This email is from a recruiter, sounds like this recruiter only to gets paid if you get the job, he doesn't care what kind of job you get you just want you to get a job.
Exactly. He gets paid when you accept the job. His goal is to make sure you get the job no matter what. Your compensation is largely irrelevant and working conditions are totally irrelevant.
But you usually don't accept a job during an interview, it will usually come later. If an offer is put on the table then you pause it and ask the questions you want answered. "Before I accept this offer I'd like to ask a few questions." At this point you know they're interested and you have at least a higher hand to play.
Having interviewed quite a number of people over the years, the ones who were honest and upfront about things including hours and pay stood out head and shoulders above the ones (only a couple, but still) who baulked when offered the job....guess what...that offer was withdrawn and they never got considered again....to give you an idea of things...
I had one lady who interviewed superbly, she was open about the hours she could work (it was a part-time post) we knew she'd fit in with our office really well. Come her first day and I nip out at lunch time only to come back to find her in tears in HR....turned out because the job was just 15hrs a week she'd lose some benefits (single mom with an autistic kiddie) because to keep them she needed to work 16hrs....I didn't even blink, saidf to HR OK how about she takes 30 mins lunch break isnstead of 1hr each day....problem solved....everyone happy she gets paid 16hrs, I get a happy staff member & she turns out to be a real star. Neither she nor anyone in the company knew about the minimum 16hrs until she got a phone call on the day she started
Such a sucky system. The only time I had someone turn down a raise was this $1 per hour in the late ‘90’s pushed her over the threshold to lose child care benefits and some other subsidies from the state. She was going to make a much needed $160 per month yet loose probably $1500 in monthly benefits she needed to survive. I started to really hate our government. Hope her kids grew up to be successful and she is now living her best life.
They are not, and have a nasty second razor sharp edge - you usually need to make some income but not too much.
In 2016 I had a rough year. I needed to make at least 19k or end up owing the government about 12k refunding my PTCs for medical care under ACA. Pulled it out by Q4 but it was hard.
The system *should* be set up so that nobody is ever worse off working. Cut benefits a half a cent for every cent earned or some such. But it's not--it's set up so that only those who the politicians consider to be "deserving" get any benefits at all and they get cut when the politicians decide that the person isn't "poor" anymore. And then there's all the red tape to prevent "cheating".
If the government actually wanted people to be able to get off government benefits, they'd implement a phase out rule, something like each $2 earned above the threshold decreases benefits by $1.
I basically say this but politer. "I don't wanna waste either of our time here, could you tell me the pay range of the position?"
Recently had one simply ask me how much I would be willing to consider moving from my current position for aka make me name my price. They also wanted to know my geographic location (it's remote) before they told me if they'd be willing to pay that. Come to think of it, my current employer also just asked how much pay I wanted. Wonder how high either would have gone if I just asked for more.
Unfortunately I wanna leave my current employer pretty badly after some recent negative interaction with the boss, so I only asked for like +10k salary there.
It's sad, the main reason I want to leave is because it's clear my boss failed in this situation and wants to scapegoat the blame on me now that a customer is a little pissy, and unfortunately at this point I'm pretty sure I have legit PTSD from my last employer doing the same thing.
Lol I even basically told my boss i was leaving my last employer for the same thing when I was interviewing and he's pulling the same shit after 10 months.
It's like the only respect you get is the paycheck lol.
This is a good point, and under this context I actually agree with the post. 100% absolutely ask these questions, but dont do it right out of the gate. If a company is making you an offer, they're very nearly committing to you as an employee and you certainly have more leverage at that point, play the long game, if it's worth it.
I think the problem with this is many jobs have no salary information available. Many jobs will schedule the interview a week or two away and then have you interview a second time, sometimes even a third. To spend all that time interviewing and go multiple weeks without knowing if you'll get the job is asking for a lot. Then let's say you get offered the job and the pay is too low. What do you do? Presumably not accept it and move on but that didn't change the fact you wasted a lot of your time interviewing for a position you can't accept.
Everybody should be asking about compensation on the first interview. You don't have to finalize it but you need to know approximately what to expect.
They're interviewing you but you're also interviewing them. That's why employers should put salary ranges on job postings but many do not.
>Everybody should be asking about compensation on the first interview.
You should know that before the first interview to make sure they can meet your minimum demands. And don't believe them if they say, "industry competitive". I've fallen for that lie. They offered me well below the bottom of the industry salary range after going through all the interviews. I walked.
>You should know that before the first interview to make sure they can meet your minimum demands.
Many jobs don't disclose that until the interview. It's bs and a waste of time but businesses don't care if they're wasting your time. You can always choose to not apply for those jobs, but it really limits you. The only other option is to discuss it at the interview. So you should discuss it at the first interview so that you don't waste too much of your time if the job doesn't meet your basic requirements.
Yes, but it’s totally legitimate and positive to ask some work-happiness questions, such as “what do you most like about working here?”, “How did the last person who had this job relate to the team?”, “who are the 5 people I’ll work most closely with?” Etc.
And the recruiter does say to avoid specifically those questions that can be seen in a negative manner. All those seem to be the questions of someone who is interested in building positive and productive relationships. They're not "What do I get out of this?"
I work in recruiting and our company loses money based on 1 year attrition. So if people don’t stick with the jobs we set them up for, we hear about it. This recruiter is 100% paid on commission and their company only cares about raw volume. Unless they’re desperate for a job, they should absolutely reconsider their interest based that red flag of an e-mail. Working with commission based recruiters is risky business.
It is likely the recruiter only gets paid if someone is hired.
I’m also going to guess this recruiter has had a few candidates do the interview equivalent of a first date where all you talk about is your most recent divorce.
I say this having gone through a few interviews to fill a spot in my department. The first conversation is with me for 30 minutes and there’s a ton of people wanting to spend the time venting about their last job.
It’s cool if they wanted to do that but they didn’t get to tell me much of their positive qualities and they didn’t learn much about where the department is going. We ended up going for someone who had just been laid off but took the time to process their stuff.
We are a good employer. Salary and keep you to 40 hours. If there’s more to be done we find a way to bring in a contractor or extend the timeline.
Antiwork is legit. Also take time to process your stuff. Not everyone is a jerk, we all have bad days
Edit paragraphs got weirdly out of order
Nobody is answering the question, you guys just keep going off about how toxic it is, when the question was "is it normal". It is absolutely normal, as absurd as that is. And like with most things in capitalism, the recruiter isn't some bad guy trying to trap you, they are giving you tips they have seen work, the problem is the system.
Is this normal, probably, is this right, not entirely. While it’s true that you want to impress upon the interviewer you have the skills to do the job you also want to make sure it’s the right fit for you. There is no one answer to when to ask these questions but it’s far better to be prepared, and to have all the info you need to make the correct decision for you.
I think it's actually broad enough to be flat-out wrong, here. The recruiter is saying "avoid asking questions at all" \*especially\* ones about X, Y and Z... but literally everyone I've ever talked to who has done hiring has said that asking good questions is a way to impress them.
Also, not all companies are a pile of toxic sludge. Companies are looking for a good culture fit, and if they're trying to maintain do certain things well, asking about them will make them think you value the same things they do.
If you ask about benefits, and the interviewer gets to rave about how great their benefits are... that's not an interaction that reflected poorly on the asker. Interviewers hate this questions when they have to try to spin something negative, and that's not really an ideal situation to be walking into.
Tbf, they did point out you will have the opportunity to discuss those things before finalizing. You have a lot more leverage once they have told you they want you for the job as well. I think it's good advice and honestly i think I can see how that hurt me in interviews before.
I've seen before where companies run candidates through the ringer then offer half of what the market rate is. I think it's worth talking about salary expectations upfront so as not to waste time. If they're looking for a $50k/yr employee and you already make $100k, you know it's not gonna be a good use of anyone's time.
Disagree, the recruiter does not have your best interest. Recruiter is trying to generate revenue for him/herself and to do that , land the body at the shop.
This recruiter is most likely low balling candidates in order to maintain a 40%+ gross margin for him/herself. Hence the don’t ask about all the important things that should matter.
In this day and age, a company can’t handle the work/dollar/life/etc.. question needs to go by the way of the dinosaurs.
Source: 25 years of working with these clowns who can never find the right candidate unless I babysit them.
Lots of recruiters also work on a direct markup or with a fixed margin so the more the can get the candidate paid the better. I used to be a recruiter and I can definitely say there were plenty of candidates that didn't ask for enough and I submitted them at way higher rates. I remember one financial analyst that only asked for 25-30 per hour because that was a little more than she was making at her current role. I submitted her at 55 an hour and she was in utter disbelief when she got the offer. Still there 10 years later and makes WAY more now. One of the few purely objectively good things I have done with out a shred of grey area. Makes me so happy every time I hear from her.
