I feel like the numbers matter here. I recently moved jobs and the posted salary was the full range for the role. The hiring range is a narrower slice of that range. The range below the hiring target is internal development space. The space above is …well they don’t want to use it. They want a couple years of salary increase to keep you from immediately starting your next job search I think. lol.
They didn’t give a salary range. That was part of the problem. They just asked me what my salary would be. I said £30,000 a year. For a job in fucking London that requires technical experience. Meaning I would have a good 90 minute commute from anywhere I could hope to live.
I recently moved jobs and the posted salary was the full range for the role.
The salary range should always be changing with inflation and cost of living. That most likely means that being hired at the lower band of the range means you are going to stay at that part of the hiring range. If not, it means hitting the top end after a few years is a ceiling and you were probably being underpaid the whole time.
I was a civil servant. The hiring bands were pretty wide well defined there, at least for technical specialists like yours truly. The 50-60% of max range is considered developmental and would normally be given to an internal candidate who was being groomed as part of a succession plan. 60-80% is the sweet spot, and they will go to 90% for an exceptional candidate. Only once in my career did I negotiate 100% of max - and it was because I was taking a pay cut in the new role. I was changing jurisdictions because I was ( and still am) in love.
I feel like the numbers matter here. I recently moved jobs and the posted salary was the full range for the role. The hiring range is a narrower slice of that range. The range below the hiring target is internal development space. The space above is …well they don’t want to use it. They want a couple years of salary increase to keep you from immediately starting your next job search I think. lol.
They didn’t give a salary range. That was part of the problem. They just asked me what my salary would be. I said £30,000 a year. For a job in fucking London that requires technical experience. Meaning I would have a good 90 minute commute from anywhere I could hope to live.
And that still wasn’t low enough.
That’s actually insane.
I wonder if they’ve just sent out a generic rejection without checking it.
That is a possibility I hadn’t considered.
They probably want single people that live ten to a flat and can afford to work for 30,000 a year.
That’s who they’ll get.
The salary range should always be changing with inflation and cost of living. That most likely means that being hired at the lower band of the range means you are going to stay at that part of the hiring range. If not, it means hitting the top end after a few years is a ceiling and you were probably being underpaid the whole time.
I was a civil servant. The hiring bands were pretty wide well defined there, at least for technical specialists like yours truly. The 50-60% of max range is considered developmental and would normally be given to an internal candidate who was being groomed as part of a succession plan. 60-80% is the sweet spot, and they will go to 90% for an exceptional candidate. Only once in my career did I negotiate 100% of max - and it was because I was taking a pay cut in the new role. I was changing jurisdictions because I was ( and still am) in love.