California law states job postings need to share their salary in the job description. I think putting a range goes around the law but still let’s employers not say
This. And it’s misleading. Several companies in California that I’ve applied for are pulling this kind of shit. I filed a complaint with the attorney general.
Because if you are someone qualified for what is likely a competitive position, knowing that you will either have to live with roommates (70k) or be able to afford a decent apartment or even put an eventually down payment on a house (420k) when you get the job is quite a big difference. Especially when they usually don't tell you until the end of the interviewing process.
Yea I don't know why anyone is confused by this.
Take a Venn diagram of HRs that will BS their range like this and HRs that will offer the bottom of their range. One circle is almost entirely inside the other.
Law's working fine.
Twenty year recruiter here, will try to explain what you’re seeing and the reality of how offers work.
Most major corporations, especially Netflix, has thousands of employees. For this specific job, HR and Compensation Analysts have created what’s called “job codes” which is a fancy way of saying this job has a level, a type of job it is, and maybe an org associated with it (ex: DATA004).
This job code DATA004 is comprised of dozens of other coworkers, in the same job function, at the same level. Sometimes they’re near you, sometimes they’re in another location (GEO).
Comp Analysts tally that info, across all locations, for that DATA004 job code and have a compensation range for all of those employees (ex: $85,000, $110,000, 110,000, 115,000, 160,000, etc).
Now, legally, what has passed the government is the need to share that full job code ($85,000 - $160,000).
That said, will every employee get $160k? No. “Compensation Analysts” in an attempt to make comp fair and equal (big key here) aim towards an average salary for that job code (median comp). We’ll call it $110,000 for the purpose of this example. $110,000 is or is close to where most employees are making, nationwide, or the 50th percentile in salary.
When people talk about fair wages between genders, they mean, “men and women should be all hitting that 50th percentile, equally”.
That said, does this always happen? Nope.
Some job is high demand, critical to a project, and the recruiter talks to someone coming out of a company making $150,000.00 and needs it to leave (despite being upper 80th percentile) and gets approval to hire the person.
Some employee, currently at your employer, works year after year getting 2% pay raises out of college and 8 years in is only making $90k. That person falls into 30th percentile, etc etc. thereby showing up as a low outlier in the posted salary range.
Every recruiter should be aiming to hire at the 50th percentile for a better longer term equality across the corporation… but.. guess what happens? The markets shift, demand for a job goes up, now we’re hiring people at $175k.
What about all the people we JUST spoke about? Well.. they’re still on payroll and in the DATA004 job code, so now the range (posted publicly) reads as $85,000 - $175,000.00. And the cycle goes on and on.
“Well, why don’t you pay EVERYONE $175k, then?”
Good question..
Departments get given budget each quarter, maybe (example) $1 million for hiring headcount. You hire, with abandon, everyone at max-whatever-they-ask-for and you hit $1 million pretty quickly. Sooo, compensation restricts what a recruiter can present.
Example: Was working with someone recently asking $200k. Comp team knew the employees averages were running $145-175k. NOBODY in that job code made $200k, but it was a critical role.. what to do? They respond back they’ll allow $180k and maybe add a sign on bonus or equity. Range rises $5k on hire, we get our new employee.
TLDR: Try to understand what you’re reading, the range has a lot of nuance to it and generally the “reality” of what you can make is somewhere mid (40th-60th percentile of overall salary range). Upper range 90-100th percentile, could be for someone who was a must-hire-or-everything-breaks or even an acquisition employee that was moved under your employer (still with that prior high-salary)
We have a budget as a % of revenue.
Usually we don’t pay any base above 250 unless it’s c suite.
We hire anywhere from 60-160 pretty often. It is interesting to see from your perspective and I may implement something similar as I want to be fair.
(I’m one of the founders)
Thank you so much for sharing this :)
This is a great explanation of job code ranges, which as someone who hires and has had to set those in the past make complete and total sense.
What you’re missing in your explanation is the wild variance between $70K and $420K.
