|
Kalenn Istarion posted:If they are bringing you in like that odds are they will step up. Yep. Counter-offer with the approved salary and watch them blink. If they don't, toss a call to your friends. 
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 12:34 |
|
|
quote:Bonus estimates' worth depends to some extent on the firm offering them. I have a target range on my bonus but the company I work for has trended well below the disclosed target ranges for people at my level for the last couple years for ~reasons~. I'm still happy with the actual bonus ranges that are in effect but you need to get a feel for that or assume it's zero. Yep. Unless you have reliable inside income (aka not what HR says) on how the company treats its bonuses, always treat bonuses as surprise income and don't count on them to make ends meet.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:I think asking for more significant figures than should be relevant makes you sound like a goof. It also depends on the offer you received. I wouldn't go any further than a $500 breakdown unless the starting offer did, in which case you can match their sig figs. My most recent offer from a company was delivered to single dollar resolution, so I had clear negotiation room with that, but most don't do that.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
quote:I am graduating with a Bsc in chemical engineering in a few weeks. I have 2 internships, 1 research project that I presented at a national conference, have club leadership experience, and have a GPA of 3.2. I started 8 years ago in pharma with a master's degree and no relevant internships at $67,000. You are going to start in a much more expensive area than I did for $3,000 below the national average for the average Engineer I level role. Per 142 salary reports in the bay area for "Engineer I", the average is around $82K with a range of $70K-90K reported. Not the most reliable metric, of course, but it's pretty close to what I expected honestly. If you like the job, PTO and company and can make it work in that expensive of an area, it could be worth it to take at that salary for a foot in the door, industry-wise. You'll make way the hell more once you job-hop once or twice. Whether it's worth it or not is up to you. It's tough to negotiate upward on entry offers, but there's no point not trying, especially if relo is involved. Sundae fucked around with this message at 21:19 on May 27, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 27, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Same general focus, even!  (If you're doing solid oral dose process design and ever have any questions, please feel free to PM me. I'm in process and formulation development. ) Knowing the process focus now, I'd say that $70-75K for that is pretty standard on the east coast for entry-level in that specialization. I can't vouch for the west coast, though.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
Hotbod Handsomeface posted:Ok so I countered at 75 and they got back to me saying that 65 was the max. Totally cordial and professional. I am ok with this offer and I think that the experience is worth it so I'll take it, relocate and reevaluate where I am at in 2 years. The benefits are also better by a high margin than my peers. I feel good that I tried. Glad that you're okay with it. $52K anywhere in California is hilariously, almost insultingly low for a ChemE unless he's gotten stuck in academia. That being said, first year / entry-level people get hosed hard all the time in the sciences, so as long as he's willing to jump ship in a few years, he'll make way more on the second role. Good luck!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
Bitchkrieg posted:Update: Everything went better than anticipated. Well done!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2016 06:00
|
|
|
Philip Rivers posted:They blew up the offer. Goddrat. Sorry, dude. They loving suck.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
Philip Rivers posted:Ugh gently caress my life why would they even make an offer in the first place if there was someone in front of me Because they're still cheap awful fucks and they were hoping to lowball the overall job. You went over their lowball threshold so they went with the other candidate. Also possible: When you accepted the lowball offer, they'd go to the other candidate and try to bargain him down, then rescind yours anyway. No matter how you look at it, you dodged a bullet here. Seriously.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
"I really like what your company has to offer, but I have a very generous offer from another firm that I have to consider. If you can increase your offer to X [or whatever your terms actually are], I can guarantee immediate acceptance. Otherwise, I'll give your offer full consideration and get back to you by your deadline with my decision." I'm 2 for 2 on getting my demand (or most of it) with a line like that. I tend to offer multiple options if they're reasonable for me, like "increase the bonus, or increase salary by X, or signing bonus of Y, or vesting period reduction of Z" sorts of stuff, depending on what works for me to make the offer feel good. The more flexibility you have in terms of what meets your compensation requirements (at least with large companies which may have weird rules about what they can and cannot change in offers), the more likely you get what you want.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:My chief engineer shot down me moving saying I was critical to the program. My current group manager was slightly annoyed as they were trying to get a promotion for me already through the convoluted mess and don't like that continuing to do that looks like they're responding to me making a threat. Negotiating subverted :/ Yep - external promotion time now. I also agree with Asur 100%. The companies that actually let you do the internal transfer thing, even if they say they allow it, are few and far between.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
"This person is critical to our operations" is the code-phrase to exempt your worker from any transfer opportunities. You're not actually critical, this way your manager doesn't have to find a replacement worker (or get stuck down a man if you're in a reduce-by-attrition phase). HR isn't going to take "look, it's really inconvenient right now" as an answer usually, but their policy pretty much always has a clause about critical roles. That's also assuming you don't have literally the minimum possible number of employees in your department, in which case you are critical but not for a good reason. So long story short, any place that talks about lean staffing and claims to have robust internal transfer options is a lying sack of poo poo. They're (almost but not quite) mutually exclusive and completely incompatible.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
quote:This is the situation, where I work is massively expanding Yeah, this isn't quite the environment I was talking about. If you're growing as fast as you can and just haven't been able to bring in enough people for everything yet, that's very different from a company that scales its staff to the exact amount needed to do the steady-state job, with no overage or backup for turnover, vacation, illness, etc. My previous company dropped my department from 32 people to 7 while expanding the total workload, as an example. The justification was basically "because they can," except for one executive who liked to refer to it as "attrition by exhaustion." Everyone who tried to escape to other roles in the company was either blocked as "critical staff" or ended up with a multi-job situation (my former manager, as an example) where she technically started a new job, but it was with the understanding that she was still responsible for all of her old department's work as well for the next 6 months, subject to renewal at company's discretion if they couldn't find an appropriate replacement in 6 months. (SURPRISE!!! THEY DIDN'T even try!) If you can't get promoted / transferred because your company is expanding or growing and hasn't caught up to scale yet, or the project is seriously that critical to the company's future, blah blah, that's something where you could have a foreseeable end to the nonsense. It's when that period ends and they still call you critical that the old Get-Out Frog becomes the definite right answer. quote:Many, many people from the thing I am working on to the thing that wanted to take me have transferred and been promoted while doing so. So they just hate you, you mean? Like, unless I'm misreading this part, it's sounding like you're supporting that you should get out ASAP. (My interpretation: Lots of people get to transfer from your department and get promoted, but not you, because you're being called critical but the others weren't.) If I'm not totally off in left field in that interpretation, 
Sundae fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Nov 21, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
I have a reverse question (re: thread title) for this thread. I live in the SF bay area and make an astronomical sum of money compared to elsewhere in the USA, but being the bay area, it's still not enough to ever own a house out here or retire. If you know that your current salary is drastically higher than what any incoming offer for a comparable position would be anywhere else, would you give your current salary info in an attempt to anchor the salary on the high end of their pay range? Or is that just begging for a "reject outright, we can't afford him" as an answer? I'm okay with a pay cut to move back east since it'll also cut a zero off of the house prices, but I of course also want to squeeze every last drop from an employer that I can along the way.  If I can use my current income to my advantage in negotiations, I'm all for it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2019 22:56
|
|
|
Also, please remember: Just because an ethical top scientist in your field is on board with something doesn't mean it'll succeed. It just means that the science probably won't be a scam. The company can still gently caress with financials, build compensation in a way that screws over everyone not in their inner circle, sell poo poo off for pennies when it gets inconvenient, or take their money and run after selling to a larger player in the field. Also (just since you mentioned Theranos): The standard lifecycle of a biotech startup is to hang their hat on the ONE BIG THING they've been working on, push it with every ounce of their (workers') being, and hope for the best. They'll get beautiful chemistry data, great bioavailability / tox data in rodent models, larger mammalian models will look pretty good, and then maybe the funding starts around FIH or so. They'll drum up tons of support and excitement as their Ph1 data comes back great. They'll get an accelerated approval for limited Ph2 studies, maybe, and bring in a ton of investor or joint-venture capital for Phase 3. Their one big moon shot just... ...just under-performed the placebo in the pivotal Ph3 study. Their golden goose is dead. Their stock, if any exists, crashes by 95%. The business attempts futilely to find someone to buy them / their IP, hunts for more investors to run another round of trials under different conditions because it's 'just an outlier from a poorly-designed study / badly-selected cohort, can't you see the mistake we made in the study design?' Nobody comes to their aid. The company lays off top scientists left and right trying to keep up an appearance of clinical viability, but eventually it all shutters. This is the fate of like 90% of even ethical biotech startups, regardless of how good your scientists are. Most drugs fail, and promising ones fail spectacularly.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
