Companies That Refuse to Divulge Their Pay Range

o53djz7qTPY4der on 03/02/2022 - 15:35

I had a very interesting exchange this afternoon with a recruiter for an L&D role at a very popular high street optometrist.

Job sounded great - fantastic opportunity to design materials and learning. However, when we got to the end of the call they asked "What are you currently earning?" and "How much do you want to earn?"

I responded with "What is the range for the role in the PD?". To which, they responded…. "Can't tell you that, it's HR policy to assess skills before discussing money".

I told them to get lost and that I find it offensive to refuse to offer that information.

What do you do or would you do?

Education & Work

Comments

  • bobbified on 03/02/2022 - 15:37
    +6

    'Can't tell you that, it's HR policy to assess skills before discussing money'

    How about if 'the range is $1 to $200K, depending on your skills and experience'?

  • bobbified on 03/02/2022 - 15:43
    +2

    I'm not sure about engineering and others, but corporate roles seem to rarely advertise pay range nowadays.

    • o53djz7qTPY4der on 03/02/2022 - 15:44
      +47

      That's fine… But don't expect the applicant to divulge information that you're not prepared to share yourself.

      • bobbified on 03/02/2022 - 15:47
        +4

        You're right actually. I think back and it's been a while since anyone has asked about my pay when I applied for roles. I used to love it when they did ask though because I'd jack the figures up to the minimum that I wanted. If they still asked me for an interview, I'd know that they're willing to pay more than that.

      • markathome on 03/02/2022 - 18:09
        +10

        If they won't divulge pay range ask for the top-end of what you reasonably conceive.

        According to https://www.payscale.com/research/AU/Job=Optometrist/Salary - 10% of optometrists make more than $112k.

        I would request $136k. If they ask what you're currently on say $124k. A 10% pay rise is not unreasonable for the risk of a new job and we need to factor in the heightened inflationary environment.

        If my figures seem like an insult, ask for an even higher salary.

        My personal opinion: everyone in Australia needs to ask for a pay rise yesterday. Australia is being heavily outperformed by countries that are experiencing high inflation but whose workers are actually prepared to ask for a pay rise.

        post modified after I discovered Payscale seems to underquote

      • p1 ama on 05/02/2022 - 01:18
        +1

        I don't know why you're getting so offended. If someone asks you what you're expecting, that's a good chance to filter out the shit employers who aren't willing to pay you what you're worth.

        • Blitzfx on 06/02/2022 - 13:48
          +3

          Because they're wasting your time going through a pointless interview process only to be screwed over at the end with a shit offer.
          OP is fine with sharing their information so long as they are willing to share theirs so as to avoid wasting everyone's time.

  • life is suffering on 03/02/2022 - 15:44
    +30

    This is outrageous tbh. They need to advertise their range. This is money saving tactic. short sighted imo

    • o53djz7qTPY4der on 03/02/2022 - 15:44
      +38

      100%. I told them it was offensive and to stop wasting my time.

      • subywagon on 03/02/2022 - 16:00
        +4

        If they don't tell me I don't bother.

      • ThithLord on 03/02/2022 - 16:10
        +3

        Good for you. They're a pack of marsholes

      • Kangal on 04/02/2022 - 19:37
        +11

        One thing you could've done better is, before reacting, ask for their full name and who their supervisor is. Then react. And follow through on your angst, by sending the management a really harsh (email) letter.

        This acheives two things:
        - firstly, it makes the HR be seen as unprofessional (and potentially unfit for their job) if you word it correctly
        - secondly, it makes him look stupid and management. So if this really was their policy (doubt it), it might get them to amend the Job Ad and do better moving forward.
        - bonus… even if it achieves nothing, you can be proud that you tried to better the market for everyone, and this applied pressure to their dodgey practices. Potentially damaging the company reputation, the managers reputation, and just putting them on the radar of unions and regulators (someone who has a history of being crappy is more likely believed to have commited a crappy thing down the line when a client or employee complains).

    • arend on 03/02/2022 - 15:48
      +48

      Wow, you'd surely think an optometrist wouldn't be short-sighted!

      • life is suffering on 03/02/2022 - 15:51
        +1

        Lol

      • Gaz1 on 05/02/2022 - 15:36
        +8

        Perhaps they were just making a spectacle of themselves….

      • serpserpserp on 07/02/2022 - 09:13

        Guess it depends on the lens you view this situation through.

    • freefall101 on 03/02/2022 - 16:51
      +12

      I had the job of doing recruitment analytics at a very large employer, it comes down to how employers try to balance keeping salaries secret and generally screwing the whole thing up. Most need to revamp how they manage salaries and banding internally before they change how they advertise to market and they won't do it.

