It's amazing the way companies are trying to low ball possible employees now.....

In reply to Duke:

But there a bit more to that . . . You need to know the going rate in the area the company is located.

I'm not bypassing that fact of " . . . the more you know . . . ". It just a nice highlight of commoditization of positions that some employers are pushing for. They are creating the same cyclical game they complain about.

"There is no talent available for insert field/industry/position."

The true headline should read:

"There is no talent available for insert field/industry/position that we want to pay peanuts for. And we'll complain about this shortage that we're creting because we can; even though we are causing it."

In reply to SVreX:

When it comes to contract recruiting, especially for remote positions, the conversation usually switches to national average for rate . . .

Plumbers and Pipefitters Union likes to tell us they are always shorthanded because nobody wants to do the work. I mentioned that I'd do the work to a supervisor of mine, he said "well the company doesn't like when people go from the office to the field because its supposed to be the other way around."

Even though the guys digging holes make twice what I do. I'd take their job.

In reply to Strike_Zero:

Duke wrote: *Caveat emptor.* You should know the approximate going rate of the job for the location you're looking in.

SVreX wrote:

Strike_Zero wrote: In reply to SVreX: While that may be somewhat true, in most cases it isn't. That example I supplied is from an area that pays almost two times for that skillset . . . As the low rate. They (company or recruiter) go to "lower cost" areas with lowball rates, hoping the potential hires don't know about the actual rate. The tactic usually starts with "I'm working for a confidential client . . ." For that contract PM position, that rate is pretty damn low for their requirements. They are asking for a midlevel PM with upper level skills at a Jr rate . . .

I'm sure you are correct...in YOUR area. The median income where I live is $28,600. There are VERY few $50k salaries, regardless of the occupation. There are plenty of wealthy people, but they don't make salaries at all. I know senior engineers with 30 years experience making under $40k. No benefits. Yes, I understand if we talk national averages, you are probably right. But there ARE areas of the country that are just not competitive with everywhere else.

I hate to sound like a right-wing talk show host, but those guys should move. $40k for a Mechanical or Electrical engineer with 3 decades of experience? (We are talking about a DEGREE'd engineer, correct?)

That is seriously the most insane thing I've ever read.

z31maniac wrote:

SVreX wrote:

Strike_Zero wrote: In reply to SVreX: While that may be somewhat true, in most cases it isn't. That example I supplied is from an area that pays almost two times for that skillset . . . As the low rate. They (company or recruiter) go to "lower cost" areas with lowball rates, hoping the potential hires don't know about the actual rate. The tactic usually starts with "I'm working for a confidential client . . ." For that contract PM position, that rate is pretty damn low for their requirements. They are asking for a midlevel PM with upper level skills at a Jr rate . . .

I'm sure you are correct...in YOUR area. The median income where I live is $28,600. There are VERY few $50k salaries, regardless of the occupation. There are plenty of wealthy people, but they don't make salaries at all. I know senior engineers with 30 years experience making under $40k. No benefits. Yes, I understand if we talk national averages, you are probably right. But there ARE areas of the country that are just not competitive with everywhere else.

I hate to sound like a right-wing talk show host, but those guys should move. $40k for a Mechanical or Electrical engineer with 3 decades of experience? (We are talking about a DEGREE'd engineer, correct?) That is seriously the most insane thing I've ever read.

Eh... Not necessarily, as long as they're happy to live in that area for their entire lives. That is presuming that the cost of living is aligned with the salaries. I'd assume that the average house there would be around $50k.

But I do agree with you, my above statement was just playing devils advocate.

In reply to Duke:

Ehhhh . . Uhhh . . Ummm

I didn't disagree with you. I just added more meat to the bone . . .

If I misread, I apologize . . .

Before ascribing ill intent to recruiters, understand a couple of things.

1. Recruiters often know perfectly well the pay rate in question is too low for an area, have told the hiring managers this, and are still directed to go through the "due diligence" exercise of trying to find a slate of candidates at the rate on the hiring requisition.

2. Only a couple of years, unemployment was high enough in many areas, that people would take substantially less for a short term contract. While this has changed in many parts of the country, the perception that employers can name their price, lags reality.

I have made a living studying and markets and recommending pay ranges. To the OP and anyone else, if the job is wrong for you don't take it. Remember you are most often dealing with the messenger. Shooting messengers does not help you win friends or influence people.

Strike_Zero wrote: In reply to Duke: Ehhhh . . Uhhh . . Ummm I didn't disagree with you. I just added more meat to the bone . . . If I misread, I apologize . . .

D'oh. I thought that you were correcting my post. Sorry! :thumbsup:

mtn wrote:

z31maniac wrote:

SVreX wrote:

Strike_Zero wrote: In reply to SVreX: While that may be somewhat true, in most cases it isn't. That example I supplied is from an area that pays almost two times for that skillset . . . As the low rate. They (company or recruiter) go to "lower cost" areas with lowball rates, hoping the potential hires don't know about the actual rate. The tactic usually starts with "I'm working for a confidential client . . ." For that contract PM position, that rate is pretty damn low for their requirements. They are asking for a midlevel PM with upper level skills at a Jr rate . . .

I'm sure you are correct...in YOUR area. The median income where I live is $28,600. There are VERY few $50k salaries, regardless of the occupation. There are plenty of wealthy people, but they don't make salaries at all. I know senior engineers with 30 years experience making under $40k. No benefits. Yes, I understand if we talk national averages, you are probably right. But there ARE areas of the country that are just not competitive with everywhere else.