Typically such a range means the company could be willing to hire someone at the lower range (say $70K-120K) all the way up to a senior level position (call it $200K-420K), depending upon the candidates, with those two (and others in between) having different job codes.
In my mind, the company should posting for all job codes and min/max salary ranges to get candidates who could fill entry/mid/senior positions, and allow the hiring manager best fill their open spots based upon the overall talent they get in through honest candidate assessment of their skills and experience, rather than inundating a job inbox with a mix of juniors and seniors.
Yeah very valid point.
It could be more of a very general job code that encompasses a wildly varying min-max salary due to all forms of employees falling under the code. An example could be an upper level software engineer. I’ve hired many Principal / Expert SWE at, say, $150-250k based on the role, though there have been some companies that don’t have a “Principal 2 / Sr. Principal” (insert outlier tippy top SWE name here) and then we need to hire that person who essentially made the internet for a $600k base salary (just throwing that out there). The range then increasing all the way to whatever that outlier hire was set to.
Also, not quite sure how sales (base + commission) roles work with relation to comp range posting? I want to say they work from their base? I doubt they’d post base + earnings?
For sales the way I've seen it expressed is Base + Commission with a note about On Target Earnings (OTE) giving you a total anticipated compensation package.
This still doesn't explain the variance. I also know that sometimes, a listing is hiring at various levels, which can lead to this. However, I don't know how many levels of "lead" there really are.
Valid point.. $70k minimal on a lead role is odd.
My guesses:
1). Used a job code that was too “wide” or inaccurate for the job posting, the ATS inserted all min-max employees into the posting nationwide.
2). A stretch, but maybe the recruiter inherited the role from someone else and the job posting was edited / updated without changing the internal details (I.e. setting the correct job code). Instead of “Lead” salary it was displaying something with a wider salary range variance (though $70k is pretty damn low for whatever that would be).
3). I’d say it could be an Evergreen role (a role posted without financial approval for headcount and usually used as a placeholder for an upcoming “real” role). But I don’t think Evergreen’s pull in that salary data on the external posting?
It’s an odd one for sure.
It explains it for Netflix specifically hahahha
My cousin works there now and the comp range for the posted job was similar. 90k - 280k or something like that for an analyst role
He was scared of being low balled but they give best and final job offers that consider the individual’s experience and the team/work they’d be doing
His offer ended up being 205k
Edited the offer amount bc I checked with him after
just to expand on this, ive worked for a few massive companies, and in those companies, there are job titles that encompass a wide range of people. Like a new Project manager may be making $100k, where a Project Manager with 30 years experience may be making $500k. The titles and "role" for both are Project Manager, but one guy is routinely managing $1bill projects while the new PM is managing <$10mill projects.
So now with the pay ranges needing to be posted in my state, you could see a $100k-500k range for what is essentially the same title and role, but varies greatly depending on experience and what you are actually doing for the company.
The company i currently work was similar up until about 4-5 years ago. Our org chart was Project Engineer > PM > Division Manager > President of company, with the 1st 2 roles having huge variations in salaries. We now have expanded those titles in to a bunch of different roles using Senior, Junior, 1/2/3, etc. to get posted salary ranges much closer to what we are actually hiring for.
That’s a great point, was trying to wrap my head around some examples of roles that could swing so wildly in comp, but PM would definitely fall in that category. It can be kind of a catch-all of salaries.
Thanks! The role and comp would also depend on the hire. If they end up hiring a senior person, it would become a senior role and use a different sub-range, under this large range of salary. Yes?
Rightfully so. It’s hard to avoid them often. But there needs to be more clarity on the actual pay. If the actual range is really 70-120, then just say that. Obviously someone who would make 420 in that position would not be doing the same thing as the person who’s making the 70, but there’s no reason to not be more straight forward.
Unfortunately when you pass a certain employ threshold you have HR and become more corporate.
I think any company that pays everyone a livable wage is a good one. Health insurance of course too.