quote:You maybe look at "not name a number" in Poker terms, but the information asymmetries in poker are themselves symmetrical (everyone's info asymmetry is the same outside of player behavior), while in job negotiation they're anything but. There's also an uncomfortably good chance, depending on how large your current and prospective companies are, that they actually already know how much (generic you) make or can verify it. There's no benefit to naming a number for like 99% of everyone. As an example of this, my first job was with a large company who had a phone # for employment verification. The automated system would confirm your dates of employment, whether you were eligible for rehire or not, and what your final salary was.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
Non-compete dude: Talk to an employment lawyer in your state/area. It's going to depend on your state and court jurisdiction of course, but it is not unheard of for a company to lose the ability to enforce a NCA if they've made substantial changes to your employment terms and/or terminated your employment themselves. YMMV, IANAL, TTAL, etc. Get someone specific to your area because it can vary drastically from state to state. Example of the sort of thing I'm talking about : Imagine a circumstance in which you take a job, sign a NCA, and then suddenly they cut your pay to minimum wage and eliminate your vacation time. In reasonable jurisdictions, it doesn't matter if there was a contract because the employer clearly has not held up their end of it. Just because you have a NCA and it's been enforced before doesn't mean your circumstances are identical to the previous ones. Talk to a lawyer.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2019 04:48
|
|
|
Zauper posted:FWIW, I've never heard of it working this way - but absolutely you should talk to a lawyer familiar with the precedent and ask them. For a non-compete, continued employment, in most jurisdictions, is not sufficient consideration - so employment is not a term of the non-compete. Here's a lawyer's blog post that says that, but also that it might make it easier to beat. Yeah that's where the state-by-state thing came in. My employer in CT had NCEs for everyone but when they tried to enforce it on employees they laid-off en mass, a court shot it down for at least one guy I worked with. Fired for cause might be different. IANAL and I am almost certainly not in the same state as the OP because NCEs are all but unenforceable here. I need to move to whatever state allows them, put one that blocks all in-state competitors, and then immediately cut people to salaried < min-wage after they relocate. Heck yeah, a new era of indentured servitude!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
SEKCobra posted:You will never be indispensable, get a new offer from a different employer. Also, indispensable is a curse. Just wait until you're truly indispensable to your department and then see how bad your promotions and internal transfer options become.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2019 20:33
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:I could have a new one in a couple weeks if I really wanted, but I'm honestly happy where I'm at now for various reasons. There is no ethical happiness under capitalism. Embrace the greed.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
Xguard86 posted:Happiness is fair pay for fair work. Fair pay which you secured by knowing the numbers, negotiating and being willing to act in the face of an unfair situation. Every moment of happiness you consume is ten moments of happiness denied to a malnourished seabird.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2019 03:44
|
|
|
Xguard86 posted:My God you are correct. Suicide is the only moral choice. Exactly! I'll go first. *shows himself out of the thread*
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2019 16:30
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Business, Finance, and Careers > The Negotiation Thread: and then I burned their house down and yelled 'WHAT'S YOUR BATNA NOW, BITCH?' I had to shorten it a little because it's too long. Radium is why we can't have nice things I guess. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2021 19:05
|
|
|
ben shapino posted:my anti-imposter syndrome mantra of "hell, lots of people i work with mess up all the time and nobody seems to care, im probably doing alright if they have never come down on me the whole time i've worked here" has been serving me well lately. don't be so hard on yourself!  You should hear what they're saying about you behind your back.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2021 23:49
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:The part that puts me a bit on the side of the response is this Yep, I agree with you. The guy signaled that negotiation was basically over, and then at the end came back at +40%. You can do a little bit more, negotiate around the fringes, etc etc, but you'd better be certain there's no other viable candidate and they have no time to lose if you're going to do a huge increase out of nowhere at the end after signaling no objection before. Just don't discuss the salary details / say anything until the end and you see the full package. The dude could even maybe have pulled it off if he framed the question as an issue of benefits / retirement packages instead of "I waited for you to be invested and then yanked the rug out from under you." quote:I think in an employment system that treats you as mercenary, you have to act like a mercenary to effectively advocate for yourself. I think it's a little rich that the manager is treating it like the candidate spat at the offer. Rescinding the offer would only serve to preserve the manager's ego and is frankly a little unprofessional. Maybe I'm a little biased on that last point, as I have had offers pulled after trying to negotiate. I don't think there's a problem with trying to squeeze an extra 40%. I think there's a tactical problem with saying "X is fine" and then being like "SURPRISE, I WANT X+40% NOW THAT YOU LIKE ME." Now they don't like you, because nobody likes having the rug pulled out from under them. There are ways to play the game and get that +40% (or whatever) without basically faking-out that you anchored yourself, and then telling them directly that you were faking. Sundae fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Apr 7, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2021 20:17
