Re: In Defense of Salary History

[SuePStewrt -at- AOL -dot- COM]

Chris Willis says, in part:

>>However, as someone
who is currently invovled in the interviewing process, I understand the
frustration that leads to asking for salary history in a resume cover letter.

>>I'm seeking candidates to fulfill a (requirements deleted)  >>I've sat
accross the table from a fine writer with a
journalism background who doesn't even know what hypertext is but wants to
start at a minimum of $40K a year. I've talked with a marketing writer who
says that she's interested in learning these skills but can't work for less
than $40/hr. It's frustrating to spend time interviewing someone, thinking
they might be a fine addition to the team, only to find out that their
expectations don't match their skill in this area. <snip> However, if
someone's not willing to bet that they
can come up to speed and make themselves worth a higher wage in the long run,
why should I? It's a waste of each of our time to even proceed with an
interview.  Therein lies the value of the salary history.<<

I agree with you, BUT I submit that this has nothing whatsoever to do with
what the candidate is making now, was making last year, or made five years
ago.  You say yourself:  "their expectations."  This is "salary required" or
"salary expected", NOT salary history.  What I make now or made then is
frankly none of your business.

If you want to ask what it would take to get me to change employers, then I
might be willing to give you an answer, hedged about with caveats and
if-thens, and you may be sure it will be on the high side to give me some
negotiating room.

 Better yet, why don't you just tell me what the pay range is for the
position, and then I'll tell you whether I'm interested?

But, you say, I don't want to tip my hand.  Thank you.  Neither do I.  Why
should I tell you how much I want if you won't give me an idea of what you
might offer?  Most companies will low-ball if they can; and if someone
offered you 40% more than your current salary, would you say, "Oh, that's not
necessary; I'll move for a 15% increase."?

It's a game.  I've been on both sides of it, and it never ceases to irritate
me.  I worked for a large company with set salary ranges for various job
grades, but I wasn't allowed to tell a candidate what the range was for a
position.  I've also, like you, spent hours interviewing a candidate who
finally confessed s/he had to have 50% more than I could offer.

It still seems to me that it is the company itself that can beat this game;
simply publish the pay range for the position in the ad.  You will get no
more unusable resumes than you do now, and but by submitting resumes the
qualified candidates signal their willingness to work for what you can pay.

JMHO.

sue stewart
suepstewrt -at- aol -dot- com