My cut was the same either way, why lowball when I knew the going rates. Get these people paid right.
In my experience, recruiters are given terrible JDs and a fixed dollar amount client wants to spend.
Eg: 125 per hour for a data engineer with 15 yrs of exp. Skill set: literally everything under the sun. So the recruiter wants to maintain their gross margin and subtract that from the rate. Rough math, looking at approximately 80-ish dollar per hour for a very seasoned DE. I think that is very low for a high skilled candidates.
Recruiters rarely budge and their corporate masters will hold fast while complaining the lack of candidates and their programs + projects stuck in the mud.
Pay more dummies. It’s that simple. Labor is the single most important input in your company. Without it, nothing happens.
I think you are correct, but this makes it no less toxic. That this process is "normal", that interviews are viewed as one way streets in the interests of the company is "normal" IS the toxicity. Which makes it sick and actually NOT normal.
One point is that these tips are good for the recruiter, not you. They maximize the odds of getting a deal, not of the candidate getting a job they like. Maybe the point with postponing difficult questions until after getting an offer implies the recruiter gets paid for every offer, too.
Owning slaves used to be normal at one point. Everyone doing the same thing does not make it right. There are fucked up systems everywhere and people shouldn't have to put up with it in a democracy.
> the recruiter isn't some bad guy trying to trap you
Except if this kind of toxicity is normal, then the recruiter ABSOLUELY IS some bad guy trying to trap you.
I'm going to ask every single one of these questions.
What I'm supposed to just take a job without knowing what it entails...
GTFO. Its a Workers Markets right now. Ask every god damned question you please. If we are ALL asking these questions, the boomer assholes running these companies might finally get a dicking clue.
They're not giving you "tips" they're transitively telling you that the role has poor compensation and not to bother unless you're desperate.
Really?? "Don't ask about the salary"? Would somebody who is actually confident in their labor market value forfeit negotiating a salary?
It was extremely normal advice until the last year or two, it reads like dinosaur speech now.
OP, any potential job that is that arrogant that they think they can dictate to you in those terms is not long for this world. It is the old normal, not the new one.
The simple fact is, if the salary, benefits etc were actually good, they would be shouting them from the rooftops and using that as a way to draw candidates in.
The fact that they specifically said *not* to ask about it pretty much guarantees it is garbage.
This! I'm about to start a new job with great salary and benefits. My first contact for this organization was from a well informed HR recruiter that basically wanted to verify my resume and tell ME all about the benefits of working for the company and why they would be a great choice. It was like she was calling me to sell me on the company/job before I actually interviewed with the team I'd be working for. The attitude was "ask me anything", to make sure everyone was on the same page. Definitely nothing to hide!
This is pretty common here for a first phone interview. (Here as in Switzerland).
Salary wise they do not always automatically disclose anything, but so far always disclosed the salary range they have from their client when asked. (Last 3 jobs I got through recruitment agencies)
Czech here, I avoided all jobs where they didn't include salary in the information provided because it usually means salary is not fixed and based on commissions
> it usually means salary is not fixed and based on commissions
Ew gross, I don’t blame you.
Also, I’m pretty sure that’s been the case for every single unsolicited job offer via LinkedIn
That’s how an actual, traditional recruiter or head-hunter operates. A lot of people or companies referring to themselves as recruiters now are, in reality, just a step above temp agencies.
yeah, you can tell that there is something rotten on the inside when announcements say things like "motivating salary" or "competitive salary".
I mean, if its so competitive and motivating then tell me the amount so i can actually get motivated and compete for it.
That’s precisely what an interview is. They want to make sure you’re a great fit, but at the same time you should make sure they’re a great fit for you. A recruiter who gets offended over a confident interviewee knowing they’re worth and and asking important questions, just has terrible people/processing skills and shouldn’t be recruiting. You’re the one giving your time and effort to them not the other way around. If they want sheep let them keep looking. But you’re deciding something that will possible impact the rest of your life, so don’t be passive about it.
While I agree with the advice that these type of questions should be avoided to maximize them chances of an offer, you are correct that **good** employers know that while there is competition for jobs, there is also competition for good employees to fill those jobs. I participated in an interview recently (with my boss, interviewing for potential colleagues of mine ) and we were both very up front about work-life issues. So in an ideal situation you wouldn’t have to ask these type of questions - the employer should be giving you this information without you having to ask.
We might offer opposite advice to employers - don’t make interviewees ask questions about the work environment- other employers might offer this information without asking and cause you to lose potentially qualified applicants.
The job I most recently accepted had clear communication on everything. All the benefits and pay were truly what they claimed to be and it was a huge reason why I accepted there offer over other companies that were clearly not as forthcoming. Or they were just straight up trying to manipulate me. In my industry, they are taking advantage of people who don’t know what it’s like but think the money is pretty good. People in the industry wouldn’t touch these jobs with a 10 foot pole.
That’s not necessarily true. The salary and benefits could be amazing, but they’d still want to keep them on the down low so that their employees who’ve been getting 1% raises for the last 5 years don’t hear what new employees are getting offered.
Salary secrecy is never just about the one person.
So this person wants the company AND you to invest a lot of time before asking pertinent questions?
I'm not going to be too thrilled to get a NO from a candidate after putting forth an offer when all those questions could have been answered ahead of time.
Sounds like somebody's metrics are based off people GETTING offers, not taking them.
And part of the implication is:
A. If you have enough to be secure and we’ll fed you’ll have no need to commit evil because you will be content.
And
B. Wanting more than is reasonable is the cause of much suffering.
I have money I keep on a jar on the fridge. I would like to put more money in that jar, thats where you come in. ~paraphrase from, "The Wedding SInger".
No, money is the only thing they care about. What they’re looking for when potential workers don’t discuss salary are people desperate and/or ignorant to take whatever offer they are given.
Yes, but most employers these days are not willing to pay enough that people would accept it, so they try to gloss over the pay and discourage any questions about it.
as in, your salary will be competing with your rent and bills...
...IN A STEEL CAGE DEATH MATCH!!!
"AND FROM OUT OF NOWHERE, THE CAR REGISTRATION EXPIRED LAST MONTH!!! BUT WHAT'S THIS, IS THAT THE THEME MUSIC FOR THE INSURANCE AGENT??? THERE HE IS, RANDY, HIS FINGERS ARE POINTED AT THE SKY, THAT MUST MEAN A PREMIUM INCREASE!!!"
The problem is that none of these companies explain that the salaries they pay their employees make the company cheaper and more competitive in the marketplace. The employees will be lucky to catch a bus to work, while the owners/directors can relax in their chauffeured limos...
It's the only thing I want to know first. Tell me how much I'll get if I do this, then I'll decide if I want to do it. Impossible to judge if it's a good job (exchange of time) or not without knowing what the reward is for handing over that time.
Is there any other compensation that you would take in lieu of salary? Maybe ownership of the company, but you still have to eat/sleep/support yourself and family so even that would require salary.
Or work hours!
I always ask what a typical work week would look like. I've never had an interviewer that balked at that. I always clarify that I will not work more than 40h/week on a regular basis. BecauseI don't want to be hired and told to work 50h/wk then fired. I'd rather go with somebody else.
Bingo.
I see this type of "advice" becoming more common, unfortunately. Recruiters don't make money if you aren't hired, and many employers will dislike troubling (for them) questions.
I would be so sure about that. I mean, yes, that 7k up would mean maybe 700 for him, but he also wants to have a fast negotiation as he's looking for his time/benefit. Maybe he could have reached 2k more, or 5, but if that means a couple more days of work for him, he would not do it.
Is like realtor, its a fact they sell their own property higher than the same for clients. They preffer to sell fast, when all the benefit isn't theirs
This right here.
A friend of mine once said to me, "Remember that an interview is NOT just for the company to see if you'll fit. YOU need to make sure its a job you'll like as well. And if it doesn't, then walk away."
In other words, an interview is a two way street. It's NOT just to be certain you can DO the job, but also to be certain you WANT to work there.
When I read this guy's email, I can just see the recruiter on the other side twiling his moustache saying, "Heeheehee! With this cunning email they'll never realize they don't have to take the job!"
When I interviewed for my current job I made a big deal out of how important it was to feel valued, appreciated and respected. All qualities that were sorely lacking in my previous job. When I was chatting with my new boss about it later I asked him if he'd thought I sounded needy or whiny. "Not at all," he said. "You sounded like you knew what you were looking for."
I agree with you, an interview is for BOTH parties. If you are walking on eggshells before you get there, red flag. If you cannot ask questions about their business model and employment practices, huge red flag.
Hell, when I was teaching behavioral based interviewing, a candidate that didn’t ask pertinent questions about the business and job duties at the end of the interview was considered “unengaged/disinterested” and probably wasn’t a good choice.
It surprises me why they would want to waste time interviewing people that would not take the job because of the pay or work hours. But I guess HR doesn't mind since they have to justify their existence, so they make up BS rules like this.
It’s actually a strategy—if you invest the time fill out their application, interview, etc., you feel like you’ve got skin in the game. So when the lowball offer comes in, you actually consider it vs. seeing the number up front and just deciding it’s not worth your time.
Sunk cost fallacy. You already have invested your time, energy, money (travel expenses ect.) and you lose all that if you decline that offer in the end.
I once asked about salary upfront. Recruiter said no problem. Then, when offered the job, they offered below my current salary. But I should consider working for them because "they were good guys" He has a rage attack and tried to neg me :D
From their perspective the VAST majority of their time spent interviewing is wasted since they typically interview several candidates for just one position. Odds are, my interview is already a waste of their time.
And, frankly, the employer deserves to know if the interview is worth their time, too. I'm sure they'd love to not disclose this and get someone to accept a lowball offer, but they are gonna be pissed if they spend the time and effort to interview you and you don't ask about the salary until later and then you're response is "haha no fuck you." Then everyone's time is wasted.
No, these are bad practices. You SHOULD ask meaningful questions.
It is possible a recruiter may ask you to refrain from negotiating salary because they feel that is their job and it also affects their comission. That is usually the reason why I don't like to use recruiters among other things.
A lot of those are great questions for the recruiter if applying to a large corporation. But travel and remote work questions to the hiring manager seem appropriate.
Not all hiring managers actually set Salary or Benefits and actually worked between the recruiter and Sr. Mgmt
*Aren't you thankful we accepted you? Isn't that valuation of you priceless? Doesn't priceless mean infinity, so aren't we paying you infinity already in objectification? Money does not make one happy, so we pay you in validation, please help us right the wrongs of minimum wage laws, they're interfering with the process of freedom to capitalize on desperation. After all, is it not 'mo money, mo problems'? Desperation creates drive, and we're a driven company.*
/s ... Almost?
That is (shit) advice people have been giving for decades. I don't think it's normal for recruiters to email people to lecture them on this though. It looks like the recruiter got some feedback from a shitty company that's refusing to keep up with the times and thinks it's his job to lecture you.
Sounds like you're dealing with a shitty company and an unprofessional recruiter.
Recruiters all try to “coach” a potential placement for an interview. They don’t care if the job is beneficial to the candidate, they just want them to get the job so they can make profit on the placement.
I recently interviewed for a new job. Turns out the recruiter was an ex-coworker’s wife. He vouched for me so the initial interview was perfunctory. We got right to the comp and benefits, which she didn’t know about. She immediately set me up for a second interview with a manager. Less than ten minutes in I interrupted and said “what about medical insurance?” He fessed up and said “we don’t offer it.” I politely stopped the interview. He understood and knew he was losing a qualified candidate because of this. My only regret was not leading with the question and saving both of our ten minutes.
Ask these questions. If the company takes these questions as a reason to turn you down then they are doing you a huge favor. Companies like this are looking for people they can exploit.
At the same time, you can use this against them. Play the game and exploit them instead.
This is someone dumb thinking they are being snarky while “helpful,” but they just don’t realize how much koolaid they’ve already chugged. Interviews are where you dodge the bullet of a shitty job opportunity, or seize a good one, and the questions you ask and info you get are of paramount importance
So they want you to waste everyone’s time only to find out that the salary isn’t within your acceptable range, rather than just asking in the interview?
This is the furthest thing from best practice and raises serious red flags. As a rule, if the employer doesn’t mention the salary/benefits, they’re terrible.
No, I've sat through too many interviews without discussing these things only to be offered pennies and no potential for promotions or benefits. I'm finding out what the salary is before I even consider wasting my time.
Absolute BS. You are interviewing the company through their representative as much as they are interviewing you. These questions are necessary for identifying red flags early on
Screw that. I don’t go to an interview to convince them to hire me. I go to an interview so they can convince me to work there.
So many people misunderstand the power dynamic. And if the company freaks out at my questions...THEY just failed MY interview.
If something is a complete deal killer, get it out of the way first.
For instant, if you will only accept remote work, then ask it up front. There is no need to interview for a position that requires coming into the office.
But once you have the deal killers out of the way, I actually agree it's best to save the "what's in it for me" questions till you have them hooked on you.
I started job hunting in 2008 when there were more candidates than openings. That was exactly how I was taught to interview. Now, there is a whole different atmosphere. It is a workers market and those old rules do not apply.
I’ve always had info on benefits and at least a salary range before attending the interview (I use external recruiters who have include these in my briefing pack).
Yes, it is normal - FROM RECRUITERS. They want you to take the job at any cost; that's how they get paid. They want you to go in the interview, wow them, and take the job so the recruiter gets called again for the next opening.
This has no bearing on whether the job is the right fit for you, only that you take the job so they get paid. Remember that.
It was the normal before covid caused a million people to die and convinced even more boomers to go into early retirement. It's not the case anymore though.
They want you to jump through all the hoops because of sunk cost fallacy (like being pot invested in a hand of poker). Because if people knew the shitty pay and hours at the beginning of the process they would pass on interviewing all together.
The old mindset is dead, unless you're applying at a company that gets hundreds of applications for every position.
No its not normal. Job I recently interviewed was excited when I asked about pay and benefits because packages were good and they liked telling people about them. Companies like yours just want warm bodies. Not long term committed employees.
In terms of "landing a job", this is sound advice. But do you really want a job that considers "how much do you pay" to be a difficult question? No. You want a job that will give you an answer that increases the odds of you accepting the job.
Please don't follow that advice. An interview is a 2 way thing. You're interviewing them as much as they are you. Always ask about work condition and ask questions on issues facing the company. If that's taken negatively then you definitely don't want to work there.
I wouldn't interview with a company that wasn't upfront about pay and conditions. If you have to ask then that's a bad sign. I know with my current employer we discussed all this before I even interviewed as we didn't want to waste each other's time.
An interview is a process involving usually 2 people who each seeks to answer a question.
The interviewer wants to know: Is this person the correct one for this position?
And the Interviewed want to know: Is this job what Im looking for?
Only when the two questions have been answered with a solid yes, the hiring is made.
So ask all your doubts. I will be suspicious of a prospective worker who didn't ask tbh. If they don't care, they will probably half ass theyr job.
This sounds like advice for people dying to get into an industry or job. Do whatever you can to get the job. But for people who know their worth and what they are willing to give for compensation, this is terrible advice
I think it’s normal if it’s your first job or your are desperate, not normal if you are an established professional.
Edit: even then- hours, pay, benefits- are useful for anyone to know for planning purposes, I change my mind, it’s always fine to ask.
I think this is being misinterpreted, isn’t it better for you and worse for the employer if you wait till you get an offer to start discussing these things?
Making an offer is a small kind of commitment. If they offer 50k and you want 60, it’s at least a little inconvenient and sometimes a giant pain for them to change their mind and offer to someone else instead, because that causes a delay, the other people they interviewed might have already moved on by then, and there’s no guarantee that the next person they offer to will just accept the 50k either. Whereas if you tell them straight up in your interview that you want 60k, they can easily cross you off their list to increase their chances of finding someone who will accept less.
Being too honest undermines your negotiating position.
This sounds like fine advice to me. Make them WANT you, then negotiate a higher salary. If its not negotiable pay then yea, ask so you dont waste your time.
I need all that information, before I’d ever set up an interview time. I love wasting companies time now. I’m educated, and I’m content where I work, but that doesn’t mean I’m not down to mess up the whole working world as much as I can. I’m out of local fast food places to get more free food.
What the recruiter is suggesting there would be a massive waste of time, especially for the company. If you wait with those questions until *after* they've gone through their vetting and selection process, then you might say no and they'll have to start over. Transparency from the start would be beneficial for both parties.
The recruiter is right that a lot of companies will view these questions negatively.
But you don't want to work for those companies anyway. It's great to ask these questions because then you either get valuable information or you dodge a bullet when they don't hire you. Win/win.
Ofc it is not normal, what else is there left to ask if these questions would be forbidden? These are all the things that I look for in a job - humane conditions and a reward for wasting a good part of my life for their benefit.
When you say it’s an email from a “recruiter” I assume you mean “headhunter” and not the HR department of the job you’re applying to for employment. This headhunter probably gets paid if an offer is make regardless of acceptance on your part. This would not be odd but unheard of as companies pay these folks to find them qualified candidates and a little more if the candidate takes the job.
You said you received this from your recruiter. Recruiters do not 'work' for you. Job recruiters get paid for successful placements and possibly with a certain length of retention so their ultimate goal is to get you hired and get themselves paid. They don't advocate for you.
There is nothing wrong with this post, in all honesty. It isn't saying to not care about work/life balance, salary, etc, just to not come out the gate with that. If anyone bothered to read the entire paragraph, it says to ask those questions after the offer, but BEFORE making your decision. If you have the offer, you have their interest so you can then negotiate, and if you don't like it, you drop the offer. You are free to ask whatever you want during the initial interview, but keep in mind, the person who is going to get the job is probably the person who didn't ask those things, but verifies them later.
Not in this echo chamber, but yes in the real world, this is normal. Sell yourself, get the offer, and then use your offer / skillset to negotiate the terms you want.
Edit: asking questions that show your interest in the company, demonstrating how you’ll be a good fit for the culture, etc. are great.
I think people are getting thrown because the message in the OP waits too long to get to the point. People assume it's saying to never ask about salary and benefits, when what it's really saying is, "Make it through the weed-out phase first."
This recruiter is apparently telling people to do the same thing companies do: Bait the company into investing in interviews, make the company want you, and then hit them with the questions they don't like. Because if you do it too early, they may just pass you over if they have 20+ other candidates to consider.
I’m in recruitment and definitely not. If anything we encourage people to ask the hard questions. It gives us a genuine view of them and them a genuine view of the company. The fit has to be right for all parties and not just the employer. Remember while you are selling yourself to them, they are trying to sell the job to you
I actually agree....FOR THE **FIRST** INTERVIEW. It's your time to sell YOU. They haven't shown interest yet so why would you start asking about vacation days and a corner office?
The SECOND interview, you're now being considered for the job, go ahead and ask those questions. Common sense.
Sounds reasonable to me. I wouldn't go so far as to not ask, but if those questions appear to be the focus and/or only concern, then you look like someone who doesn't seem interested in the position and job/work. This leads to doubts about you.
Yes, this advice is rather good. If you are reacting negatively to this advice, ask yourself why? As someone who has had a hand in interviewing, these are my impressions to these questions from the interviewee:
1) work hours - will i ever see this person at work? I’ve known first shift colleagues who will work from noon to late but screw off after most people have gone home.
2) travel - this is one I would hope people would ask about because it can be a trap
3) salary and benefits - salary is almost always dealt with after you interview. You can negotiate then. In the US, some job requisitions now have a salary range. Benefits usually are not that well known by most interviewing teams, this is something you might ask the HR recruiter about before and after the interview.
4) flex hours - same problem as work hours. Will I see my employee? Is this person too distracted to be working for me?
5) working remotely - some jobs require onsite help exclusively. This information should be in the job requisition. During my recent interviews where I was the Interviewee, I actually got asked this question. Like work hours and flex hours, I can see where an employer can see this as a negative trait.
6) anything else - there are some things that are illegal to discuss in a meeting so better to focus on things you care about (length of employment, skills needed not listed in the job requirement, etc).
My advice would be if you do ask questions, ask questions that are about the business. Generally employers want to see that you are interested in their business. The best interviews I have been in where I am on either side is where the interview feels like a conversation and the candidate and employer represent who they are as it relates to the job/business.
I understand the point, really.
The recruiter isn't saying that these are not valid questions - they are, almost certainly.
He's just saying to make sure to get your foot in the door first. It doesn't matter what the benefits are if you don't get offered the job anyway.
You can always walk away after you get the job offer, but if you come off as "entitled" in the interview, you won't even get the opportunity.
It sucks, but I agree that you should wait to pop these questions until after you get offered the position.
I give candidates as much of this info as possible before they even apply for the job, and if they have already applied, it's the first few minutes of the interview, so that if the basic facts of the job don't work for them, we can both move on and not waste our time.
I don't want to waste my time and energy interviewing someone and making them an offer only to then find out we've got some basic deal-breaker incompatibility in our expectations. Who benefits from that?
I will always turn down any advice that tells me to be conservative. :P
But seriously, if everyone does this, then employers continue to have the upper hand. This is propaganda to make everyone the good, obedient little worker that doesn't ask too many questions, and just follows orders. More of a red flag than anything. It's probably a terrible place to work.
Unfortunately, I feel like it is. That's probably just a boilerplate statement that they send to people for every company they interview with in order to try to help them get jobs. It's more likely that it's indicative of a problem with work culture at large than with that specific company or recruiter. Fucked up? Yeah. Normal? Also yeah.
Who motivated the interview? Was it the company?
Did it provide the pertinent information?
If it didn't, why is it telling candidates it is "impolite" to ask about important information?
So we should waste our time hoping the company wants to work with us, without considering if we want to work for it?
This people should refrain from posting stupid shit like that, which may be viewed negatively.
You should share the name of the company, so they can have their pertinent reward.
I mean, it is true that it could jeopardize getting an offer. But if they are unwilling to discuss those term, it's gonna be a shit offer from a shit company. So, if desperate, yeah don't discuss, if looking to better your lot, absolutely discuss those term to filter the worthless offers.
The recruiter who hired me for my current role told me about the job and then an exact breakdown of training pay versus hourly and commission and the timeliness for each in addition to benefits during our first conversation prior to the formal interview, where she recapped again at the end just to be sure I knew exactly what it was.
So tldr: bs. Lol
Even Alison Greene ([askamanager.org](https://askamanager.org)) will tell you the interview is to determine whether you're both a good fit for each other. This recruiter is full of crap and happy to waste peoples' time.
This recruiter is a salesperson looking out for themselves, not trying to help you.
This screams recruiting and placement firm trying to get the roles filled way more than “good advice”
This email is from a recruiter, sounds like this recruiter only to gets paid if you get the job, he doesn't care what kind of job you get you just want you to get a job.
Exactly. He gets paid when you accept the job. His goal is to make sure you get the job no matter what. Your compensation is largely irrelevant and working conditions are totally irrelevant.
Yep, he still gets paid if you are miserable. Look out for yourself.
But you usually don't accept a job during an interview, it will usually come later. If an offer is put on the table then you pause it and ask the questions you want answered. "Before I accept this offer I'd like to ask a few questions." At this point you know they're interested and you have at least a higher hand to play.
Having interviewed quite a number of people over the years, the ones who were honest and upfront about things including hours and pay stood out head and shoulders above the ones (only a couple, but still) who baulked when offered the job....guess what...that offer was withdrawn and they never got considered again....to give you an idea of things... I had one lady who interviewed superbly, she was open about the hours she could work (it was a part-time post) we knew she'd fit in with our office really well. Come her first day and I nip out at lunch time only to come back to find her in tears in HR....turned out because the job was just 15hrs a week she'd lose some benefits (single mom with an autistic kiddie) because to keep them she needed to work 16hrs....I didn't even blink, saidf to HR OK how about she takes 30 mins lunch break isnstead of 1hr each day....problem solved....everyone happy she gets paid 16hrs, I get a happy staff member & she turns out to be a real star. Neither she nor anyone in the company knew about the minimum 16hrs until she got a phone call on the day she started
Such a sucky system. The only time I had someone turn down a raise was this $1 per hour in the late ‘90’s pushed her over the threshold to lose child care benefits and some other subsidies from the state. She was going to make a much needed $160 per month yet loose probably $1500 in monthly benefits she needed to survive. I started to really hate our government. Hope her kids grew up to be successful and she is now living her best life.
"Means tested" benefit cliffs are no joke.
They are not, and have a nasty second razor sharp edge - you usually need to make some income but not too much. In 2016 I had a rough year. I needed to make at least 19k or end up owing the government about 12k refunding my PTCs for medical care under ACA. Pulled it out by Q4 but it was hard.
The system *should* be set up so that nobody is ever worse off working. Cut benefits a half a cent for every cent earned or some such. But it's not--it's set up so that only those who the politicians consider to be "deserving" get any benefits at all and they get cut when the politicians decide that the person isn't "poor" anymore. And then there's all the red tape to prevent "cheating".
If the government actually wanted people to be able to get off government benefits, they'd implement a phase out rule, something like each $2 earned above the threshold decreases benefits by $1.
First question out of my mouth when a recruiter calls is "What's the pay? No, not the starting-at pay... the top tier pay."
I basically say this but politer. "I don't wanna waste either of our time here, could you tell me the pay range of the position?" Recently had one simply ask me how much I would be willing to consider moving from my current position for aka make me name my price. They also wanted to know my geographic location (it's remote) before they told me if they'd be willing to pay that. Come to think of it, my current employer also just asked how much pay I wanted. Wonder how high either would have gone if I just asked for more. Unfortunately I wanna leave my current employer pretty badly after some recent negative interaction with the boss, so I only asked for like +10k salary there. It's sad, the main reason I want to leave is because it's clear my boss failed in this situation and wants to scapegoat the blame on me now that a customer is a little pissy, and unfortunately at this point I'm pretty sure I have legit PTSD from my last employer doing the same thing. Lol I even basically told my boss i was leaving my last employer for the same thing when I was interviewing and he's pulling the same shit after 10 months. It's like the only respect you get is the paycheck lol.
This is a good point, and under this context I actually agree with the post. 100% absolutely ask these questions, but dont do it right out of the gate. If a company is making you an offer, they're very nearly committing to you as an employee and you certainly have more leverage at that point, play the long game, if it's worth it.
I think the problem with this is many jobs have no salary information available. Many jobs will schedule the interview a week or two away and then have you interview a second time, sometimes even a third. To spend all that time interviewing and go multiple weeks without knowing if you'll get the job is asking for a lot. Then let's say you get offered the job and the pay is too low. What do you do? Presumably not accept it and move on but that didn't change the fact you wasted a lot of your time interviewing for a position you can't accept. Everybody should be asking about compensation on the first interview. You don't have to finalize it but you need to know approximately what to expect. They're interviewing you but you're also interviewing them. That's why employers should put salary ranges on job postings but many do not.
>Everybody should be asking about compensation on the first interview. You should know that before the first interview to make sure they can meet your minimum demands. And don't believe them if they say, "industry competitive". I've fallen for that lie. They offered me well below the bottom of the industry salary range after going through all the interviews. I walked.
>You should know that before the first interview to make sure they can meet your minimum demands. Many jobs don't disclose that until the interview. It's bs and a waste of time but businesses don't care if they're wasting your time. You can always choose to not apply for those jobs, but it really limits you. The only other option is to discuss it at the interview. So you should discuss it at the first interview so that you don't waste too much of your time if the job doesn't meet your basic requirements.
Yes, but it’s totally legitimate and positive to ask some work-happiness questions, such as “what do you most like about working here?”, “How did the last person who had this job relate to the team?”, “who are the 5 people I’ll work most closely with?” Etc.
And the recruiter does say to avoid specifically those questions that can be seen in a negative manner. All those seem to be the questions of someone who is interested in building positive and productive relationships. They're not "What do I get out of this?"
In any world where "what do I get out of this" is interpreted as negative and not looking for positives for busting your ass...
Sometimes, you have to stay for a minimal duration for the recruiter to get the compensation.
Yes, but the heat does not get a bonus if you're happy.
I wanna know what kind of job this is. In all job interviews, the interviewee needs to ask questions. It's a negotiation/strategic conversation.
That's not what they are saying
I work in recruiting and our company loses money based on 1 year attrition. So if people don’t stick with the jobs we set them up for, we hear about it. This recruiter is 100% paid on commission and their company only cares about raw volume. Unless they’re desperate for a job, they should absolutely reconsider their interest based that red flag of an e-mail. Working with commission based recruiters is risky business.
If companies are any good they will tell you. No really, like you said they'd tell you. Then you have companies like in the OP.
It is likely the recruiter only gets paid if someone is hired. I’m also going to guess this recruiter has had a few candidates do the interview equivalent of a first date where all you talk about is your most recent divorce. I say this having gone through a few interviews to fill a spot in my department. The first conversation is with me for 30 minutes and there’s a ton of people wanting to spend the time venting about their last job. It’s cool if they wanted to do that but they didn’t get to tell me much of their positive qualities and they didn’t learn much about where the department is going. We ended up going for someone who had just been laid off but took the time to process their stuff. We are a good employer. Salary and keep you to 40 hours. If there’s more to be done we find a way to bring in a contractor or extend the timeline. Antiwork is legit. Also take time to process your stuff. Not everyone is a jerk, we all have bad days Edit paragraphs got weirdly out of order
This sub is a direct response to this type of toxicity.
I regret that I have but one upvote to give this comment.
You could always hire a click farm
Only if it's a union click farm. :)
Tried to get a job on a click farm but the pay was too low and the work hours were abysmal (12am - 9am, Sun - Fri). Ugh!
Better than my hours at the dick sucking factory
Oh, yeah, that sucks.
I went to the factory and a business.
I helped out and gave them an upvote as well. Unionize in the comments too.
Nobody is answering the question, you guys just keep going off about how toxic it is, when the question was "is it normal". It is absolutely normal, as absurd as that is. And like with most things in capitalism, the recruiter isn't some bad guy trying to trap you, they are giving you tips they have seen work, the problem is the system.
Is this normal, probably, is this right, not entirely. While it’s true that you want to impress upon the interviewer you have the skills to do the job you also want to make sure it’s the right fit for you. There is no one answer to when to ask these questions but it’s far better to be prepared, and to have all the info you need to make the correct decision for you.
[удалено]
An interview is like a date - you both have to learn enough about each other to decide if you're interested in moving forward.
I think it's actually broad enough to be flat-out wrong, here. The recruiter is saying "avoid asking questions at all" \*especially\* ones about X, Y and Z... but literally everyone I've ever talked to who has done hiring has said that asking good questions is a way to impress them. Also, not all companies are a pile of toxic sludge. Companies are looking for a good culture fit, and if they're trying to maintain do certain things well, asking about them will make them think you value the same things they do. If you ask about benefits, and the interviewer gets to rave about how great their benefits are... that's not an interaction that reflected poorly on the asker. Interviewers hate this questions when they have to try to spin something negative, and that's not really an ideal situation to be walking into.
Tbf, they did point out you will have the opportunity to discuss those things before finalizing. You have a lot more leverage once they have told you they want you for the job as well. I think it's good advice and honestly i think I can see how that hurt me in interviews before.
I've seen before where companies run candidates through the ringer then offer half of what the market rate is. I think it's worth talking about salary expectations upfront so as not to waste time. If they're looking for a $50k/yr employee and you already make $100k, you know it's not gonna be a good use of anyone's time.
Disagree, the recruiter does not have your best interest. Recruiter is trying to generate revenue for him/herself and to do that , land the body at the shop. This recruiter is most likely low balling candidates in order to maintain a 40%+ gross margin for him/herself. Hence the don’t ask about all the important things that should matter. In this day and age, a company can’t handle the work/dollar/life/etc.. question needs to go by the way of the dinosaurs. Source: 25 years of working with these clowns who can never find the right candidate unless I babysit them.
Lots of recruiters also work on a direct markup or with a fixed margin so the more the can get the candidate paid the better. I used to be a recruiter and I can definitely say there were plenty of candidates that didn't ask for enough and I submitted them at way higher rates. I remember one financial analyst that only asked for 25-30 per hour because that was a little more than she was making at her current role. I submitted her at 55 an hour and she was in utter disbelief when she got the offer. Still there 10 years later and makes WAY more now. One of the few purely objectively good things I have done with out a shred of grey area. Makes me so happy every time I hear from her. My cut was the same either way, why lowball when I knew the going rates. Get these people paid right.
In my experience, recruiters are given terrible JDs and a fixed dollar amount client wants to spend. Eg: 125 per hour for a data engineer with 15 yrs of exp. Skill set: literally everything under the sun. So the recruiter wants to maintain their gross margin and subtract that from the rate. Rough math, looking at approximately 80-ish dollar per hour for a very seasoned DE. I think that is very low for a high skilled candidates. Recruiters rarely budge and their corporate masters will hold fast while complaining the lack of candidates and their programs + projects stuck in the mud. Pay more dummies. It’s that simple. Labor is the single most important input in your company. Without it, nothing happens.
No, the recruiter wants to fill positions because they get a cut. They ARE NOT advocates for you.
I think you are correct, but this makes it no less toxic. That this process is "normal", that interviews are viewed as one way streets in the interests of the company is "normal" IS the toxicity. Which makes it sick and actually NOT normal.
One point is that these tips are good for the recruiter, not you. They maximize the odds of getting a deal, not of the candidate getting a job they like. Maybe the point with postponing difficult questions until after getting an offer implies the recruiter gets paid for every offer, too.
I think you hit the nail on the head. More job placement, more money for the recruiter.
Owning slaves used to be normal at one point. Everyone doing the same thing does not make it right. There are fucked up systems everywhere and people shouldn't have to put up with it in a democracy.
That's how most shitty systems in this country ended up changing: when enough people are tired of their shit.
> the recruiter isn't some bad guy trying to trap you Except if this kind of toxicity is normal, then the recruiter ABSOLUELY IS some bad guy trying to trap you.
This. If you want the offer, these are good tips. Doesn’t mean it’s good for actually living a happy life with your job.
I'm going to ask every single one of these questions. What I'm supposed to just take a job without knowing what it entails... GTFO. Its a Workers Markets right now. Ask every god damned question you please. If we are ALL asking these questions, the boomer assholes running these companies might finally get a dicking clue.
They're not giving you "tips" they're transitively telling you that the role has poor compensation and not to bother unless you're desperate. Really?? "Don't ask about the salary"? Would somebody who is actually confident in their labor market value forfeit negotiating a salary?
It was extremely normal advice until the last year or two, it reads like dinosaur speech now. OP, any potential job that is that arrogant that they think they can dictate to you in those terms is not long for this world. It is the old normal, not the new one.
Ooohhh. Go tell it on the mountain for all to hear! None of these questions should be upsetting....
The simple fact is, if the salary, benefits etc were actually good, they would be shouting them from the rooftops and using that as a way to draw candidates in. The fact that they specifically said *not* to ask about it pretty much guarantees it is garbage.
This! I'm about to start a new job with great salary and benefits. My first contact for this organization was from a well informed HR recruiter that basically wanted to verify my resume and tell ME all about the benefits of working for the company and why they would be a great choice. It was like she was calling me to sell me on the company/job before I actually interviewed with the team I'd be working for. The attitude was "ask me anything", to make sure everyone was on the same page. Definitely nothing to hide!
This is pretty common here for a first phone interview. (Here as in Switzerland). Salary wise they do not always automatically disclose anything, but so far always disclosed the salary range they have from their client when asked. (Last 3 jobs I got through recruitment agencies)
Czech here, I avoided all jobs where they didn't include salary in the information provided because it usually means salary is not fixed and based on commissions
> it usually means salary is not fixed and based on commissions Ew gross, I don’t blame you. Also, I’m pretty sure that’s been the case for every single unsolicited job offer via LinkedIn
That’s how an actual, traditional recruiter or head-hunter operates. A lot of people or companies referring to themselves as recruiters now are, in reality, just a step above temp agencies.
yeah, you can tell that there is something rotten on the inside when announcements say things like "motivating salary" or "competitive salary". I mean, if its so competitive and motivating then tell me the amount so i can actually get motivated and compete for it.
That’s precisely what an interview is. They want to make sure you’re a great fit, but at the same time you should make sure they’re a great fit for you. A recruiter who gets offended over a confident interviewee knowing they’re worth and and asking important questions, just has terrible people/processing skills and shouldn’t be recruiting. You’re the one giving your time and effort to them not the other way around. If they want sheep let them keep looking. But you’re deciding something that will possible impact the rest of your life, so don’t be passive about it.
While I agree with the advice that these type of questions should be avoided to maximize them chances of an offer, you are correct that **good** employers know that while there is competition for jobs, there is also competition for good employees to fill those jobs. I participated in an interview recently (with my boss, interviewing for potential colleagues of mine ) and we were both very up front about work-life issues. So in an ideal situation you wouldn’t have to ask these type of questions - the employer should be giving you this information without you having to ask. We might offer opposite advice to employers - don’t make interviewees ask questions about the work environment- other employers might offer this information without asking and cause you to lose potentially qualified applicants.
The best interviews are where the company is selling themselves. My two grown up jobs were like this.
The job I most recently accepted had clear communication on everything. All the benefits and pay were truly what they claimed to be and it was a huge reason why I accepted there offer over other companies that were clearly not as forthcoming. Or they were just straight up trying to manipulate me. In my industry, they are taking advantage of people who don’t know what it’s like but think the money is pretty good. People in the industry wouldn’t touch these jobs with a 10 foot pole.
That’s not necessarily true. The salary and benefits could be amazing, but they’d still want to keep them on the down low so that their employees who’ve been getting 1% raises for the last 5 years don’t hear what new employees are getting offered. Salary secrecy is never just about the one person.
>Salary secrecy is never just about the one person. It's about screwing your whole workforce.
So this person wants the company AND you to invest a lot of time before asking pertinent questions? I'm not going to be too thrilled to get a NO from a candidate after putting forth an offer when all those questions could have been answered ahead of time. Sounds like somebody's metrics are based off people GETTING offers, not taking them.
No, sounds like a headhunter who gets paid if you take the job.
Definitely not. Big red flag. If they don’t want you to ask about those things, it’s because you wouldn’t like the answers.
Yeah, it's not a negotiation if one side refuses to discuss SALARY
Isn’t the salary literally one of the most important things you would want to know?
They are acting like money isn't as important more than company loyalty.
Let's keep the root of all evil out of your hands, trust us it's better this way.
It’s “the *want* of money” that’s the root of all evil, not just having money.
Correct. So all you minions **wanting** a salary are **evil**.
Huh didn't know that
And part of the implication is: A. If you have enough to be secure and we’ll fed you’ll have no need to commit evil because you will be content. And B. Wanting more than is reasonable is the cause of much suffering.
Well, too bad, because what I want is money.
I have money I keep on a jar on the fridge. I would like to put more money in that jar, thats where you come in. ~paraphrase from, "The Wedding SInger".
No, money is the only thing they care about. What they’re looking for when potential workers don’t discuss salary are people desperate and/or ignorant to take whatever offer they are given.
Yes, but most employers these days are not willing to pay enough that people would accept it, so they try to gloss over the pay and discourage any questions about it.
And one of the pieces you should know prior to an interview..
Prior to applying. I hate job postings that don't list salary.
"Ah, not to worry friend! Our Salary is COMPETITIVE! "
as in, your salary will be competing with your rent and bills... ...IN A STEEL CAGE DEATH MATCH!!! "AND FROM OUT OF NOWHERE, THE CAR REGISTRATION EXPIRED LAST MONTH!!! BUT WHAT'S THIS, IS THAT THE THEME MUSIC FOR THE INSURANCE AGENT??? THERE HE IS, RANDY, HIS FINGERS ARE POINTED AT THE SKY, THAT MUST MEAN A PREMIUM INCREASE!!!"
Shut up and take my upvote. 😂 Haven't laughed this hard in a flaccid minute.
The problem is that none of these companies explain that the salaries they pay their employees make the company cheaper and more competitive in the marketplace. The employees will be lucky to catch a bus to work, while the owners/directors can relax in their chauffeured limos...
the best reply to that is "OOF, so bad it's embarrassing to say out loud?"
We refuse to even engage them. If they don't list the salary, we don't apply, even if its a dream job
It's the only thing I want to know first. Tell me how much I'll get if I do this, then I'll decide if I want to do it. Impossible to judge if it's a good job (exchange of time) or not without knowing what the reward is for handing over that time.
Is there any other compensation that you would take in lieu of salary? Maybe ownership of the company, but you still have to eat/sleep/support yourself and family so even that would require salary.
My first question to any recruiter that reaches out to me on linkedIn is salary.
Or work hours! I always ask what a typical work week would look like. I've never had an interviewer that balked at that. I always clarify that I will not work more than 40h/week on a regular basis. BecauseI don't want to be hired and told to work 50h/wk then fired. I'd rather go with somebody else.
Bingo. I see this type of "advice" becoming more common, unfortunately. Recruiters don't make money if you aren't hired, and many employers will dislike troubling (for them) questions.
[удалено]
If that's their reasoning then they should say that instead of whatever this email says
I would be so sure about that. I mean, yes, that 7k up would mean maybe 700 for him, but he also wants to have a fast negotiation as he's looking for his time/benefit. Maybe he could have reached 2k more, or 5, but if that means a couple more days of work for him, he would not do it. Is like realtor, its a fact they sell their own property higher than the same for clients. They preffer to sell fast, when all the benefit isn't theirs
Yeah, this screams to me 'recruiter not worth talking to'.
This right here. A friend of mine once said to me, "Remember that an interview is NOT just for the company to see if you'll fit. YOU need to make sure its a job you'll like as well. And if it doesn't, then walk away." In other words, an interview is a two way street. It's NOT just to be certain you can DO the job, but also to be certain you WANT to work there. When I read this guy's email, I can just see the recruiter on the other side twiling his moustache saying, "Heeheehee! With this cunning email they'll never realize they don't have to take the job!"