      For a single role, sure, a little cost saving is short sighted. However it happens on every role and it adds up to millions in cost (literally). And it was always the same discussion, this person is the perfect candidate, we have to fill this role, they'll walk if they don't get it because we already discussed it, etc, etc. It's why jumping jobs is the best way to get a pay rise, because once you have an employee they always seem replaceable. No one gets hired at the middle of the road on salary, it's always at the top end, then you need to try keep them inside the banding by not offering much in the way of pay rises in the future.

      It's also why HR stops recruiters from just telling everyone the banding right at the start, particularly in a tough job market, to try get it under control at all. Recruiters don't really have responsibility for much beyond shortlisting a collection of talent, they're not the ones managing the cost of hiring all these people. Plus once someone is told the role pays up to $x, it's really hard to explain to them why they're worth $20k less than that. But you don't want to lose the best candidates by saying the job pays $x early on in the process so they drop out, when an extra $20k might have been well worth spending.

      Personally, I just tell them what I expect for the role. No one needs to know what I earn right now.

      • Oneguyinmelb on 07/02/2022 - 09:21

        Out of curiosity, what would happen if a candidate didn't announce their 'salary expectations' and instead wanted the employer to make the first offer? Do you know if this even happens?

        Seems like it would be the best way to get the range, request 5-10% more and then not feel short changed when accepting the role.

        • freefall101 on 07/02/2022 - 11:03

          It doesn't work that way. You're asked your salary expectation early on in the process, before interviews, to make sure you're not way too expensive for the job. If you refuse to give an answer or play weird games, expect to get dropped from the shortlist as it's usually a red flag that you're just someone chasing money and not serious about wanting to work for the company. The offer comes much, much later and you can argue why you deserve more than your expectation if you want then, part of basic salary negotiation.

          You should do your own market research if you're worried about getting short changed. There's plenty of information out there on what the average salary is for most roles for you to look at and you should know what you're worth. Fishing around for the information with them is blatantly obvious and a good way to get a "thank you for your application, we've gone with another candidate" email unless you have a very unique set of skills that they're looking for and they're willing to tolerate that.

            • freefall101 on 07/02/2022 - 12:34

              @[Deactivated]: That's not what I'm saying at all, where did I say the pay had to be crap? Or you had to sign a declaration of love to the company?

              Some people take a job because it's the path they want to take their career to make more money later. Or they see a chance to move up within the company and make more money. Or they see a way to make the company more money and they'll get rewarded because of that. Some people see it as the most dollars they can get while they look for a job that pays more dollars, THOSE people are the problem and this is a red flag. They'll leave within 6 months.

              And I'm talking professional people who can negotiate salaries and have wide banding. If you're working under an award or site agreement, or an entry level role or whatever, you'll get paid what you're given, there's not much scope there.

              Tell me, would you quit your current job for $1k more a year? Why/why not? And if I was your employer, why should I keep you around if I could find someone who wants to progress in the company? Yes, 90%+ of people bullshit about loving the company, the problem is the ones who so blatantly don't care they pretty much tell the recruiter as much.

    • WT on 04/02/2022 - 13:17
      +10

      pretty sure its because existing employees who they bent over cant see what new hires are starting on.

      e.g employee 1 started 5 years ago, got 1 pay rise but company needs an urgent hire along with inflation they are offering more then what employee 1 is on, but they dont want to give a pay rise to existing staff

  • illogicalerror on 03/02/2022 - 15:44
    +3

    In that situation I ask for what i want plus $20k, see what happens.

    • apiecost on 05/02/2022 - 14:19
      +2

      I did that for a job I didn't want. I applied because it was closer to where I needed to move to, but in my heart I knew I was going to hate it so I jacked it up. They offered it to me and I then felt like I had to take it. Fortunately (for me) the company closed down after 3 months and I got a big redundancy payout.

    • Gaz1 on 05/02/2022 - 15:38

      What happens if they remove you from the shortlist for this reason?
      I guess it depends how much you want the job.
      Unfortunately this practice means they could save a bit of money but miss out of a great person.

  • life is suffering on 03/02/2022 - 15:44
    +3

    Are you a bot?

  • CheapandUsed on 03/02/2022 - 15:52
    +3

    In the past when I have had to play this game my "current salary" always happened to be the lower target I was willing to accept from a new employer.

    I am potentially fortunate that the offer would be mid-high on my desired band. Absolutely aware that this isn't everyone elses experience though.

