Salary expectations questions – How should you answer them? (2020)
Salary expectations in tech hiring are portrayed as a high‑stakes negotiation where information asymmetry largely favors employers and recruiters. Commenters debate whether to give a number early, with many advocating withholding current or expected salary to avoid anchoring low, while others stress the value of upfront ranges to avoid wasting time when budgets don’t align. The thread also highlights structural issues such as recruiter incentives, location-based pay for remote roles, legal limits on asking salary history, and the vast pay gaps between typical jobs and roles at FAANG, finance, or elite AI companies.
How to Answer “Salary Expectations”
- Many advocate not giving a number first; let the employer anchor and then negotiate up if possible.
- Others prefer stating a firm number or range early to avoid wasting time if bands don’t overlap.
- Some say to state what you want (or need to live comfortably) rather than what you currently earn.
- Several warn never to reveal past salary unless it was well above market; it’s seen as a trap that caps you.
Recruiters’ Incentives and Behavior
- Third‑party recruiters get paid on successful, lasting placements and a percentage of salary, so in theory they want you placed and paid well.
- Multiple commenters note the stronger incentive is “close quickly and maintain client relationship,” not maximize your pay; a small commission delta isn’t worth risking a lost placement.
- There is disagreement over how much they will actually push for higher comp in practice.
Negotiation Tactics and Anecdotes
- Multiple stories of huge jumps (e.g., 90k → 250k → 400k+) by refusing to name expectations, waiting for offers, then asking for more or leveraging competing offers / unvested equity.
- Others report the opposite: offers always near expectations, no upward movement, or rescinded offers after mild negotiation in the current weak market.
- Advice recurs: don’t lie about prior salary; use competing offers, strong project stories, or explicit value instead.
Market Conditions and Leverage
- Several note today’s market (post‑2022) is much tougher: fewer offers, rescinded negotiations, and less room to push.
- Some argue vertical movement is rare and titles often change without real advancement; others counter that big‑tech promotions to high comp levels are common for a minority.
Location, Remote Work, and Pay Levels
- Debate over whether hiring in lower‑cost regions (e.g., Poland, Warsaw) is primarily about cheap labor vs. accessing talent.
- Strong disagreement on location‑based pay for remote roles: some call it pure supply/demand; others call it exploitation and a red flag.
- Americans paying US‑level rates in Europe are prized; some seek non–location‑adjusted US contracts but are warned about time‑zone and leverage issues.
Comp Structure: Salary, Bonuses, Equity
- Some hiring managers say they always pay the band maximum but still ask expectations to “position” offers and sell non‑salary aspects (remote, hours, title, equity).
- Opinions diverge on bonuses: company‑wide vs. individual, and whether they are a good way to reward outsized contribution.
- Equity at startups is widely viewed as statistically low value for ICs compared to big‑tech or trading compensation.
Legal/Privacy and Data Sources
- Several mention salary‑history bans in parts of the US; asking “current salary” may be illegal in some jurisdictions, but “expectations” is still allowed.
- Background‑check products (e.g., salary databases from payroll providers/credit bureaus) let employers verify past pay; this makes lying risky.
- Opting out is possible but can complicate future credit / large purchases.
Attitudes Toward the “Salary Game”
- Many see the whole process as adversarial and “stupid,” with employers hiding budgets and employees trying to avoid underselling themselves.
- Some hiring managers dislike overly aggressive negotiators and will walk away if candidates behave as if it’s a high‑stakes geopolitical negotiation.
- A recurring theme: know your minimums, factor in non‑salary costs/benefits (commute, housing, risk, WLB), and be willing to walk from lowball or opaque employers.