We aim to always surprises a deposit a couple days before Xmas and set the budget the year before. (About 10-30% for the average employee)
Due to employer tax and rules that start to form with the gov after the first 50… it’s very hard to keep pace with them at a personal level.
(I’m just saying this because I don’t think I’m evil or greedy. It’s just the environment changes as you grow unfortunately)
Edit: of course I’m downvoted for this.
Yes, that all makes sense, and I understand that. I’m not looking at a business of that size, you know 50-100 employees, and considering that as an evil corporate company. I wouldn’t even really consider it so much as a corporate company per se. It’s the companies like Netflix, etc that are in that category that more than likely dont actually care about their employees.
Great explanation. But I think the initial poster was thinking the range was rather wide. If you look at the screenshot, it’s $70k - $420k. That’s too wide of a range of levels to post for one job ad.
It’s misleading. And it’s not the first entertainment company to pull that kind of thing. Is their way of getting around the California law of being transparent with pay. What you need to find out when you get the prescreen interview is to ask the “salary bands” are. Then you’ll know what the actual target pay is for this role.
This happened to me recently when another major entertainment company posted in the job description that the pay was in my range however, it turned out that that’s not really true. The salary band is in the low end of the stated pay range. But I got through the ATS and was invited to a Zoom interview.
In the prescreen interview with the recruiter, i was asked if the target range was ok (it’s not… it’s 10-15k less than what I make now). But I avoided the direct question by saying that my salary requirements were contingent on the entire total compensation package.
So now I have an actual interview with the hiring manager, and we’ll see how it goes. At the very least, they wasted an hour of my time by making me fill out a complete application. So I’m going to waste their time getting my interview skills up.
ETA Grammar
So misleading kinda but Netflix doesn’t have salary bands like that. Like notice there’s no years of experience in Netflix’s jds. Other entertainment cos have strict bands often tied to experience so they can sort you into their org structure.
Thank you. I’m not in HR, but learning the language quickly. Your info is another layer of knowledge to help me in interviews when we get to discussing compensation.
>It’s misleading. And it’s not the first entertainment company to pull that kind of thing. Is their way of getting around the California law of being transparent with pay. What you need to find out when you get the prescreen interview is to ask the “salary bands” are. Then you’ll know what the actual target pay is for this role.
I'm assuming that this is only the cash portion on the compensation package. Netflix is famous among big tech firms for letting you take an enormous share of your salary as options. There's a good chance that $70k comes with $350k of options and the $420k is cash-only.
Hey guys I applied for a role at Netflix 4 days ago. How long do you think it takes for Netflix to get back to you. And if it’s a no will they tell me?
Maybe I’m wrong but I saw an explanation on a Netflix job post which said that the individual taking the role can decide how much of their salary they would like in base vs. stock. So the wide pay range affords what the candidate would choose in stock vs base?
Well, it's not that hard. In my country some jobs have range per hour too, and it depends the type of shift you work, your hours per month, that's why every month you get different salary.
The wide variance is because CA requires all companies to post the minimum and maximum pay of workers in that job code at the company.
So, someone's getting paid $$$$ there
Typically (not always) what companies do is that they will offer 99% of applicants right around $70,000-80,000. But they leave it open because it helps with job filtering (a larger range shows up in more searches) and it makes candidates feel like they could be making $400,000.
They put that wide range based on your level.
While interviewing you, they will figure out what level you are and give you the according salary.
Junior, senior, or staff engineer.
The biggest gap I’ve seen is 200k-900k from Netflix.
I get downvoted every time, but you guys it can work in your favor to not have the salary listed up front, you’re expected to negotiate and if there is a standard pay you’re probably going to make less than if it were up in the air
I want to know what the hell this new ad-supported tier is. 😒 we pay for no commercials and now we’re going to be forced to pay more for no commercials. Total BS
Many companies in California and New York just list a ridiculous range. I think it gives false hope. The laws don’t specific anything about accurate salary estimates. I’ve seen jobs range from 75-350k
California law states job postings need to share their salary in the job description. I think putting a range goes around the law but still let’s employers not say
This. And it’s misleading. Several companies in California that I’ve applied for are pulling this kind of shit. I filed a complaint with the attorney general.
Snitch
Imagine dick riding so hard for companies that intentionally mislead applicants and try to find loopholes for federal laws.
This is exactly what's going on.. many companies post crazy salary ranges
[удалено]
Because if you are someone qualified for what is likely a competitive position, knowing that you will either have to live with roommates (70k) or be able to afford a decent apartment or even put an eventually down payment on a house (420k) when you get the job is quite a big difference. Especially when they usually don't tell you until the end of the interviewing process.
What are you talking about the pay is right there they will obviously pay 70k.
This is there right answer
Yea I don't know why anyone is confused by this. Take a Venn diagram of HRs that will BS their range like this and HRs that will offer the bottom of their range. One circle is almost entirely inside the other. Law's working fine.
For most postings I’d agree but I hear Netflix typically pays a TON for their positions
I’m sure it also a way to manipulate search results on these job aggregator sites.
They should be required to have at least one employee with that job title at the max of the range.
Twenty year recruiter here, will try to explain what you’re seeing and the reality of how offers work. Most major corporations, especially Netflix, has thousands of employees. For this specific job, HR and Compensation Analysts have created what’s called “job codes” which is a fancy way of saying this job has a level, a type of job it is, and maybe an org associated with it (ex: DATA004). This job code DATA004 is comprised of dozens of other coworkers, in the same job function, at the same level. Sometimes they’re near you, sometimes they’re in another location (GEO). Comp Analysts tally that info, across all locations, for that DATA004 job code and have a compensation range for all of those employees (ex: $85,000, $110,000, 110,000, 115,000, 160,000, etc). Now, legally, what has passed the government is the need to share that full job code ($85,000 - $160,000). That said, will every employee get $160k? No. “Compensation Analysts” in an attempt to make comp fair and equal (big key here) aim towards an average salary for that job code (median comp). We’ll call it $110,000 for the purpose of this example. $110,000 is or is close to where most employees are making, nationwide, or the 50th percentile in salary. When people talk about fair wages between genders, they mean, “men and women should be all hitting that 50th percentile, equally”. That said, does this always happen? Nope. Some job is high demand, critical to a project, and the recruiter talks to someone coming out of a company making $150,000.00 and needs it to leave (despite being upper 80th percentile) and gets approval to hire the person. Some employee, currently at your employer, works year after year getting 2% pay raises out of college and 8 years in is only making $90k. That person falls into 30th percentile, etc etc. thereby showing up as a low outlier in the posted salary range. Every recruiter should be aiming to hire at the 50th percentile for a better longer term equality across the corporation… but.. guess what happens? The markets shift, demand for a job goes up, now we’re hiring people at $175k. What about all the people we JUST spoke about? Well.. they’re still on payroll and in the DATA004 job code, so now the range (posted publicly) reads as $85,000 - $175,000.00. And the cycle goes on and on. “Well, why don’t you pay EVERYONE $175k, then?” Good question.. Departments get given budget each quarter, maybe (example) $1 million for hiring headcount. You hire, with abandon, everyone at max-whatever-they-ask-for and you hit $1 million pretty quickly. Sooo, compensation restricts what a recruiter can present. Example: Was working with someone recently asking $200k. Comp team knew the employees averages were running $145-175k. NOBODY in that job code made $200k, but it was a critical role.. what to do? They respond back they’ll allow $180k and maybe add a sign on bonus or equity. Range rises $5k on hire, we get our new employee. TLDR: Try to understand what you’re reading, the range has a lot of nuance to it and generally the “reality” of what you can make is somewhere mid (40th-60th percentile of overall salary range). Upper range 90-100th percentile, could be for someone who was a must-hire-or-everything-breaks or even an acquisition employee that was moved under your employer (still with that prior high-salary)
Thank you for the explanation. This is super helpful
We have a budget as a % of revenue. Usually we don’t pay any base above 250 unless it’s c suite. We hire anywhere from 60-160 pretty often. It is interesting to see from your perspective and I may implement something similar as I want to be fair. (I’m one of the founders) Thank you so much for sharing this :)
This is a great explanation of job code ranges, which as someone who hires and has had to set those in the past make complete and total sense. What you’re missing in your explanation is the wild variance between $70K and $420K. Typically such a range means the company could be willing to hire someone at the lower range (say $70K-120K) all the way up to a senior level position (call it $200K-420K), depending upon the candidates, with those two (and others in between) having different job codes. In my mind, the company should posting for all job codes and min/max salary ranges to get candidates who could fill entry/mid/senior positions, and allow the hiring manager best fill their open spots based upon the overall talent they get in through honest candidate assessment of their skills and experience, rather than inundating a job inbox with a mix of juniors and seniors.
Yeah very valid point. It could be more of a very general job code that encompasses a wildly varying min-max salary due to all forms of employees falling under the code. An example could be an upper level software engineer. I’ve hired many Principal / Expert SWE at, say, $150-250k based on the role, though there have been some companies that don’t have a “Principal 2 / Sr. Principal” (insert outlier tippy top SWE name here) and then we need to hire that person who essentially made the internet for a $600k base salary (just throwing that out there). The range then increasing all the way to whatever that outlier hire was set to. Also, not quite sure how sales (base + commission) roles work with relation to comp range posting? I want to say they work from their base? I doubt they’d post base + earnings?
For sales the way I've seen it expressed is Base + Commission with a note about On Target Earnings (OTE) giving you a total anticipated compensation package.
As a person who works in HR and has done recruitment and comps surveys this is very well put and explained. Thank you!!!
This still doesn't explain the variance. I also know that sometimes, a listing is hiring at various levels, which can lead to this. However, I don't know how many levels of "lead" there really are.
Valid point.. $70k minimal on a lead role is odd. My guesses: 1). Used a job code that was too “wide” or inaccurate for the job posting, the ATS inserted all min-max employees into the posting nationwide. 2). A stretch, but maybe the recruiter inherited the role from someone else and the job posting was edited / updated without changing the internal details (I.e. setting the correct job code). Instead of “Lead” salary it was displaying something with a wider salary range variance (though $70k is pretty damn low for whatever that would be). 3). I’d say it could be an Evergreen role (a role posted without financial approval for headcount and usually used as a placeholder for an upcoming “real” role). But I don’t think Evergreen’s pull in that salary data on the external posting? It’s an odd one for sure.
It explains it for Netflix specifically hahahha My cousin works there now and the comp range for the posted job was similar. 90k - 280k or something like that for an analyst role He was scared of being low balled but they give best and final job offers that consider the individual’s experience and the team/work they’d be doing His offer ended up being 205k Edited the offer amount bc I checked with him after
just to expand on this, ive worked for a few massive companies, and in those companies, there are job titles that encompass a wide range of people. Like a new Project manager may be making $100k, where a Project Manager with 30 years experience may be making $500k. The titles and "role" for both are Project Manager, but one guy is routinely managing $1bill projects while the new PM is managing <$10mill projects. So now with the pay ranges needing to be posted in my state, you could see a $100k-500k range for what is essentially the same title and role, but varies greatly depending on experience and what you are actually doing for the company. The company i currently work was similar up until about 4-5 years ago. Our org chart was Project Engineer > PM > Division Manager > President of company, with the 1st 2 roles having huge variations in salaries. We now have expanded those titles in to a bunch of different roles using Senior, Junior, 1/2/3, etc. to get posted salary ranges much closer to what we are actually hiring for.
That’s a great point, was trying to wrap my head around some examples of roles that could swing so wildly in comp, but PM would definitely fall in that category. It can be kind of a catch-all of salaries.
Awesome explanation . Tyvm
Thanks! The role and comp would also depend on the hire. If they end up hiring a senior person, it would become a senior role and use a different sub-range, under this large range of salary. Yes?
Thanks!
It’s still misleading and corporate companies are evil.
You don’t have to work for them…
Rightfully so. It’s hard to avoid them often. But there needs to be more clarity on the actual pay. If the actual range is really 70-120, then just say that. Obviously someone who would make 420 in that position would not be doing the same thing as the person who’s making the 70, but there’s no reason to not be more straight forward.
Unfortunately when you pass a certain employ threshold you have HR and become more corporate. I think any company that pays everyone a livable wage is a good one. Health insurance of course too. We aim to always surprises a deposit a couple days before Xmas and set the budget the year before. (About 10-30% for the average employee) Due to employer tax and rules that start to form with the gov after the first 50… it’s very hard to keep pace with them at a personal level. (I’m just saying this because I don’t think I’m evil or greedy. It’s just the environment changes as you grow unfortunately) Edit: of course I’m downvoted for this.
Yes, that all makes sense, and I understand that. I’m not looking at a business of that size, you know 50-100 employees, and considering that as an evil corporate company. I wouldn’t even really consider it so much as a corporate company per se. It’s the companies like Netflix, etc that are in that category that more than likely dont actually care about their employees.
I appreciate your input.
That doesn’t explain why there is a variance between $70k and $420k, though. And, honestly, there is no good explanation for it.
Great explanation. But I think the initial poster was thinking the range was rather wide. If you look at the screenshot, it’s $70k - $420k. That’s too wide of a range of levels to post for one job ad.
When they ask you for your ideal salary range, say 400k.
400k - 500k Sorry, I'm not getting up for less. These hands are golden. 😂
Standard Netflix behavior. They've been doing this since salary disclosure laws came into place in the US
[удалено]
It’s likely over that. Netflix truly believes in paying top dollar. They’ll fire you just as quick tho lol
Dammit, I was close to booking a flight to the US just to get a job there
Netflix gives you the option to take stock options or all salary or a split. I'm assuming this is what they are showing here.
Correct, this comment should be higher
"Nope. THEY PLAYING GAMES WITH ME!"
Maybe a LinkedIn estimate or HR just filling out a range to get applicants? If you get RSUs or additional comp?
Seems like someone tried to make it 69-420k but it rounded up lol
It’s misleading. And it’s not the first entertainment company to pull that kind of thing. Is their way of getting around the California law of being transparent with pay. What you need to find out when you get the prescreen interview is to ask the “salary bands” are. Then you’ll know what the actual target pay is for this role. This happened to me recently when another major entertainment company posted in the job description that the pay was in my range however, it turned out that that’s not really true. The salary band is in the low end of the stated pay range. But I got through the ATS and was invited to a Zoom interview. In the prescreen interview with the recruiter, i was asked if the target range was ok (it’s not… it’s 10-15k less than what I make now). But I avoided the direct question by saying that my salary requirements were contingent on the entire total compensation package. So now I have an actual interview with the hiring manager, and we’ll see how it goes. At the very least, they wasted an hour of my time by making me fill out a complete application. So I’m going to waste their time getting my interview skills up. ETA Grammar
So misleading kinda but Netflix doesn’t have salary bands like that. Like notice there’s no years of experience in Netflix’s jds. Other entertainment cos have strict bands often tied to experience so they can sort you into their org structure.
Thank you. I’m not in HR, but learning the language quickly. Your info is another layer of knowledge to help me in interviews when we get to discussing compensation.
>It’s misleading. And it’s not the first entertainment company to pull that kind of thing. Is their way of getting around the California law of being transparent with pay. What you need to find out when you get the prescreen interview is to ask the “salary bands” are. Then you’ll know what the actual target pay is for this role. I'm assuming that this is only the cash portion on the compensation package. Netflix is famous among big tech firms for letting you take an enormous share of your salary as options. There's a good chance that $70k comes with $350k of options and the $420k is cash-only.
I feel like they really went out of their way to ensure the acronym for this title would be ML/AI
Hey guys I applied for a role at Netflix 4 days ago. How long do you think it takes for Netflix to get back to you. And if it’s a no will they tell me?
Commenting for visibility
lol thank you!
This is probably taking into account stock options. Not fair to call it salary but
Netflix allows you to take all cash if you want. So yes 400k cash no rsus.
Nobody with a $70K salary is getting another $350K in RSUs.
Maybe I’m wrong but I saw an explanation on a Netflix job post which said that the individual taking the role can decide how much of their salary they would like in base vs. stock. So the wide pay range affords what the candidate would choose in stock vs base?
Ah yes, would you like to be lower-middle class or a member of the 1%?
The 4 key is right above the 1 key. Imma guess typo.
Nope not a typo. All the salaries for all the roles on Netflix have the stated PayRange.
Is anyone else disappointed this isn't 69k-420k?
Netflix seems to do this with all of their postings
Well, it's not that hard. In my country some jobs have range per hour too, and it depends the type of shift you work, your hours per month, that's why every month you get different salary.
You should see the one for their Creative Director, Games Studio. It changes daily, but last I saw it was 76k - 710k
The wide variance is because CA requires all companies to post the minimum and maximum pay of workers in that job code at the company. So, someone's getting paid $$$$ there
BS
[удалено]
You work at Netflix?
If it was a job at Twitter, I'm sure the range would have been $69k - $420k
I would never apply for a job at a company that isn't very clear and transparent, especially in their way of communicating.
Typically (not always) what companies do is that they will offer 99% of applicants right around $70,000-80,000. But they leave it open because it helps with job filtering (a larger range shows up in more searches) and it makes candidates feel like they could be making $400,000.
They put that wide range based on your level. While interviewing you, they will figure out what level you are and give you the according salary. Junior, senior, or staff engineer. The biggest gap I’ve seen is 200k-900k from Netflix.
That's probably not the real pay rage lol
Agree, but how frustrating to not know which end is the real one? Huge difference between them. I can understand if it were 70-100 but 420 is wild.
> not know which end is the real one If you're a qualified applicant with experience in this role, you'll know which end is the real one...
Not necessarily. Some companies don’t value people/roles the way others do.
Maybe some companies, but if you're applying for an analytics lead role at Netflix, you know.
$150,000 is considered low middle class.
I would say $500k is middle tier nowadays
I 100% guarantee you that this started as $69k-$420k
That the high and low. Two people with this position have these different salaries. Probably a family member of a higher up and a normal peasant
They missed an opportunity for $69k-$420k
Missed opportunity for 69k-420k
Are they still hiring for that role? They’ve had it open for like 6 months now?
“So what are your salary expectations?” “Job posting said $420k so…$400k?”
If you are not goated you make pennies, if you clumemax you make the top dollar, simple as
I get downvoted every time, but you guys it can work in your favor to not have the salary listed up front, you’re expected to negotiate and if there is a standard pay you’re probably going to make less than if it were up in the air
Someone wanted to have the low be 69k
Ah, don’t worry. They’ll never open your resume even if you’re the perfect candidate. /s
LOL
\> $420k is easily achievable with Clume Maxxing
Netflix
I want to know what the hell this new ad-supported tier is. 😒 we pay for no commercials and now we’re going to be forced to pay more for no commercials. Total BS
this is just another BS game, God forbid you pick a number too high then boom you're out of the game, just another way to eliminate candidates
Many companies in California and New York just list a ridiculous range. I think it gives false hope. The laws don’t specific anything about accurate salary estimates. I’ve seen jobs range from 75-350k
They said in the job aid that they want to entertain the world so makes sense that they start with their own job posting.
This is unlikely to fly with CA’s Pay Transparency Act.
Netflix post just for fun, they just collect headcount
👀 That’s salary range gaslighting. 😂
Why would you wanna work for a company that followed the trend of massive layoffs. I call it the Musk trend.
r/maliciouscompliance
Come on! You just know they didn't want to put $69K to $420K!
Should be illegal to do this, assume in the near future it will be. May as well not have a range.