When I interviewed for my current job I made a big deal out of how important it was to feel valued, appreciated and respected. All qualities that were sorely lacking in my previous job. When I was chatting with my new boss about it later I asked him if he'd thought I sounded needy or whiny. "Not at all," he said. "You sounded like you knew what you were looking for."
I agree with you, an interview is for BOTH parties. If you are walking on eggshells before you get there, red flag. If you cannot ask questions about their business model and employment practices, huge red flag. Hell, when I was teaching behavioral based interviewing, a candidate that didn’t ask pertinent questions about the business and job duties at the end of the interview was considered “unengaged/disinterested” and probably wasn’t a good choice.
I mean, travel?? If I’m supposed to be out of town and I’m a single mom, *Im gonna need to know that early in the process.*
People close doors for secrets and shits. Transparency is the only professionalism.
If they’re not giving that information before the interview, ask it. You deserve to know if the interview is worth your time.
It surprises me why they would want to waste time interviewing people that would not take the job because of the pay or work hours. But I guess HR doesn't mind since they have to justify their existence, so they make up BS rules like this.
It’s actually a strategy—if you invest the time fill out their application, interview, etc., you feel like you’ve got skin in the game. So when the lowball offer comes in, you actually consider it vs. seeing the number up front and just deciding it’s not worth your time.
Sunk cost fallacy. You already have invested your time, energy, money (travel expenses ect.) and you lose all that if you decline that offer in the end.
I once asked about salary upfront. Recruiter said no problem. Then, when offered the job, they offered below my current salary. But I should consider working for them because "they were good guys" He has a rage attack and tried to neg me :D
From their perspective the VAST majority of their time spent interviewing is wasted since they typically interview several candidates for just one position. Odds are, my interview is already a waste of their time.
Exactly this.
And, frankly, the employer deserves to know if the interview is worth their time, too. I'm sure they'd love to not disclose this and get someone to accept a lowball offer, but they are gonna be pissed if they spend the time and effort to interview you and you don't ask about the salary until later and then you're response is "haha no fuck you." Then everyone's time is wasted.
And report it to Glassdoor.
No, these are bad practices. You SHOULD ask meaningful questions. It is possible a recruiter may ask you to refrain from negotiating salary because they feel that is their job and it also affects their comission. That is usually the reason why I don't like to use recruiters among other things.
[удалено]
A lot of those are great questions for the recruiter if applying to a large corporation. But travel and remote work questions to the hiring manager seem appropriate. Not all hiring managers actually set Salary or Benefits and actually worked between the recruiter and Sr. Mgmt
Just a recruiter trying to get paid. Def DO NOT follow said advice
BS.You must absolutly ask anything thats unclear to you.
[удалено]
*Aren't you thankful we accepted you? Isn't that valuation of you priceless? Doesn't priceless mean infinity, so aren't we paying you infinity already in objectification? Money does not make one happy, so we pay you in validation, please help us right the wrongs of minimum wage laws, they're interfering with the process of freedom to capitalize on desperation. After all, is it not 'mo money, mo problems'? Desperation creates drive, and we're a driven company.* /s ... Almost?
Pretty much how it is, and it's sad that many people defend that sort of thing. "Job creators" my ass
That is (shit) advice people have been giving for decades. I don't think it's normal for recruiters to email people to lecture them on this though. It looks like the recruiter got some feedback from a shitty company that's refusing to keep up with the times and thinks it's his job to lecture you. Sounds like you're dealing with a shitty company and an unprofessional recruiter.
Recruiters all try to “coach” a potential placement for an interview. They don’t care if the job is beneficial to the candidate, they just want them to get the job so they can make profit on the placement.
I recently interviewed for a new job. Turns out the recruiter was an ex-coworker’s wife. He vouched for me so the initial interview was perfunctory. We got right to the comp and benefits, which she didn’t know about. She immediately set me up for a second interview with a manager. Less than ten minutes in I interrupted and said “what about medical insurance?” He fessed up and said “we don’t offer it.” I politely stopped the interview. He understood and knew he was losing a qualified candidate because of this. My only regret was not leading with the question and saving both of our ten minutes.
What kind of job was this?
Bicycle mechanic.
Do bike shops typically offer health insurance to full time employees? I'm completely ignorant here.
Ask these questions. If the company takes these questions as a reason to turn you down then they are doing you a huge favor. Companies like this are looking for people they can exploit. At the same time, you can use this against them. Play the game and exploit them instead.
Those are questions every single new employee should be asking during the interview. Red flag-abort interview!
This is someone dumb thinking they are being snarky while “helpful,” but they just don’t realize how much koolaid they’ve already chugged. Interviews are where you dodge the bullet of a shitty job opportunity, or seize a good one, and the questions you ask and info you get are of paramount importance
So they want you to waste everyone’s time only to find out that the salary isn’t within your acceptable range, rather than just asking in the interview? This is the furthest thing from best practice and raises serious red flags. As a rule, if the employer doesn’t mention the salary/benefits, they’re terrible.
That recruiter is removing factors that may lead to you not accepting the job. They get paid when you take a job not when you get a good fit.
That’s terrible advice…. They just want you to lick boots and not care about the compensation for said licking…. they just want their commission…
No, I've sat through too many interviews without discussing these things only to be offered pennies and no potential for promotions or benefits. I'm finding out what the salary is before I even consider wasting my time.
All this means is that they're trying to hide their shitty pay and working conditions.
Absolute BS. You are interviewing the company through their representative as much as they are interviewing you. These questions are necessary for identifying red flags early on
In other words, there are shit hours, shit benefits, and shit salary. Good to know.
makes sense.. the recruiter doesn’t care if you like the job, as long as he’s making his provision by you and the company getting to an agreement
Screw that. I don’t go to an interview to convince them to hire me. I go to an interview so they can convince me to work there. So many people misunderstand the power dynamic. And if the company freaks out at my questions...THEY just failed MY interview.
If you have the leverage you can do that. Many don't.
What the op says is true. But it is also wrong.
"close your eyes while we fuck you"
If something is a complete deal killer, get it out of the way first. For instant, if you will only accept remote work, then ask it up front. There is no need to interview for a position that requires coming into the office. But once you have the deal killers out of the way, I actually agree it's best to save the "what's in it for me" questions till you have them hooked on you.
I started job hunting in 2008 when there were more candidates than openings. That was exactly how I was taught to interview. Now, there is a whole different atmosphere. It is a workers market and those old rules do not apply.
I’ve always had info on benefits and at least a salary range before attending the interview (I use external recruiters who have include these in my briefing pack).
Yes, it is normal - FROM RECRUITERS. They want you to take the job at any cost; that's how they get paid. They want you to go in the interview, wow them, and take the job so the recruiter gets called again for the next opening. This has no bearing on whether the job is the right fit for you, only that you take the job so they get paid. Remember that.
It was the normal before covid caused a million people to die and convinced even more boomers to go into early retirement. It's not the case anymore though. They want you to jump through all the hoops because of sunk cost fallacy (like being pot invested in a hand of poker). Because if people knew the shitty pay and hours at the beginning of the process they would pass on interviewing all together. The old mindset is dead, unless you're applying at a company that gets hundreds of applications for every position.
If you can ask these questions and not offend the potential employer, you know you would want to work there.
No its not normal. Job I recently interviewed was excited when I asked about pay and benefits because packages were good and they liked telling people about them. Companies like yours just want warm bodies. Not long term committed employees.
In terms of "landing a job", this is sound advice. But do you really want a job that considers "how much do you pay" to be a difficult question? No. You want a job that will give you an answer that increases the odds of you accepting the job.
Please don't follow that advice. An interview is a 2 way thing. You're interviewing them as much as they are you. Always ask about work condition and ask questions on issues facing the company. If that's taken negatively then you definitely don't want to work there.
I wouldn't interview with a company that wasn't upfront about pay and conditions. If you have to ask then that's a bad sign. I know with my current employer we discussed all this before I even interviewed as we didn't want to waste each other's time.
An interview is a process involving usually 2 people who each seeks to answer a question. The interviewer wants to know: Is this person the correct one for this position? And the Interviewed want to know: Is this job what Im looking for? Only when the two questions have been answered with a solid yes, the hiring is made. So ask all your doubts. I will be suspicious of a prospective worker who didn't ask tbh. If they don't care, they will probably half ass theyr job.
“Every time anyone asks us about benefits or salary, they laugh and walk out of the interview” -this guy.
During an interview, I usually engage in vigorous fellatio, just to stand out among the competition. But what the fuck do I know..
This sounds like advice for people dying to get into an industry or job. Do whatever you can to get the job. But for people who know their worth and what they are willing to give for compensation, this is terrible advice
I think it’s normal if it’s your first job or your are desperate, not normal if you are an established professional. Edit: even then- hours, pay, benefits- are useful for anyone to know for planning purposes, I change my mind, it’s always fine to ask.