  • TheMindsetTraveller on 03/02/2022 - 15:59
    +5

    Asking what you "hope" to earn at a new company is becoming more common, and as a prospective employee, it is my responsibility to know what the market is paying for similar jobs I am interested in. Further, knowing what my experience and skills are, and then you can kind of know what you want, with where you are it, and what the market is doing.

    If you think you are worth $100k, yet similar jobs are paying $75k, why would an employer select you when you will get disappointed with the offer anyway?

    • Leiothrix on 04/02/2022 - 08:41
      +13

      If they advertised what they were offering upfront then they wouldn't waste the time of job-seekers or their own time with inquiries or pointless interviews.

      • AustriaBargain on 05/02/2022 - 14:03

        But why settle for 75k value workers by advertising 75k when they can advertise no specific price and chance getting a 100k value worker for 75k?

        • Leiothrix on 05/02/2022 - 15:04
          +4

          You get what you pay for. If a 100k worker actually accepts the job they're either not going to hang around for long or will become a 75k worker.

          Or perhaps become a 50k worker because they're pissed at being so undervalued and you're stuck paying 75k.

          Recruitment and training is expensive. Companies trying to be cheap like this is penny wise and pound foolish, but it's easier to measure tangible expenses rather than intangible benefits.

          • Blitzfx on 06/02/2022 - 13:55

            @Leiothrix:

            Or perhaps become a 50k worker because they're pissed at being so undervalued and you're stuck paying 75k.

            Reminds me of office space where he deliberately tries to get himself fired by under performing lol

  • dust on 03/02/2022 - 16:00
    +1

    This is fairly common unfortunately. Nothing stopping you from adding $20k to your current salary and another $20-$50k on top of that as your salary expectation?

    • o53djz7qTPY4der on 03/02/2022 - 16:01
      +11

      I don't have a problem with telling them. I have an issue with them not telling me their range.

  • orangetrain on 03/02/2022 - 16:01
    +7

    As I tell everyone, asking for salary expectations rise with a 30k-70k salary fee when they don't list or say it. They say it when I have to ask among thousands of ads? 15k-45k extra.

    The fee is for time wasted on fishing expeditions by American wannabes. Make it easy and upfront and I'll also be easy and upfront.

  • DreadPirateRoberts on 03/02/2022 - 16:01
    +5

    You can either do "my salary at my old role is for a different skill set so a direct comparison is not applicable here", inflate and lie, or have the conversation and say "I need to know the salary range before progressing any further".

  • spiff on 03/02/2022 - 16:01
    +2

    I don't think it's too outrageous and definitely not offensive. If there is no advertised range (which is common), then it's up to you to communicate your expectation and if they can meet it, great, if not, then move on.

    • baskinghobo on 05/02/2022 - 13:32
      +1

      But the thing is it then it becomes the responsibility of the job seeker to research the expected salary range for each and every role. People obviously want to avoid selling themselves short but they also want to avoid asking for too much either as then they risk having someone elses application considered over theirs. And most people tend to sell themselves short because they would rather get the job than be rejected for the latter. It basically works like bidding on freelancer sites.

      • Aureus on 05/02/2022 - 14:11
        +1

        In my experience when you ask more then they are willing to spend, they will let you know and then you can either adjust your ask our tell them you are not interested.

  • iNeed2Pee on 03/02/2022 - 16:05
    +5

    Very poor form not telling you the range.

  • rektrading on 03/02/2022 - 16:06
    -6

    I told them to get lost and that I find it offensive to refuse to offer that information.

    Clearly not a hireable material.

  • djsweet on 03/02/2022 - 16:15
    +12

    I've never had someone tell me their range. I've just told them what I want, and that's it. If they don't offer me what I want, I don't take the job - simple. I have had someone ask for my salary once. I just told them I'd signed a confidentiality agreement and couldn't reveal it. I imagine any company playing silly buggers with salary is probably not where you want to work anyway. I'm sure you made the right choice in turning them down.

  • El cheepo on 03/02/2022 - 16:16
    +4

    The answers to how much do you currently earn and how much would you like to earn are:

    I currently earn (what you actually want to be earning) and would like to earn (a reasonable/negotiable %) more than that.

    And see where it goes.

  • poboy on 03/02/2022 - 16:23
    +15

    If a recruiter is proactively calling you about a role, they should give the range. They are the ones trying to woo you.

    • o53djz7qTPY4der on 03/02/2022 - 16:24
      +20

      Precisely… They called me.

      • poboy on 03/02/2022 - 16:25
        +1

        They have always told me the range when I asked.