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Yeah I have my doubts about the Letter Writer's reliability too, but the only way this entire discussion has any point at all is to take the information presented to us at face value. The angle is "assuming this is an accurate representation of what happened..." Agreed. I mean, we can only debate what we have in front of us, which is an Ask A Manager letter. For content: I've used a variant of the "say X, then demand Y" approach before and had it work. A company in Ireland interviewed me, and said there was no relocation package and if that was a problem. I said that "for the right offer, nothing is a problem." They then offered me a moderately-competitive (for Ireland) salary and no relocation, and I came back and said "That's not the right offer. We have a problem." They then turned around and argued a bit, then returned with a full relocation package offer. I ended up still rejecting it because by the time they decided, I'd gotten a drastically higher offer in the USA. Even though the higher-paid job ended up being terrible (it was the J&J job), the Ireland site ended up being shuttered less than a year after I would've started, so while I didn't dodge a bullet, at least I got hit with a smaller one.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
Dongsturm posted:I'm getting really annoyed by companies trying to lie about overtime and other conditions when I interview. Yeah let's not use the now-edited-out word in BFC, thanks. I don't think there's a single subforum where that's acceptable.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2021 05:23
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:First off, Bantas are the creatures in Return of the Jedi. Uggh.... and I thought your comp package smelled bad on the outside!
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2021 22:34
|
|
|
spf3million posted:6 months ago I updated my LinkedIn profile to account for the new position/niche I had gotten into. Shortly thereafter I began getting requests from market research companies asking me to participate in paid interviews with their clients regarding the market I am now participating in. Typically an hour or so. The usual rate offered was $150-200/hr, I did a couple of those while never divulging anything proprietary. The questions were all super basic. I started realizing that I could probably charge way more so began escalating my rate. This morning I just locked in an interview at $500/hr and she didn't bat an eye. poo poo I might throw out $1,000/hr for the next one just to see what happens. Wait, that poo poo isn't just the latest spam-email nonsense? I've been deleting those assuming they're just scams.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2021 22:10
|
|
|
Spikes32 posted:I appreciate this. I'm in San Diego now making 90k gross plus 401k and annual rsu grants. My partner will be making 165k plus bonuses in San Jose. My minimum will be 120k full time at a company with it scaling up for contract. I'm looking for lims admin jobs in the pharma /biotech sphere and think that's reasonable. If anyone who is familiar with the bay area and biotech has feedback on these numbers for what I should be targeting I'd appreciate it. Even if you somehow only get your exact $90K current, $255K + bonuses/401k/RSU is perfectly livable in the Bay Area. That being said, if you have experience and are working in LIMS, you're probably looking at $105K, probably higher, with bonus+401(k). I don't know about $120K, but mostly because I don't know many people in that side of the field.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2021 04:12
|
|
|
TheParadigm posted:Has anyone had luck getting a noncompete waived through asking for it to be paid/salaried if enforced, or is that more of an EU/non USA thing? I've red-lined it out of a job offer successfully, but I've never tried the paid/salaried-if-enforced thing. Non-competes are extremely hard to enforce in the USA in the first place, to the point where it's almost easier to keep an illegal blacklist than try to enforce a NCA.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2021 23:05
|
|
|
Omne posted:Got an offer where the bump in starting salary almost matches the salary at my first real job; kinda want to negotiate it up just to hit that. This is going to be completely dependent on your risk tolerance. I won't even work at a start-up at all with my tolerance level, for example, and I value bonuses / stock options at 0% of proposed value until they are dollars in my bank account. Someone more in experience in start-ups can give you a less cynical answer, hopefully.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2021 00:51
|
|
|