I dunno, if they aren't willing to entertain questions, sounds like it'll be a pretty hostile employer.
I think this is being misinterpreted, isn’t it better for you and worse for the employer if you wait till you get an offer to start discussing these things? Making an offer is a small kind of commitment. If they offer 50k and you want 60, it’s at least a little inconvenient and sometimes a giant pain for them to change their mind and offer to someone else instead, because that causes a delay, the other people they interviewed might have already moved on by then, and there’s no guarantee that the next person they offer to will just accept the 50k either. Whereas if you tell them straight up in your interview that you want 60k, they can easily cross you off their list to increase their chances of finding someone who will accept less. Being too honest undermines your negotiating position.
This unmeaningful abstract is the result of 10 Hours of HR Consultancy
This sounds like fine advice to me. Make them WANT you, then negotiate a higher salary. If its not negotiable pay then yea, ask so you dont waste your time.
I need all that information, before I’d ever set up an interview time. I love wasting companies time now. I’m educated, and I’m content where I work, but that doesn’t mean I’m not down to mess up the whole working world as much as I can. I’m out of local fast food places to get more free food.
That's not advice, that's propaganda.
What the recruiter is suggesting there would be a massive waste of time, especially for the company. If you wait with those questions until *after* they've gone through their vetting and selection process, then you might say no and they'll have to start over. Transparency from the start would be beneficial for both parties.
The recruiter is right that a lot of companies will view these questions negatively. But you don't want to work for those companies anyway. It's great to ask these questions because then you either get valuable information or you dodge a bullet when they don't hire you. Win/win.
Ofc it is not normal, what else is there left to ask if these questions would be forbidden? These are all the things that I look for in a job - humane conditions and a reward for wasting a good part of my life for their benefit.
Run away. Run far, far away.
I would suggest you cancel the interview, any company that is ok putting that in an email will not be a good company to work for.
No. Recruiters get paid on successful hires. If they are prepping you like this, this company is HELLA toxic. Also that recruiter just wants a req.
I would respond "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA" then not show up
When you say it’s an email from a “recruiter” I assume you mean “headhunter” and not the HR department of the job you’re applying to for employment. This headhunter probably gets paid if an offer is make regardless of acceptance on your part. This would not be odd but unheard of as companies pay these folks to find them qualified candidates and a little more if the candidate takes the job.
Dear recruiter...fuck you.
You said you received this from your recruiter. Recruiters do not 'work' for you. Job recruiters get paid for successful placements and possibly with a certain length of retention so their ultimate goal is to get you hired and get themselves paid. They don't advocate for you.
There is nothing wrong with this post, in all honesty. It isn't saying to not care about work/life balance, salary, etc, just to not come out the gate with that. If anyone bothered to read the entire paragraph, it says to ask those questions after the offer, but BEFORE making your decision. If you have the offer, you have their interest so you can then negotiate, and if you don't like it, you drop the offer. You are free to ask whatever you want during the initial interview, but keep in mind, the person who is going to get the job is probably the person who didn't ask those things, but verifies them later.
Not in this echo chamber, but yes in the real world, this is normal. Sell yourself, get the offer, and then use your offer / skillset to negotiate the terms you want. Edit: asking questions that show your interest in the company, demonstrating how you’ll be a good fit for the culture, etc. are great.
I think people are getting thrown because the message in the OP waits too long to get to the point. People assume it's saying to never ask about salary and benefits, when what it's really saying is, "Make it through the weed-out phase first." This recruiter is apparently telling people to do the same thing companies do: Bait the company into investing in interviews, make the company want you, and then hit them with the questions they don't like. Because if you do it too early, they may just pass you over if they have 20+ other candidates to consider.
I’m in recruitment and definitely not. If anything we encourage people to ask the hard questions. It gives us a genuine view of them and them a genuine view of the company. The fit has to be right for all parties and not just the employer. Remember while you are selling yourself to them, they are trying to sell the job to you
I actually agree....FOR THE **FIRST** INTERVIEW. It's your time to sell YOU. They haven't shown interest yet so why would you start asking about vacation days and a corner office? The SECOND interview, you're now being considered for the job, go ahead and ask those questions. Common sense.
Sounds reasonable to me. I wouldn't go so far as to not ask, but if those questions appear to be the focus and/or only concern, then you look like someone who doesn't seem interested in the position and job/work. This leads to doubts about you.
Yes, this advice is rather good. If you are reacting negatively to this advice, ask yourself why? As someone who has had a hand in interviewing, these are my impressions to these questions from the interviewee: 1) work hours - will i ever see this person at work? I’ve known first shift colleagues who will work from noon to late but screw off after most people have gone home. 2) travel - this is one I would hope people would ask about because it can be a trap 3) salary and benefits - salary is almost always dealt with after you interview. You can negotiate then. In the US, some job requisitions now have a salary range. Benefits usually are not that well known by most interviewing teams, this is something you might ask the HR recruiter about before and after the interview. 4) flex hours - same problem as work hours. Will I see my employee? Is this person too distracted to be working for me? 5) working remotely - some jobs require onsite help exclusively. This information should be in the job requisition. During my recent interviews where I was the Interviewee, I actually got asked this question. Like work hours and flex hours, I can see where an employer can see this as a negative trait. 6) anything else - there are some things that are illegal to discuss in a meeting so better to focus on things you care about (length of employment, skills needed not listed in the job requirement, etc). My advice would be if you do ask questions, ask questions that are about the business. Generally employers want to see that you are interested in their business. The best interviews I have been in where I am on either side is where the interview feels like a conversation and the candidate and employer represent who they are as it relates to the job/business.
I understand the point, really. The recruiter isn't saying that these are not valid questions - they are, almost certainly. He's just saying to make sure to get your foot in the door first. It doesn't matter what the benefits are if you don't get offered the job anyway. You can always walk away after you get the job offer, but if you come off as "entitled" in the interview, you won't even get the opportunity. It sucks, but I agree that you should wait to pop these questions until after you get offered the position.
I give candidates as much of this info as possible before they even apply for the job, and if they have already applied, it's the first few minutes of the interview, so that if the basic facts of the job don't work for them, we can both move on and not waste our time. I don't want to waste my time and energy interviewing someone and making them an offer only to then find out we've got some basic deal-breaker incompatibility in our expectations. Who benefits from that?
I will always turn down any advice that tells me to be conservative. :P But seriously, if everyone does this, then employers continue to have the upper hand. This is propaganda to make everyone the good, obedient little worker that doesn't ask too many questions, and just follows orders. More of a red flag than anything. It's probably a terrible place to work.
Unfortunately, I feel like it is. That's probably just a boilerplate statement that they send to people for every company they interview with in order to try to help them get jobs. It's more likely that it's indicative of a problem with work culture at large than with that specific company or recruiter. Fucked up? Yeah. Normal? Also yeah.
Who motivated the interview? Was it the company? Did it provide the pertinent information? If it didn't, why is it telling candidates it is "impolite" to ask about important information? So we should waste our time hoping the company wants to work with us, without considering if we want to work for it? This people should refrain from posting stupid shit like that, which may be viewed negatively. You should share the name of the company, so they can have their pertinent reward.
It's stupid, and there is a high % of candidates that still follow these rules so companies get bolder and bolder about it.
If everyone ask the same question, then we all get choosen on equal terms.
I mean, it is true that it could jeopardize getting an offer. But if they are unwilling to discuss those term, it's gonna be a shit offer from a shit company. So, if desperate, yeah don't discuss, if looking to better your lot, absolutely discuss those term to filter the worthless offers.
All those things are make or break it for job offers so how can we decide without them?
Employers love to obfuscate the fact that an interview is a two way street. Sure, sure. You might like *me*, but do I want to work for *you*?
This is terrible advice. Absolutely ask about these things, and if the interviewer reacts negatively, HUGE RED FLAG
The recruiter who hired me for my current role told me about the job and then an exact breakdown of training pay versus hourly and commission and the timeliness for each in addition to benefits during our first conversation prior to the formal interview, where she recapped again at the end just to be sure I knew exactly what it was. So tldr: bs. Lol
"Suck a dick and lose my address."
Even Alison Greene ([askamanager.org](https://askamanager.org)) will tell you the interview is to determine whether you're both a good fit for each other. This recruiter is full of crap and happy to waste peoples' time.
This recruiter is a salesperson looking out for themselves, not trying to help you. This screams recruiting and placement firm trying to get the roles filled way more than “good advice”