  • TheBilly on 03/02/2022 - 16:48
    +2

    I wouldn't take offence to it but I also wouldn't take it seriously. If they wouldn't divulge the pay range I would have just given them a ridiculous figure.

  • [Deactivated] on 03/02/2022 - 16:50
    +2

    Request a high salary, lie if you need to about current, no way employer can confirm anyhow. Plenty of desperate businesses looking for staff as unemployment rate too low

  • djones145 on 03/02/2022 - 16:52
    +2

    with a name like that i need to go to spec savers

  • Drakesy on 03/02/2022 - 17:08
    +2

    Yeah.
    If a recruiter isn't transparent about wages i don't give them a second more.

    The amount that come forward with opportunities and when pressed about renumeration get flakey i think should be treated with the same transparency.

    As in they're the ones wanting your business, make them work for it.

  • Wade on 03/02/2022 - 17:25
    +6

    You say you don't want to divulge information, yet you've accidentally put your password as your username.

  • fantombloo on 03/02/2022 - 17:31

    What are you currently earning?

    Not really their business is it?

    How much do you want to earn?

    Fair enough question as long as they offer how much they want to pay.

  • dizzle on 03/02/2022 - 18:51
    +2

    I find it worse that many jobs don't even tell you the company in the advertisment (recruiting agencies don't want you contacting the company directly). How do I know I want to work for you if I don't know who you are?

    • bobbified on 03/02/2022 - 19:39
      +1

      ….don't even tell you the company in the advertisment (recruiting agencies don't want you contacting the company directly).

      Of course not. If you contact the company directly after seeing their ad and get hired, then company doesn't have to pay the recruiter commission. The recruiter usually has to call around their own networks to find that available role and then advertise it. They don't want to be doing it for free.

      How do I know I want to work for you if I don't know who you are?

      If you're interested, like everything else, call the number on the ad.

    • Quantumcat on 04/02/2022 - 09:21
      +4

      Often you can google phrases in the ad and find the company website that way (if they have a careers page).

    • virhlpool on 05/02/2022 - 01:32
      +1

      I find it silly that even companies with full-fledged HR team need to use recruiters who then end up not mentioning the company's name in the job ads so that candidates don't apply to the company's portal directly.

  • temporiser on 04/02/2022 - 07:22

    I would tell them to get lost.

    I see plenty of advertisements on seek that don’t have any salary information which is annoying.

    In my area of expertise the salary can vary considerably

  • tabitha731 on 04/02/2022 - 07:34
    +2

    Always do a quick linkedin search on the recruiter you’re talking to, that will help u determine if you’re dealing with someone who’s got experience in recruiting or just another body to front to the cold calls to candidates. Ypu will find that a lot of recruiters were receptionists or so e other role irrelevant to recruiting, and they’ve just landed in recruiting coz they think the commission is great.

  • Ade99 on 04/02/2022 - 07:35

    Commensurate with skills and experience I would bring to the role…..

  • [Deactivated] on 04/02/2022 - 07:52
    +1

    i always ask how much they pay before going to ANY interviews in person

    • kiitos on 04/02/2022 - 14:05

      Have you stopped the process for many of them when you found out the pay?

      • [Deactivated] on 04/02/2022 - 17:08

        yes, if it wasnt close to what i wanted.

  • FairDeal on 04/02/2022 - 08:39
    +4

    Yes it's rediculous that HR companies don't say or put the pay rate in the job advertisement. What's even more rediculous is that people have accepted this practice! I liken it to a real estate agent selling your house (in the case of the HR agent YOU are the house) but not telling you the price they are asking for YOUR house!

    Of course the reason they do this is because they are not trying to find the BEST person for the job they are trying to find the CHEAPEST so they can increase their already bloated margins to cream as much as they can off the rate the employer is offering.

    This HR agency system is corrupt, broken and legacy as since the invention of Seek and other online job sites they offer little to no value for the rediculous ONGOING commission they take from the workers pay packet.

    • derrida derider on 04/02/2022 - 20:54
      +2

      One big reason firms get very cagey about advertising salaries is because they don't want their EXISTING employees to see what market salaries actually are. Can't have them asking for a pay rise.

  • HelpMeiCantSee on 04/02/2022 - 09:17
    +6

    Yeah, stuff em. My response to those questions would be “if you’re asking, I can only assume you believe in transparency regarding wages, and freely discuss them amongst employees. What is the pay range you are offering?”

    I suspect they’d freak because they have a no wage discussion policy internally.

    Corporate HR can eat a fat one. They’ve sown the seed of contempt for decades, and now that it’s finally a buyers market they still want to play games?

    Transparency is the only way forward. Clear expectations and clear offers. Stop wasting peoples time.

