating being hired.

Your hiring manager usually doesn't care, as long as there aren't any req:title limitation issues, because it attracts you and generates less paperwork on their side.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: