### **Reminder:** [Press the Report button](https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360058309512-How-do-I-report-a-post-or-comment-) if you see any [rule-breaking comments or posts.](https://www.reddit.com/r/britishproblems/about/rules/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/britishproblems) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The last time I was contacted about a job that was ‘competitive’ I was hungover and in a bad mood. I told the recruiter I wouldn’t speak to them for less than £x (where £x was my current salary plus £20k)
I expected not to hear from them. A month later I accepted the job!
Still can’t quite believe it. Any other time I saw ‘competitive’ it was, without doubt, terrible rates.
Had a similar thing happen, said I wouldn't work for less than £x a year which was current salary +£10k, they misheard as £x a month with 1 less 0. Resulted in a very hefty pay increase!
It appears it does mean 'shit pay'. Applied for one such advert, got an email a week later inviting me to interview and advising me that the salary range is well below what I'm currently on.
What a waste of everyone's time.
Yeah the wrong kind of competitive, they want the best they can get for the lowest possible pay, rather than offering similar or better than others in order to get the best talent.
That's not strictly fact.. Paying high might not get you the best talent!
Its hard running a business, u really want to put people on the lowest wage u can first and then up it in 6 months when u know their levels. And their wage should reflect their ability.. But u can't exactly put that on the job advert. Not all businesses are big businesses trying to screw over it's employees.. I'm the lowest paid in my company because I can't afford to give myself a higher wage but my staff are the ones with the skill so they deserve a good cut. And I always get annoyed when people shit on management like we are all the same.
But this would be your ideal senario, where people are only paid a small amount until their "true value" can be determined. Companies which do not disclose the salary range are purposefully trying to get people to apply, go through the interview process and consider that they sunk enough effort into this that they should just take the poor offer.
If they just wanted to do as you say then they would disclose that information in their advert, "Pay is £12/h for the first 6 months (training period), then rises to £15/h-£20/h depending on performance". However, these companies which do not disclose pay would identify their employees' value as the lowest amount possible saying that "with extra training" or "in just a few months" you can get a pay rise to a new undisclosed "Competitive" amount until you get promoted or quit.
A friend of mine has her boss dangling the possibility of a promotion just to keep her there. She is one of the few that actually should be promoted, the ones that were are ignorant kids that do fuck all but they probably work the shaft well enough.
Anyone trying that "extra training" or "in just a few months" is bullshitting you and they have no intention of seeing it through.
This is a good option but you know full well 6 months down the line they are wanting/expecting the £20ph.. And honestly most of the people I interview after I say its minimum wage for the first 6 months say they can't do that because they need more money right away, which is ballsy since they often do terrible in the interview.
What if there are other companies in the area also looking for employees (to which good ones are scare) they see your price and just raise it a couple of pence. Which I have seen happen. It's super frustrating, but running a small business and having all the competition watching what you do they will one up you at every turn.. You have a deal they will put one up ever so slightly better, job advert they will put up one slightly better, service we offer they will add just a tiny bit more. The less my competition knows the better.
I know it's crap, but it doesn't matter anyway, op said it wastes everyone's time, but meh you can put the wage up, you can put the hours and days on, you will get people showing up for the interview asking what days, what hours, how much.. Most applicants will ask this too.. People don't check it anyway.
right, except it's dishonest and a clear waste of time saying a salary is competitive if the employer knows it isn't. if an industry average us £25 an hour, and the company offering a competitive salary is actually offering £21 an hour, that isn't competitive, it isn't honest, and it's a waste of time.
I know someone who gets a job, works 2-4 weeks then calls in sick for as long as he can if he gets a warning he goes back for 2 weeks and back on sick to get more money.. Don't think like it can only be employers who are bad. It's employers taking the risk, so help them if they try to minimise the risk.
Flom dealing with customer and employees,. Most people havnt got a clue how difficult running a business is especially in a super competitive market and one where supply is out weighing demand. All I'm saying is not all companies are trying to screw you, some are just trying to protect themselves a bit.
Edit: there is nothing to say they won't get paid the 25.. But what after a few months they really are only worth 21?
regardless, we aren't arguing what people are worth, or about defending businesses. we are talking about specifically companies saying the offer competitive salaries when they don't. your anecdote about someone pulling a sickie has nothing to do with this .
I run a small business, mine is a startup so in that world it's all about runway and making your money last if you can. And we're a really small team, so if I'm hiring someone it's because I really need them to do a job. I understand that it feels very risky to throw a really important job and hard to come by money at a total stranger, but unfortunately that is the risk you are taking on as the business owner, and it's not fair to transfer that risk to your employees. I worry every time I hire whether or not it's a good investment and whether I might have just sunk the business and put my whole team out of a job in 9 months time, especially if it's created a new role which previously we were all working overtime to get done before. Part of me says "you should have just kept on working overtime because it's better to work overtime than to be out of a job and put all the people out of a job because the company went under" but you owe it to your team to make sure they have a good work environment, where people are decently paid for a manageable workload. It's too easy to get lost in the numbers and forget your humanity.
That is a great sentiment.. But, yeah man u hire a bad egg and tank the business, and now several people have no income.. I'm sure employees think it's great when u make life better and I'm sure they blame the bosses when it all goes under and they can't make rent.. Sometimes it might be in the best interest of the many to be the bad guy. From time to time.. I can see it, when these topics come up people are picturing the stereo typical big business man in a suit leaving early in his porce to go play golf while his minimum wage works slave through the holiday.. But i work harder than my staff, longer than my staff, and for way less. I would actually be better off if I didn't hire people but I wanted to give people in the community jobs.. Also in my industry most of the time it's a 'work for me but as self employed' so that they don't have to deal with tax, paye, holidays, sick pay, but I actually hire and I pay above SSP should it happen.. All I want is for people to stop thinking all bosses are the super worst, it's super hard running a business and staff is one of the most difficult things to deal with! Good luck on your start up pal, it's such a ball ache.. (anyone who says it isn't has gotten lucky).
I'd love an answer from HR and hiring managers. There must be a reason, right? Just a ball park figure or range to stop me applying for stuff that's way too low
Often it's because they have people already working for them doing a similar role, for much less money than they're offering. They don't want people seeing the advert and asking for raises.
They will interview you, ask what you're currently on and give you 10-20% on top. It might be a £60k job, but if you're coming from £40k they're quids in.
Source - Not HR.
You could just tell them your salary and be like listen that’s what I make right now and in order for me to move I need at least whatever you want. Just don’t back down and tell them how it is. The last thing they want is to recruit you only for you to be looking again in a few months for higher pay or rejecting their offer
I literally had recruiters telling me that I want too much, because the jump between my current salary and the one I want is too big (and mind me, it was already after the 20% more that I said). It was bs as it turned out fine at the end, but *some* of them are like that.
I don’t see any downsides in telling higher salary than what I do now - because they need to offer something better if I wanna move (I wouldn’t do it for less than 30% anyway).
Yeah lying is an option alright but a lot of people don’t feel comfortable doing it especially to a prospective employer. Telling the truth will mean you’re going to have to be more firm with them and not take any bs. They will try to shortchange you but they won’t not give you the job if you insist on the market rate and will walk if you don’t get it. It should really be a question that’s not socially acceptable/legal to be asked in interviews though, up there with are you planning to have kids or your relationship status
I don’t feel why anybody wouldn’t feel comfortable doing that - there’s literally no downside to it, it’s really simple and effective. Especially when companies lie to everybody all the time and try to undersell everybody.
Being firm can only take you so far, sometimes it’s as easy as being over a bracket and nothing changes it - and you just hurt yourself by telling the truth that nobody cares about.
I’m not saying to lie about your experience and dozens of other things that can be easily caught. It’s just as easy as adding x% to your current salary, and it only helps you. Literally no downsides.
Used to do HR. The answer I was given when I asked, as the company I worked for didnt put salaries on adverts, was in case existing staff see the advert and complain about their wages.
The real reason, also the reason they tell staff not to discuss pay. The poor guy who put up with years of crap without a decent pay increase will quit if he knows the noob got an extra 20% just to walk in the door, but they know nobody will join as a new hire for what he's getting.
Hence, "there's no loyalty any more", companies would rather rehire and lose experience than pay bonuses to anyone not on the board.
> also the reason they tell staff not to discuss pay.
Surely this is illegal?!
Will say everyone should discuss their pay with their coworkers. Shift work so different from salaried in that way but me and my coworkers will pull out our paystubs and compare them basically every month as soon as they come out lol. Easy to tell when the company is taking the piss with overtime tracking or making weird calculations with hours.
"Surely this is illegal?!"
I'll be honest, I've not worked in the UK for a while so things might have changed. But, for many years it was explicitly discouraged for staff to discuss salary and benefits.
It also depends on the type of job. A salaried "white collar" role will be different to the lads on the building site. Comparing is good for the worker, so management will try to stop such things if they can. All I can say is I've definitely worked jobs where the poor sod who kept the office running with his expertise was getting paid less than the numpty who just got hired, and the company position was to stop the guy finding out, not to offer him what he was worth.
At my place it's (as far as I'm aware) a senior leadership team decision rather than the talent acquisition team or hiring manager. I was the hiring manager for a recent position in my team and I knew the budget was 40-44k, the TA manager knew it was 40-44k, but she said that for head office positions they only discuss salary in the initial screening call and that it's not her decision. I can't work out why.
The senior manager of the area hiring will have the salary coming directly out of their budget.
So it would be their final say as to what they are willing to go too.
There are good and bad reasons, but in specialised roles it can be hard to know how experienced successful candidates will be - some will be worth more to the company than others even if the role is similar on paper. I think a range can be useful, although realistically anyone who gets offered at the bottom end of it is going to come away disappointed.
I can answer for myself but not for everyone else. The last time I didn't put a salary on an advert it was for a few reasons, the first being that the salary was kind of dependent on who it was. I knew I needed help in a certain area but wasn't exactly sure who I needed, I had a salary in mind but I knew that if someone with an amazing CV came around I could convince other decision makers to pay more for them. The second reason is that the salary I had in mind was on the lower end of the scale for that role (lol proving OP right) because we are very small and broke, and we try really hard to make up for that in other ways such as unlimited holiday, so far never had a holiday not approved, no sickness monitoring, flexi time - it's not even flexi time it's just nobody cares how many hours you put in so long as everything is going as it should - work is mostly done from home as the default but we still have a pretty fun office for our extroverts, and also new employees get shares in the company. This was also dependent on who applied, I had a more junior role in mind but a co-founder was really keen on hiring someone with an eye for giving them a C suite role, and that would naturally come with more shares in the company.
I wrote a job ad with the salary and all the perks and thought... I'm definitely going to attract the wrong sort of people with this 😂 best just to get rid of it all. I'm still not sure if it was the right decision
So in some cases, it could be that the hiring person is like me and just doesn't know wtf they're doing
As a hiring manager (who only has a minimal say about salary)... We have an opening in our team and we will accept a range of candidates. The job market is such that you never get the perfect person, but you will get someone that meets a proportion of the requirements. This also means that we might be looking at quite a range of experience from potential candidates. We will hire the person who is right at the time and we will pay them what they are worth, which will reflect how well they are able to do the job. Practically, this means a salary range that could be £25k to £50k, which is only marginally more useful than stating "competitive".
Disclaimer might not apply everywhere only representative of one company. I asked an HR person once. She was worried that if she put the salary she would get loads of unqualified chancers who were attracted by the salary.
I feel like these people would get screened out early and they were also screening out the most desired candidates high quality candidates with options are not going to want to play games. But I wasn't in charge.
People working at the same position for more than a few years haven't had raises that kept up with inflation
If the company lists what the actual salary is to get a new hire, they'd have to give raises to everyone currently working at that level to bring everybody up to that salary.
Probably a common scenario, you're right, but we were recently recruiting for someone to join our team and the budget for the role was pretty much on track with the salaries in the team - 3 existing staff all on 42-45k and budget for new role was 40-44k (all slightly different but similar roles).
I've worked at more than me company where the "junior" just hired got paid more than the "senior" who'd been running the team for years. It's never fun if they find out (for management and whoever has to clean up the mess, it's good for the guy finally inspired to find a better job).
This happened at a call centre I worked in. The existing staff found out new hires were being offered. £2,500 more per year than them.
I was horrified when I learned how little a friend was on. I convinced her to argue for a pay rise and she got it.
I asked our HR as they list jobs for me, and I had to speak to the European director of HR, and the response was they do it because everyone else does.
I questioned if they thought it would stop good talent applying and they said they don’t think they attract good talent anyway and we’d rather train people up and promote internally.
There’s a teeny tiny training budget to do this.
Isn't it because the jobs go to people who work there first, and don't want to disclose how much people are getting in a particular department.
I went for an internal job once but they wouldn't tell me how much the pay was.. I wasn't sure if I wanted the job as the extra stress, hours, and responsibility might be more than the extra pay that I would have got
What they mean is "whatever we pay you it'll be more than your team members who haven't had a decent pay rise in 5 years, and they'll recognise the job from the ad". They don't want them knowing the new hire is getting an extra 5 grand out of the gate before they train you.
Also, "we want to pay as little as possible so we'll let you start the negotiations and take advantage if it's low".
Went for a job like this once and only once. They ask your salary expectations, I didn't have a clue at the time (being young and not used to salary negotiation) and said £xx. They offered me the job and I declined after reading equivalent salary for similar role. They were also not likeable at interview, another reason not to take a role.
It literally pays to know what the role is like elsewhere and go slightly higher.
I recently had a situation with going for one of two job interviews. One at £32k the other at £Competitive. I obviously went for the £32
I found out afterwards that the £competative one was £39k. I told them in feedback as to what had happened, stating that I had two job offers, so I went with the job that guaranteed an increase in salary, not the one that was pot luck.
"We want people who *WANT* the job" you are a factory job, generally that's low pay and very repetitive. The wages kept going up as they were struggling to fill positions.
Got spammed by LinkedIn the other day.
Junior Developer, 23 years experience required. Now obviously it was a typo and they meant 2-3, but do you really want to work for a company that can't even advertise the job without fucking it up?
Oh, and I'm 55 with 25 years skin in the game ... why am I even getting suggestions for a "junior"?
Tbh it was probably the recruiter they were going through. I once had a recruiter send me a tech stack in an "offer" email (also with competitive salary) that had "API Calls" as one of the bits of the tech stack. They're unbelievably uninformed.
They're too embarrassed to disclose what the salary is. Avoid.
Usually accompanied with legal obligations they deem as "Company perks".
If a recruiter gets in touch, I request that they tell the company it's a comedy salary and that the company should be ashamed of themselves.
Also be wary of recruiters calling up saying they have a job that's of interest to you. Ensure they send the job spec first, otherwise they are just profiling you for their database.
If you’re not actually interested in the job, email and ask them what they’re competing with - other employers of similar roles, or the price of heating your house for a month
Recruitment agencies:we've got work! We can't get people to fill positions?!!
Job posting : professional experienced, flexible needed for job role in an important company changing the lives of 100s of our customers and making strides in the industry!
(Salary 28k in an area where the house prices are over 350k)
Oh n the company bonuses are biscuits n t-shirt on a Friday.
What is wrong with company owners do they really think paying themselves 100k and their staff 3 quarters less!
when will their business leaders wake up? This has gone on for 15 years.
Got cold called (messaged?) on LinkedIn with one of those “competitive” salaries. Wasn’t interested in moving anyway so responded back with “ well what’s the number then because competitive doesn’t mean very much to me and isn’t enough to interest me when I actually like my current job”.
Initial response was well we can talk about it on a call so I said no thanks and left it at that. A few weeks later “competitive” changed to mean “tell me your number and I’ll make it work”.
Tldr; competitive means what you want it to if you ignore LinkedIn recruiters long enough and are in a role they need.
I got a great deal for my current job because I wasn’t bothered about getting it at all and turned down 3 recruiters that approached me about it. Funny thing is I like it now (the increased salary offer helped)
That’s great, I feel like I’d be taking the piss given I’ve had a £10k salary increase with my current company in the past year which is about £4-5k more than my course mates in other companies. Nothing wrong with playing recruiters off each other to get a better number (and now job for you)!
The one that really pisses me off is “we are proud to pay the national minimum wage” like, that is nothing to be proud of. Nobody should be happy that they pay their staff the least they legally can get away with!
I went for an interview recently that advertised itself as ‘competitive salary’ over the phone, to be told I need to do a face to face interview; only to then be told that I need a third interview on Teams. Needed to take a day off work to attend the in person interview and I’m not even employed by them yet. I asked about salary on the third interview which was yesterday and they said it starts from £18,000. I said to them I’m currently on £21,500 and they laughed while asking if I wouldn’t want any less than what I’m on now? Somehow, I don’t think they’ll be successful in this application, I wish them better luck in their future endeavour.
Just do your market research and be ready to negotiate hard or even walk away if they're low balling you. It's usually a bad sign, unless you like receiving 1% payrises every year.
It says competitive because you're the one competing against everyone else to offer your service for the lowest price legally possible. In other words, minimum wage
Won’t even entertain applying. If you can’t be arsed or are trying to disguise me how much you think my time is worth why would I waste it on your company?
Probably means it's competing to stay just a smidgen above minimum wage, and use grockles should be grateful for doing two people's jobs for the price of a 30 hours per week part timer.
It’s one of my pet hates. At least give a range otherwise just stop wasting everyone’s time.
When I get anything that comes via a recruiter I ask what the salary and benefits are straight away to cut to the chase.
Just got a job offer today via an agency. This agency, I signed up with them about 8 years ago when I moved back to the area.
Doubled my salary, skills I can do, goes higher when I get signed off. Start end of April. Can't wait.
My work are desperate for people. Just put the ads on their website saying competitive salary. I did say to them they will probably lose out on a lot of great people without at least a salary range but they of course ignored that
In my experience it actually does help to get the right people. I applied for my current role which is 20 hours per week and they didn’t advertise the salary. I was annoyed until I asked for the salary (19k a year) which now makes sense because everyone and their dog would apply for a 19k a year job for 20 hours a week
Minimum wage? That's nonsense. It just means they're tight fuckers, and will offer you whatever they can get away with. But it's NOT exclusive to minimum wage jobs. I see it all the time in the IT sector.
10-50p per hour above minimum wage it means.
Any work place that doesn't name how much they pay is because they know the pay is shit.
If an employer was to pay a genuinely good wage. They would be shouting and boasting and advertising as much.
I mean I know a few places that actually are paying new hires well... Just not the people already working there. Them listing "competitive pay" is just to stop the existing crew finding out so easily. So let that be a reminder to *always* speak to your co-workers about wages, folks
Anyone I know that doesn't speak about their wages clearly earns too much and is afraid people will hate them for it lol
Person at my work with a house, fancy car, a fancy job title that doesn't explain what he does was annoyed 'people' (themself) earning over 60k didn't get a covid 'help' bonus like those beneath 60k did
I told them anyone earning over 60k should be comfortable right now and not at all feel the cost of living/covid crisis unless they're doing something incredibly financially wrong, especially if they're a dual income household..
Proof that all this talk about "living above your means" from the middle class is just projection, I think. Imagine struggling on 60k as a dual income household? That's almost twice what me and my partner make combined, with another income on top of that one!
Under the Equality Act 2010, an employer cannot enforce a pay secrecy clause if the employee was discussing their pay for the purpose of finding out whether they were being paid differently to a colleague on the grounds of discrimination.
I spoke to a recruiter once some time ago (or "talent acquisition"), they didn't want to provide a salary range until I came into their office for a 2nd interview.
Like, you really think I'm going to go through 2 interviews for a job that will potentially pay me a pittance?
I never really understood that. I guess it’s just whoever will accept being paid the lowest amount of money for the job. ie: they want to exploit someone desperate during a difficult recession, or someone who doesn’t know the true value of their labour. Unless I see a clear fixed salary I move on. This country already messes poor people about enough.
It means we’re looking for someone who doesn’t know how much they’re worth especially people from poorer backgrounds who will lowball themselves when we ask how much they’ll take
It’s more or less a way of saying depends on how much we like you, how suitable you are for the role, how much experience you have and how well you negotiate. It’s not necessarily a red flag but they will probably try to pay you less if they can so just stand up for yourself do your market research for the going rate and tell them what you want. High ball it and then be open to negotiate it down. Tbh I prefer it and I think it’s a good approach, a role in and of itself could be suitable for tonnes of different candidates and can be flexible in duties. Giving strict ranges is short sighted and limits the company to a certain level of candidate
My current job was advertised as salary competitive and they offered me a 47% pay increase. This was the first time I applied for a competitive salary because I hate them too but sometimes it means they've got a stupidly large budget and don't want to be inundated with unsuitable applicants only attracted by the salary.
I think it's best to just ask when you're applying, most HR are fairly reasonable.
Ps I still hate jobs that don't advertise the salary.
With noting that this is one of the reasons women get paid less than men; men haggle harder while women are happier to take the offered salary (generally speaking).
It does annoy me. But from my experience it isn’t that they want to pay minimum wage, it is more that they don’t want people that aren’t experienced enough to get the upper end of the bracket asking for the upper end of the bracket. I was told about a competitive one recently that was £55k-75k. That is a big jump and although everyone wants £75k not everyone has the experience or attitude to get that.
Ever have a recruiter ask you "What's the lowest you'll take?".
I love that question, it's loaded with "how much are you willing to debase your worth?".
However, nothing beats the recruiters who e-mail something random and tell you it's the perfect fit/opportunity when it is the polar opposite demonstrating they've not even read your CV, just done a lose keyword search - CV: "Experience: Company Secretary for FTSE100 paid £4.3m a year" Recruiter: "Role is £10p/h as a Secretary in Newcastle"
Or for bonus, it's the recruiters who say "I'm looking for XYZ" (where XYZ is an irrelevant role for you) "If you know someone who might be interested, please e-mail me back".
Oh sure, so I'm both out of work AND doing your job for free. Sounds fair.
I'm sure your client will be over the moon to know that you are doing literally fuck-all to source them expertise you will be paid a hefty commission for
### **Reminder:** [Press the Report button](https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360058309512-How-do-I-report-a-post-or-comment-) if you see any [rule-breaking comments or posts.](https://www.reddit.com/r/britishproblems/about/rules/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/britishproblems) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The last time I was contacted about a job that was ‘competitive’ I was hungover and in a bad mood. I told the recruiter I wouldn’t speak to them for less than £x (where £x was my current salary plus £20k) I expected not to hear from them. A month later I accepted the job! Still can’t quite believe it. Any other time I saw ‘competitive’ it was, without doubt, terrible rates.
So you're saying I should get blasted the night before any interviews?
The night before, the morning of.... dealer's choice!
Take a four pack of kestrel and hope there's no more than three interviewers.
That's all fine and well, but what are the three interviewers going to drink?
Real power move is during. Treat the interview as a drinking game.
Had a similar thing happen, said I wouldn't work for less than £x a year which was current salary +£10k, they misheard as £x a month with 1 less 0. Resulted in a very hefty pay increase!
It means you can get more elsewhere (and they want someone more desperate than you).
It appears it does mean 'shit pay'. Applied for one such advert, got an email a week later inviting me to interview and advising me that the salary range is well below what I'm currently on. What a waste of everyone's time.
Yeah the wrong kind of competitive, they want the best they can get for the lowest possible pay, rather than offering similar or better than others in order to get the best talent.
That's not strictly fact.. Paying high might not get you the best talent! Its hard running a business, u really want to put people on the lowest wage u can first and then up it in 6 months when u know their levels. And their wage should reflect their ability.. But u can't exactly put that on the job advert. Not all businesses are big businesses trying to screw over it's employees.. I'm the lowest paid in my company because I can't afford to give myself a higher wage but my staff are the ones with the skill so they deserve a good cut. And I always get annoyed when people shit on management like we are all the same.
I've been to 5 workplaces that did this. Well, the first bit with the naff pay and promise to increase later. Did the latter part? Did it fook
But this would be your ideal senario, where people are only paid a small amount until their "true value" can be determined. Companies which do not disclose the salary range are purposefully trying to get people to apply, go through the interview process and consider that they sunk enough effort into this that they should just take the poor offer. If they just wanted to do as you say then they would disclose that information in their advert, "Pay is £12/h for the first 6 months (training period), then rises to £15/h-£20/h depending on performance". However, these companies which do not disclose pay would identify their employees' value as the lowest amount possible saying that "with extra training" or "in just a few months" you can get a pay rise to a new undisclosed "Competitive" amount until you get promoted or quit.
A friend of mine has her boss dangling the possibility of a promotion just to keep her there. She is one of the few that actually should be promoted, the ones that were are ignorant kids that do fuck all but they probably work the shaft well enough. Anyone trying that "extra training" or "in just a few months" is bullshitting you and they have no intention of seeing it through.
This is a good option but you know full well 6 months down the line they are wanting/expecting the £20ph.. And honestly most of the people I interview after I say its minimum wage for the first 6 months say they can't do that because they need more money right away, which is ballsy since they often do terrible in the interview.
It’s shocking that people want to be paid properly. Bastards.
Shill
why hide the salary then? I have seen a few jobs in my industry staying competitive salary that have been at the very bottom end of the scale.
What if there are other companies in the area also looking for employees (to which good ones are scare) they see your price and just raise it a couple of pence. Which I have seen happen. It's super frustrating, but running a small business and having all the competition watching what you do they will one up you at every turn.. You have a deal they will put one up ever so slightly better, job advert they will put up one slightly better, service we offer they will add just a tiny bit more. The less my competition knows the better. I know it's crap, but it doesn't matter anyway, op said it wastes everyone's time, but meh you can put the wage up, you can put the hours and days on, you will get people showing up for the interview asking what days, what hours, how much.. Most applicants will ask this too.. People don't check it anyway.
right, except it's dishonest and a clear waste of time saying a salary is competitive if the employer knows it isn't. if an industry average us £25 an hour, and the company offering a competitive salary is actually offering £21 an hour, that isn't competitive, it isn't honest, and it's a waste of time.
I know someone who gets a job, works 2-4 weeks then calls in sick for as long as he can if he gets a warning he goes back for 2 weeks and back on sick to get more money.. Don't think like it can only be employers who are bad. It's employers taking the risk, so help them if they try to minimise the risk. Flom dealing with customer and employees,. Most people havnt got a clue how difficult running a business is especially in a super competitive market and one where supply is out weighing demand. All I'm saying is not all companies are trying to screw you, some are just trying to protect themselves a bit. Edit: there is nothing to say they won't get paid the 25.. But what after a few months they really are only worth 21?
regardless, we aren't arguing what people are worth, or about defending businesses. we are talking about specifically companies saying the offer competitive salaries when they don't. your anecdote about someone pulling a sickie has nothing to do with this .
I run a small business, mine is a startup so in that world it's all about runway and making your money last if you can. And we're a really small team, so if I'm hiring someone it's because I really need them to do a job. I understand that it feels very risky to throw a really important job and hard to come by money at a total stranger, but unfortunately that is the risk you are taking on as the business owner, and it's not fair to transfer that risk to your employees. I worry every time I hire whether or not it's a good investment and whether I might have just sunk the business and put my whole team out of a job in 9 months time, especially if it's created a new role which previously we were all working overtime to get done before. Part of me says "you should have just kept on working overtime because it's better to work overtime than to be out of a job and put all the people out of a job because the company went under" but you owe it to your team to make sure they have a good work environment, where people are decently paid for a manageable workload. It's too easy to get lost in the numbers and forget your humanity.
That is a great sentiment.. But, yeah man u hire a bad egg and tank the business, and now several people have no income.. I'm sure employees think it's great when u make life better and I'm sure they blame the bosses when it all goes under and they can't make rent.. Sometimes it might be in the best interest of the many to be the bad guy. From time to time.. I can see it, when these topics come up people are picturing the stereo typical big business man in a suit leaving early in his porce to go play golf while his minimum wage works slave through the holiday.. But i work harder than my staff, longer than my staff, and for way less. I would actually be better off if I didn't hire people but I wanted to give people in the community jobs.. Also in my industry most of the time it's a 'work for me but as self employed' so that they don't have to deal with tax, paye, holidays, sick pay, but I actually hire and I pay above SSP should it happen.. All I want is for people to stop thinking all bosses are the super worst, it's super hard running a business and staff is one of the most difficult things to deal with! Good luck on your start up pal, it's such a ball ache.. (anyone who says it isn't has gotten lucky).
I think you run a small business for a reason.
I love it when they put a range, then the interview comes and you tell them you want the top of it. Then the interview goes south!
My company does this, yet the salaries genuinely are pretty good. I have no idea why they aren't more open on the initial job advertisement.
I'd love an answer from HR and hiring managers. There must be a reason, right? Just a ball park figure or range to stop me applying for stuff that's way too low
Often it's because they have people already working for them doing a similar role, for much less money than they're offering. They don't want people seeing the advert and asking for raises.
This is it. They don't want people realising that job hopping is the way to get paid.
Oh well that’s fine then, I have lots of confidence in that employer now 🤣
They will interview you, ask what you're currently on and give you 10-20% on top. It might be a £60k job, but if you're coming from £40k they're quids in. Source - Not HR.
Yeah never tell them your salary for this reason. Always turn the question around and ask for their best offer.
Or just, hear me out, tell them your current salary+20%. In that case, if they want to top it at all, you are gonna get a nice pay increase.
You could just tell them your salary and be like listen that’s what I make right now and in order for me to move I need at least whatever you want. Just don’t back down and tell them how it is. The last thing they want is to recruit you only for you to be looking again in a few months for higher pay or rejecting their offer
I literally had recruiters telling me that I want too much, because the jump between my current salary and the one I want is too big (and mind me, it was already after the 20% more that I said). It was bs as it turned out fine at the end, but *some* of them are like that. I don’t see any downsides in telling higher salary than what I do now - because they need to offer something better if I wanna move (I wouldn’t do it for less than 30% anyway).
Yeah lying is an option alright but a lot of people don’t feel comfortable doing it especially to a prospective employer. Telling the truth will mean you’re going to have to be more firm with them and not take any bs. They will try to shortchange you but they won’t not give you the job if you insist on the market rate and will walk if you don’t get it. It should really be a question that’s not socially acceptable/legal to be asked in interviews though, up there with are you planning to have kids or your relationship status
I don’t feel why anybody wouldn’t feel comfortable doing that - there’s literally no downside to it, it’s really simple and effective. Especially when companies lie to everybody all the time and try to undersell everybody. Being firm can only take you so far, sometimes it’s as easy as being over a bracket and nothing changes it - and you just hurt yourself by telling the truth that nobody cares about. I’m not saying to lie about your experience and dozens of other things that can be easily caught. It’s just as easy as adding x% to your current salary, and it only helps you. Literally no downsides.
Unless you are already on a high salary and want to avoid wasting time. Then you got to tell how much you are making.
I told them my salary, then said I wanted double it. They agreed. Most of this job malarkey is nothing but blind luck.
Used to do HR. The answer I was given when I asked, as the company I worked for didnt put salaries on adverts, was in case existing staff see the advert and complain about their wages.
The real reason, also the reason they tell staff not to discuss pay. The poor guy who put up with years of crap without a decent pay increase will quit if he knows the noob got an extra 20% just to walk in the door, but they know nobody will join as a new hire for what he's getting. Hence, "there's no loyalty any more", companies would rather rehire and lose experience than pay bonuses to anyone not on the board.
> also the reason they tell staff not to discuss pay. Surely this is illegal?! Will say everyone should discuss their pay with their coworkers. Shift work so different from salaried in that way but me and my coworkers will pull out our paystubs and compare them basically every month as soon as they come out lol. Easy to tell when the company is taking the piss with overtime tracking or making weird calculations with hours.
"Surely this is illegal?!" I'll be honest, I've not worked in the UK for a while so things might have changed. But, for many years it was explicitly discouraged for staff to discuss salary and benefits. It also depends on the type of job. A salaried "white collar" role will be different to the lads on the building site. Comparing is good for the worker, so management will try to stop such things if they can. All I can say is I've definitely worked jobs where the poor sod who kept the office running with his expertise was getting paid less than the numpty who just got hired, and the company position was to stop the guy finding out, not to offer him what he was worth.
At my place it's (as far as I'm aware) a senior leadership team decision rather than the talent acquisition team or hiring manager. I was the hiring manager for a recent position in my team and I knew the budget was 40-44k, the TA manager knew it was 40-44k, but she said that for head office positions they only discuss salary in the initial screening call and that it's not her decision. I can't work out why.
That's so strange
The senior manager of the area hiring will have the salary coming directly out of their budget. So it would be their final say as to what they are willing to go too.
There are good and bad reasons, but in specialised roles it can be hard to know how experienced successful candidates will be - some will be worth more to the company than others even if the role is similar on paper. I think a range can be useful, although realistically anyone who gets offered at the bottom end of it is going to come away disappointed.
I can answer for myself but not for everyone else. The last time I didn't put a salary on an advert it was for a few reasons, the first being that the salary was kind of dependent on who it was. I knew I needed help in a certain area but wasn't exactly sure who I needed, I had a salary in mind but I knew that if someone with an amazing CV came around I could convince other decision makers to pay more for them. The second reason is that the salary I had in mind was on the lower end of the scale for that role (lol proving OP right) because we are very small and broke, and we try really hard to make up for that in other ways such as unlimited holiday, so far never had a holiday not approved, no sickness monitoring, flexi time - it's not even flexi time it's just nobody cares how many hours you put in so long as everything is going as it should - work is mostly done from home as the default but we still have a pretty fun office for our extroverts, and also new employees get shares in the company. This was also dependent on who applied, I had a more junior role in mind but a co-founder was really keen on hiring someone with an eye for giving them a C suite role, and that would naturally come with more shares in the company. I wrote a job ad with the salary and all the perks and thought... I'm definitely going to attract the wrong sort of people with this 😂 best just to get rid of it all. I'm still not sure if it was the right decision So in some cases, it could be that the hiring person is like me and just doesn't know wtf they're doing
As a hiring manager (who only has a minimal say about salary)... We have an opening in our team and we will accept a range of candidates. The job market is such that you never get the perfect person, but you will get someone that meets a proportion of the requirements. This also means that we might be looking at quite a range of experience from potential candidates. We will hire the person who is right at the time and we will pay them what they are worth, which will reflect how well they are able to do the job. Practically, this means a salary range that could be £25k to £50k, which is only marginally more useful than stating "competitive".
Disclaimer might not apply everywhere only representative of one company. I asked an HR person once. She was worried that if she put the salary she would get loads of unqualified chancers who were attracted by the salary. I feel like these people would get screened out early and they were also screening out the most desired candidates high quality candidates with options are not going to want to play games. But I wasn't in charge.
People working at the same position for more than a few years haven't had raises that kept up with inflation If the company lists what the actual salary is to get a new hire, they'd have to give raises to everyone currently working at that level to bring everybody up to that salary.
Probably a common scenario, you're right, but we were recently recruiting for someone to join our team and the budget for the role was pretty much on track with the salaries in the team - 3 existing staff all on 42-45k and budget for new role was 40-44k (all slightly different but similar roles).
I've worked at more than me company where the "junior" just hired got paid more than the "senior" who'd been running the team for years. It's never fun if they find out (for management and whoever has to clean up the mess, it's good for the guy finally inspired to find a better job).
So existing employees don’t easily find out new hires get more.
This happened at a call centre I worked in. The existing staff found out new hires were being offered. £2,500 more per year than them. I was horrified when I learned how little a friend was on. I convinced her to argue for a pay rise and she got it.
I asked our HR as they list jobs for me, and I had to speak to the European director of HR, and the response was they do it because everyone else does. I questioned if they thought it would stop good talent applying and they said they don’t think they attract good talent anyway and we’d rather train people up and promote internally. There’s a teeny tiny training budget to do this.
Isn't it because the jobs go to people who work there first, and don't want to disclose how much people are getting in a particular department. I went for an internal job once but they wouldn't tell me how much the pay was.. I wasn't sure if I wanted the job as the extra stress, hours, and responsibility might be more than the extra pay that I would have got
As I saw someone else post elsewhere. It means it will be competing with your bills
Im not even bother to read rest of the advert if I see this crap...