    • Vote for Pedro on 05/02/2022 - 10:45

      Lol @ wage discussion policy. This aint corporate America.

      I mean, yes there are contract clauses but ffs it’s unaustrayan

      • HelpMeiCantSee on 06/02/2022 - 13:14

        Totally agree mate! It’s utter BS

  • KaTst3R on 04/02/2022 - 10:22
    +2

    It is a waste of everyone's time when no pay range is discussed. I have been through a recruitment process that requires a task to be completed that takes a few days only to be told the budget for the position is 20% less than my current pay at the next interview to present my work. I would have stopped the process up front if I knew that figure early on. Lesson learned.

  • MrBear on 04/02/2022 - 11:01
    +2

    "Can't tell you that, it's HR policy to assess skills before discussing money"

    "Well I can't tell you my current salary because it is against o53djz7qTPY4der's policy. And you called me, soooo…"

    Then go silent.

  • afah0447 on 04/02/2022 - 12:51
    +19

    Employers in Australia are unlike any other in the OECD. They are loath to ever raise wages and there is solid reason for this. The LNP for the last two decades have done all they can to depress wages as much as possible. This has led to a mindset amongst employers national wide that employees mean nothing and are a cost to be minimised as much as possible and never ever raise wages. ‘The government has your back’.

    The Award Wage system is stuck to religiously and they don’t realise that it is the ‘minimum’ wage, not the market clearing wage. They complain about not being able to find staff, offer peanuts, expect people to work and then when they can’t attract staff hit up the government for support. Employers don’t understand they need to pay staff more and then pass on the costs to their customers. There is a lot of pent up savings in the economy which will flow through. But no. There is an ingrained mindset in Australia that wages should never move higher because they have the support of the LNP who will do all they can to depress wages.

    Now that the pendulum has swung to employees, employers are still slow to raise wages. It is absolute madness and wage increases have to happen…but don’t expect any help from the LNP. This is a real problem for the economy with inflation on the march.

      • afah0447 on 04/02/2022 - 15:05
        +24

        • Howard 'Workchoices' - Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs).

        • Registered Organisations Commission.

        • Australian Building and Construction Commission.

        • Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption - which found NOTHING.

        • Abolition to the right to general strike.

        • 5 per cent 'efficiency dividends' for the public service.

        • Restructuring of Awards to reduce indexation of hourly rates year-on-year and reduction of workplace entitlements.

        • stacking the Fair Commission with 'friendly' Commissioners to ensure wage negotiations always favour employers.

        • constant demonising of unions and making them out to be the devil incarnate (if it wasnt for unions we wouldn't have sick leave and annual leave. Check your history).

        • The constant push to casualise the workforce to ensure employers have no need to pay leave entitlements and can fire people on a whim.

        • Not enforcing the legal right for casuals to have their employment made permanent after 1 year.

        • Allowing the shadow labour force of 'contractors' and 'ABN holders' in jobs that clearly of an employer employee nature.

          • afah0447 on 04/02/2022 - 15:20
            +22

            @jv: Oh you mean when Rudd saw us through the GFC when Australia was the only OECD nation not to go into recession! When Wayne Swan was named Treasurer of the Year by the European Central Bank (that bastion of socialism)

            When the LNP cried blue murder about government stimulus and debt which is now mightily dwarfed by the current debt the LNP has piled on. And much of that going to the private sector to sure up their balance sheets and bonuses.

            Where are Tony Abbotts crys now of 'budget emergency' and 'budget crisis'? The LNP have piled on more debt in their 8 years of office than all debt the ALP have ever contributed.

            I know the facts hurt.

              • afah0447 on 04/02/2022 - 15:42
                +19

                @jv: You just lost the debate mate.

                …but if you want to lower the tenor of the argument to a death count let’s not look past Morrison’s (and in particular Colbeck’s) stellar handling of COVID19 in nursing homes.

                  • Zondor on 04/02/2022 - 17:01
                    +8

                    @jv: Great joke

                  • borrisz0r on 04/02/2022 - 22:25
                    +11

                    @jv: Except that aged care is a federal responsibility, and it makes up the majority of the COVID deaths.

                    Back in your box JV.

                    • jv on 04/02/2022 - 22:42
                      -7

                      @borrisz0r:

                      Except that aged care is a federal responsibility

                      What about the other states then? Why did the vast majority of the age care deaths only happen in Victoria?

                      Maybe it was because Dan stuffed up hotel quarantine and let the virus run rampant across the state killing almost a 1,000 people in Victoria.

                      He should be in jail.

                      Back in your box borrisz0r.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join