Xguard86 posted:At least where I work, we know "Ineligible to rehire" can royally gently caress someone and most firings aren't that cut and dry so it's rarely used. quote:Im in payroll - which is in HR at my current company, so I am responsible for all the verifications of employment. I’ve probably done over 1000 in my tenure and I can count on one time I’ve said someone was not eligible for rehire. PFE used that term for everyone who left under their big layoff waves from 2009-2012. They were using it to placehold that as part of the severance agreement, we'd all agreed that we could not be rehired by PFE for (six? twelve? I don't remember the duration anymore) months after accepting a severance package. A few of my coworkers who were in the layoff got hosed by that when they tried to get other jobs, because not many prospective employers are going to give the candidate a chance to explain anything from the background check. My next employer after PFE only checked my personal references and didn't verify my past employment or income, so it didn't end up mattering to me at least. Best layoff ever, honestly.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2022 17:20
|
|
|
fourwood posted:I so want to believe this is all real. Yeah, but almost certainly nope. At bare minimum, the follow-up post claiming to be his wife is fake. "Hey, I'm the wife of X and can't contact my husband. Can you connect me to him?" "X? Never heard of him. Let me send you to the hiring manager." "Hiring manager here. Hello, unverifiable spouse of this person. No, he doesn't work here, and furthermore, here's a bunch of poo poo that we'll tell you about him, unverifiable spouse."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2022 17:30
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:I was asked by the company I’m leaving what they could do to make me stay and I’m debating responding with my offer letter and saying “more than thiis” I wouldn't do that. Just go, enjoy the new role (hopefully), and let them stew.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2022 20:30
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:Is it kosher here to reveal real numbers? I’m still sort of in shock that I’m a week into this new role and I’m making this much . There's even a spreadsheet in the OP for it. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nSJHNBoljONE0lu4Yi_a5JUOzv3cS5FbC6m8lxT9i3E/edit#gid=245510761
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2022 00:25
|
|
|
I think it's either horseshit or extremely company/field specific. 1) Don't job-hop because employers don't like job hoppers, but don't stay anywhere either because they don't like people to stay in jobs? So what's the magical sweet spot these advice-givers think is a reasonable amount of time to stay at a job? 2) If you're working at a well-respected company in your field and progressing your career, who wouldn't want to steal you away from them? 3) There are skilled roles that benefit from more years of experience, where it doesn't matter where those years were, necessarily. Equipment operators in my field, for one - I'd kill for some 10+year veteran operators in my department right now, and if I could lure them away from other companies, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2022 08:29
|
|
|
kalel posted:this isn't really a directed question, but are HR people actually insane? Like I feel like you actually have to be a sociopath to do that job I try to not talk to them when possible, but the ones at J&J were definitely sociopaths. Like, I think the head of HR at my site would legit have killed baby animals for pleasure if it wasn't career-suboptimal.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:People at the bottom to middle in HR are generally not sociopaths, just extraordinarily lazy. Laziness and total lack of imagination are actually the primary traits they're selected for by the sociopaths that hold the higher HR positions. Who themselves are not objectively lazy, but they're lazier than the more active sociopaths atop the operations hierarchies. HR is fundamentally about rent seeking. My previous company's HR: #1 - Arranged for a lunch gazebo to be built out front the facility, and then banned people from eating at it, because it was just to make a good impression on visitors and prospective employees. #2 - Took away the (honestly sub-par) fitness center and expanded the HR interview offices into the space. They spent more on the HR offices than most other areas of the building, because they considered those to be a first-impression area. #3 - Had an all-hands meeting after the corporate morale survey showed that everyone was unhappy. They used the meeting to tell everyone they were lucky to have jobs, and if they didn't cheer up there would be consequences. #4 - Related to #3 - they were required by Home Office to hold group sessions for people to voice concerns/suggestions to fix morale. In the one I attended, HR started it out by informing everyone that these group sessions were not to involve any suggestions or criticism, and they recommended that everyone stay silent. The engineer who spoke up anyway was fired two weeks later. #5 - Treated delivery people like poo poo to the point that we were actually blacklisted by one local pizza place. The head of HR literally thought that "delivery people should neither be seen nor heard; the food should appear as close to invisibly as possible," and he'd chew people out if they made noise while delivering food to meetings. I know this because I helped an overloaded delivery guy carry things to a meeting room, and the HR director tried to go off at me outside the meeting room because he heard me talking in the hallway. "I work here and am helping the guy out. Get over yourself," and I went back to my trailer behind the factory. Also, remember from the corporate thread: "ZERO DEFECTS" parking spot directly next to the handicapped spot. HR had to sign off on that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2022 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 12:34 |
|
|
Quackles posted:What thread is this? https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?noseen=0&threadid=3295066&pagenumber=803&perpage=40#post490221966 That post and then two down from there for the actual mascot drawing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2022 20:00
|
|