Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why you never, ever disclose what you currently make. Companies exploit it. Their concern should not be with what you are currently making, it should be with getting you to work for their organization.
When they ask: What are you currently making - be vague. Or ask them, 'What is the pay range for this position?'

Very wise, in fact, too wise for most of the idiots who post here.

Wise but impractical for organizations that require you to report a detailed salary history as part of the hiring process

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is why you never, ever disclose what you currently make. Companies exploit it. Their concern should not be with what you are currently making, it should be with getting you to work for their organization.
When they ask: What are you currently making - be vague. Or ask them, 'What is the pay range for this position?'

Very wise, in fact, too wise for most of the idiots who post here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:no doubt the recruiter used my current comp as a start point

Why would you tell them this?

I am confident that I'm undercompensated at my current company (have solid evidence of this, so it's not just a hunch)

no one is under compensated: you earn what you deserve. Feel undercompensated? Get another company to pay you what you think you deserve.

Anonymous wrote:This is why you never, ever disclose what you currently make. Companies exploit it. Their concern should not be with what you are currently making, it should be with getting you to work for their organization.
When they ask: What are you currently making - be vague. Or ask them, 'What is the pay range for this position?'

Anonymous wrote:no doubt the recruiter used my current comp as a start point

I am confident that I'm undercompensated at my current company (have solid evidence of this, so it's not just a hunch)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We have this policy at work. It's way to hard to manage different accruals for different employees. We also had issues with incumbent employees finding out that new hires negotiated more PTO and then wanting it for themselves.

Yeah, I can appreciate that. But it sure makes it hard to either attract more senior level people (15 - 20 years experience, right in that sweet spot of their career) as a recruiter, and/or to leave as an employee.

I've technically got unlimited PTO, but in practicality I have 5 weeks (+ 2 weeks holidays). I would be hard, hard pressed to drop back to 2 weeks and many companies don't even offer that until a year in.

It's a tough choice.