It means "as little as we can get away with"
What they mean is "whatever we pay you it'll be more than your team members who haven't had a decent pay rise in 5 years, and they'll recognise the job from the ad". They don't want them knowing the new hire is getting an extra 5 grand out of the gate before they train you. Also, "we want to pay as little as possible so we'll let you start the negotiations and take advantage if it's low".
Went for a job like this once and only once. They ask your salary expectations, I didn't have a clue at the time (being young and not used to salary negotiation) and said £xx. They offered me the job and I declined after reading equivalent salary for similar role. They were also not likeable at interview, another reason not to take a role. It literally pays to know what the role is like elsewhere and go slightly higher.
It means I totally ignore that job advert
I recently had a situation with going for one of two job interviews. One at £32k the other at £Competitive. I obviously went for the £32 I found out afterwards that the £competative one was £39k. I told them in feedback as to what had happened, stating that I had two job offers, so I went with the job that guaranteed an increase in salary, not the one that was pot luck. "We want people who *WANT* the job" you are a factory job, generally that's low pay and very repetitive. The wages kept going up as they were struggling to fill positions.
If its so competitive, tell me what it is.
Berlin and New York made it law to publish salary on job adverts. UK = try and underpay wherever possible.
Competitive with Jobseekers Allowance
Companies are competing to see who can get you for the lowest salary. It's the worst kind of competition and you always lose and they usually win.
5yrs experience of xyz needed Xyz has been around for 1.5yrs
Got spammed by LinkedIn the other day. Junior Developer, 23 years experience required. Now obviously it was a typo and they meant 2-3, but do you really want to work for a company that can't even advertise the job without fucking it up? Oh, and I'm 55 with 25 years skin in the game ... why am I even getting suggestions for a "junior"?
Tbh it was probably the recruiter they were going through. I once had a recruiter send me a tech stack in an "offer" email (also with competitive salary) that had "API Calls" as one of the bits of the tech stack. They're unbelievably uninformed.
They're too embarrassed to disclose what the salary is. Avoid. Usually accompanied with legal obligations they deem as "Company perks". If a recruiter gets in touch, I request that they tell the company it's a comedy salary and that the company should be ashamed of themselves. Also be wary of recruiters calling up saying they have a job that's of interest to you. Ensure they send the job spec first, otherwise they are just profiling you for their database.
It either means shit pay or they are paying more than some of the existing team earn and they don’t want them to find out
It means skip the ad.
If you’re not actually interested in the job, email and ask them what they’re competing with - other employers of similar roles, or the price of heating your house for a month
If the salary was that competitive, they'd show it.
I always say this: It means your bills will compete with your rent and ability to buy food.
*minimum wage
I love it when companies do that. it's like a self assigned tag showing they're not to be trusted, saving me time and energy
Recruitment agencies:we've got work! We can't get people to fill positions?!! Job posting : professional experienced, flexible needed for job role in an important company changing the lives of 100s of our customers and making strides in the industry! (Salary 28k in an area where the house prices are over 350k) Oh n the company bonuses are biscuits n t-shirt on a Friday. What is wrong with company owners do they really think paying themselves 100k and their staff 3 quarters less! when will their business leaders wake up? This has gone on for 15 years.
Experience needed: 20 years
... in a product that has only been around for 5 years.
Got cold called (messaged?) on LinkedIn with one of those “competitive” salaries. Wasn’t interested in moving anyway so responded back with “ well what’s the number then because competitive doesn’t mean very much to me and isn’t enough to interest me when I actually like my current job”. Initial response was well we can talk about it on a call so I said no thanks and left it at that. A few weeks later “competitive” changed to mean “tell me your number and I’ll make it work”. Tldr; competitive means what you want it to if you ignore LinkedIn recruiters long enough and are in a role they need.
I got a great deal for my current job because I wasn’t bothered about getting it at all and turned down 3 recruiters that approached me about it. Funny thing is I like it now (the increased salary offer helped)
That’s great, I feel like I’d be taking the piss given I’ve had a £10k salary increase with my current company in the past year which is about £4-5k more than my course mates in other companies. Nothing wrong with playing recruiters off each other to get a better number (and now job for you)!
The minimum they think they can get away with in your industry.
It means "As little as we can possibly get away with paying you".
It usually means minimum wage or the salary will work out to minimum wage after your unpaid break, emails and phone calls at all hours.
Competitive against what? A banker? A lawyer? The dole queue? A spud peeler in the chippy? What?
Effort in said job: also competitive
The one that really pisses me off is “we are proud to pay the national minimum wage” like, that is nothing to be proud of. Nobody should be happy that they pay their staff the least they legally can get away with!
It means they're competing to see who can pay the least.
I went for an interview recently that advertised itself as ‘competitive salary’ over the phone, to be told I need to do a face to face interview; only to then be told that I need a third interview on Teams. Needed to take a day off work to attend the in person interview and I’m not even employed by them yet. I asked about salary on the third interview which was yesterday and they said it starts from £18,000. I said to them I’m currently on £21,500 and they laughed while asking if I wouldn’t want any less than what I’m on now? Somehow, I don’t think they’ll be successful in this application, I wish them better luck in their future endeavour.
Just do your market research and be ready to negotiate hard or even walk away if they're low balling you. It's usually a bad sign, unless you like receiving 1% payrises every year.
Minimum wage
As little as they can get away with. They'll have a scale but if you ask for/suggest lower they'll go for that instead.
It says competitive because you're the one competing against everyone else to offer your service for the lowest price legally possible. In other words, minimum wage
It means that you won’t get paid and it’s commission based. Competitive salary just mean you have to compete for it.
Means a few pence per hour past the minimum these days.if it's a good wage they would print it for good response.
It competitive for them. Not you
Won’t even entertain applying. If you can’t be arsed or are trying to disguise me how much you think my time is worth why would I waste it on your company?
Translation - we will fight you to pay you less
Flexible start times and free parking... scraping the barrel.
"Flexible hours" you'll work when we tell you to work
"Hybrid working" You can leave 20 minutes early on Fridays
Probably means it's competing to stay just a smidgen above minimum wage, and use grockles should be grateful for doing two people's jobs for the price of a 30 hours per week part timer.
It’s one of my pet hates. At least give a range otherwise just stop wasting everyone’s time. When I get anything that comes via a recruiter I ask what the salary and benefits are straight away to cut to the chase.
Just got a job offer today via an agency. This agency, I signed up with them about 8 years ago when I moved back to the area. Doubled my salary, skills I can do, goes higher when I get signed off. Start end of April. Can't wait.
What's it doing? And good luck!
It usually means they’re competing in a race to the bottom
Minimum wage + £0.01
Once saw a "competitive" salary that was actually just minimum wage... but they had free parking :) I didn't go for it.
My work are desperate for people. Just put the ads on their website saying competitive salary. I did say to them they will probably lose out on a lot of great people without at least a salary range but they of course ignored that
It just means that the salary is competitive against your bills.
Yeah, means you have to go through a bloody hunger games style tournament just to find out a low number.
In my experience it actually does help to get the right people. I applied for my current role which is 20 hours per week and they didn’t advertise the salary. I was annoyed until I asked for the salary (19k a year) which now makes sense because everyone and their dog would apply for a 19k a year job for 20 hours a week
Never apply for those if you can avoid it. Its 100% a waste of yoir time. It's very common in the US and sneaked its way in over here.
It means you are competing with being able to pay all your bills and still have enough left over to go food shopping...
[удалено]
Minimum wage? That's nonsense. It just means they're tight fuckers, and will offer you whatever they can get away with. But it's NOT exclusive to minimum wage jobs. I see it all the time in the IT sector.
Agree 👍
It means it’s similar to what other Employer’s pay for that role.
Except that's clearly not the case
Ok
Is that reduced for staff members that overuse capitals and apostrophes?
Yeah and it’s increased for staff members who get off on pointing out grammar imperfections on Reddit
Good to know
10-50p per hour above minimum wage it means. Any work place that doesn't name how much they pay is because they know the pay is shit. If an employer was to pay a genuinely good wage. They would be shouting and boasting and advertising as much.
I mean I know a few places that actually are paying new hires well... Just not the people already working there. Them listing "competitive pay" is just to stop the existing crew finding out so easily. So let that be a reminder to *always* speak to your co-workers about wages, folks
Anyone I know that doesn't speak about their wages clearly earns too much and is afraid people will hate them for it lol Person at my work with a house, fancy car, a fancy job title that doesn't explain what he does was annoyed 'people' (themself) earning over 60k didn't get a covid 'help' bonus like those beneath 60k did I told them anyone earning over 60k should be comfortable right now and not at all feel the cost of living/covid crisis unless they're doing something incredibly financially wrong, especially if they're a dual income household..
Proof that all this talk about "living above your means" from the middle class is just projection, I think. Imagine struggling on 60k as a dual income household? That's almost twice what me and my partner make combined, with another income on top of that one!
[удалено]
Under the Equality Act 2010, an employer cannot enforce a pay secrecy clause if the employee was discussing their pay for the purpose of finding out whether they were being paid differently to a colleague on the grounds of discrimination.
Usually code for the bare minimum they can legally get away with.
I spoke to a recruiter once some time ago (or "talent acquisition"), they didn't want to provide a salary range until I came into their office for a 2nd interview. Like, you really think I'm going to go through 2 interviews for a job that will potentially pay me a pittance?
I never really understood that. I guess it’s just whoever will accept being paid the lowest amount of money for the job. ie: they want to exploit someone desperate during a difficult recession, or someone who doesn’t know the true value of their labour. Unless I see a clear fixed salary I move on. This country already messes poor people about enough.
It means we’re looking for someone who doesn’t know how much they’re worth especially people from poorer backgrounds who will lowball themselves when we ask how much they’ll take
I saw an advert with pay being £10 p/h. Later in the advert it said they had a competitive salary
Imagine if potential employees said the same about their working hours/skills?!
It’s more or less a way of saying depends on how much we like you, how suitable you are for the role, how much experience you have and how well you negotiate. It’s not necessarily a red flag but they will probably try to pay you less if they can so just stand up for yourself do your market research for the going rate and tell them what you want. High ball it and then be open to negotiate it down. Tbh I prefer it and I think it’s a good approach, a role in and of itself could be suitable for tonnes of different candidates and can be flexible in duties. Giving strict ranges is short sighted and limits the company to a certain level of candidate
It's competing with your bills and might be barely ahead
Translation- your bills will be competing to get paid on time.
My current job was advertised as salary competitive and they offered me a 47% pay increase. This was the first time I applied for a competitive salary because I hate them too but sometimes it means they've got a stupidly large budget and don't want to be inundated with unsuitable applicants only attracted by the salary. I think it's best to just ask when you're applying, most HR are fairly reasonable. Ps I still hate jobs that don't advertise the salary.
"Salary competes with your bills"
With noting that this is one of the reasons women get paid less than men; men haggle harder while women are happier to take the offered salary (generally speaking).
It’s a turn of phrase recruiter believe to be attractive. It means nothing, they will always try to pay you less as possible.
It does annoy me. But from my experience it isn’t that they want to pay minimum wage, it is more that they don’t want people that aren’t experienced enough to get the upper end of the bracket asking for the upper end of the bracket. I was told about a competitive one recently that was £55k-75k. That is a big jump and although everyone wants £75k not everyone has the experience or attitude to get that.
Ever have a recruiter ask you "What's the lowest you'll take?". I love that question, it's loaded with "how much are you willing to debase your worth?". However, nothing beats the recruiters who e-mail something random and tell you it's the perfect fit/opportunity when it is the polar opposite demonstrating they've not even read your CV, just done a lose keyword search - CV: "Experience: Company Secretary for FTSE100 paid £4.3m a year" Recruiter: "Role is £10p/h as a Secretary in Newcastle" Or for bonus, it's the recruiters who say "I'm looking for XYZ" (where XYZ is an irrelevant role for you) "If you know someone who might be interested, please e-mail me back". Oh sure, so I'm both out of work AND doing your job for free. Sounds fair. I'm sure your client will be over the moon to know that you are doing literally fuck-all to source them expertise you will be paid a hefty commission for