I hate to sound like a right-wing talk show host, but those guys should move. $40k for a Mechanical or Electrical engineer with 3 decades of experience? (We are talking about a DEGREE'd engineer, correct?) That is seriously the most insane thing I've ever read.

Eh... Not necessarily, as long as they're happy to live in that area for their entire lives. That is presuming that the cost of living is aligned with the salaries. I'd assume that the average house there would be around $50k. But I do agree with you, my above statement was just playing devils advocate.

Well, not $50k, but it is only $84k.

No snow, no winter clothes, no heat bills, no snow tires, no salt on the roads (and therefore no rust), etc.

Costs are much less.

Additionally, the standards are much lower. So, keeping up with the Jones doesn't cost nearly as much.

But mostly, it is generally a cultural thing. If you were born and raised here, it's home. And some people (like me) get stuck. You spend 20+ years in a place and moving becomes really difficult, mostly because you've got no contacts anywhere else.

Trust me, I'd move in a heartbeat if I could.

SVreX wrote: Additionally, the standards are much lower. So, keeping up with the Jones doesn't cost nearly as much.

Conversely, I've heard an argument that being poor isn't bad if the Joneses are also poor. Never from anyone in the position to know first-hand however. I disagree with it.

Ah, the old "confidential client" thing.

I always advise them that I have to know where a position is going to be located before we are able to continue the conversation. Otherwise, it may just waste both of our time. There are tons of jobs for me in the San Francisco area, but I have zero desire to relocate there at the moment.

Funny story: A recruiter tried to get me to apply to a job at the company I was working for. We had an open position on the team and apparently they just did a keyword search, found what they liked and didn't bother to read where I was working. That was hilarious.

^

Even better when you get a call, they start explaining the position and you finish their sentences. They think you are clairvoyant!!

"Nah, I wrote the job description for that position and a member of the interview committee."

Advan046 wrote: Somehow people have have this false notion that just because the pay is cheap as it can be it is a win for your business.

This is because there has been a precedent set that if you help run the US economy into the ground for being a greedy shiny happy person with no thought for the long term, you get paid even more money.

Or in the words of South Park "Start up. Cash in. Sell out. Bro Down."

SVreX wrote: Well, not $50k, but it is only $84k. No snow, no winter clothes, no heat bills, no snow tires, no salt on the roads (and therefore no rust), etc. Costs are much less.

Drifting off topic... but where is this place? I'd like to retire to someplace with cheap housing and decent weather!

I am having the opposite problem. My recruiters have found me jobs in my area at my desired pay scale and I am too educated to get the interviews.

SVreX wrote:

Strike_Zero wrote: In reply to SVreX: While that may be somewhat true, in most cases it isn't. That example I supplied is from an area that pays almost two times for that skillset . . . As the low rate. They (company or recruiter) go to "lower cost" areas with lowball rates, hoping the potential hires don't know about the actual rate. The tactic usually starts with "I'm working for a confidential client . . ." For that contract PM position, that rate is pretty damn low for their requirements. They are asking for a midlevel PM with upper level skills at a Jr rate . . .

I'm sure you are correct...in YOUR area. The median income where I live is $28,600. There are VERY few $50k salaries, regardless of the occupation. There are plenty of wealthy people, but they don't make salaries at all. I know senior engineers with 30 years experience making under $40k. No benefits. Yes, I understand if we talk national averages, you are probably right. But there ARE areas of the country that are just not competitive with everywhere else.

The regional differences are crazy, considering I was making low-30's in MA as a bicycle mechanic in the mid-2000's. Granted, I was with that company for quite some time (big box retail, French owned, pulled out of the States)

Granted, a house up here costs $250k and I pay $4500/year in property taxes. Double/triple that for California.

It's actually tough to get ahead on a $95k household income here--no joke.

EvanR wrote:

SVreX wrote: Well, not $50k, but it is only $84k. No snow, no winter clothes, no heat bills, no snow tires, no salt on the roads (and therefore no rust), etc. Costs are much less.

Drifting off topic... but where is this place? I'd like to retire to someplace with cheap housing and decent weather!

click on his avatar … it says Albany, GA

Mental wrote: I am having the opposite problem. My recruiters have found me jobs in my area at my desired pay scale and I am too educated to get the interviews.

I've had that happen a few times, "Uhhh, yeah, you have too much 'experience' for them."

IE, we want someone with your skills but don't want to pay them.

z31maniac wrote:

Mental wrote: I am having the opposite problem. My recruiters have found me jobs in my area at my desired pay scale and I am too educated to get the interviews.

I've had that happen a few times, "Uhhh, yeah, you have too much 'experience' for them." IE, we want someone with your skills but don't want to pay them.

What I dislike (this scenario has played out a couple times for me) is they won't even give you a chance, even though 1) they say you are overqualified which means they get more for their money 2) they already made a $ offer and I'm ok with that.

Ridiculous!

They are afraid you will show them up and take their position or potential opportunities away.

I went to an interview for a Security Analyst contract position. I was asked 2 security based questions. For the rest of the interview, the hiring manager was asking and attempting test me about Project Mgmt, Six Sigma, and Mgmt . . . None of which were relevant to the postition. I ended that one as he couldn't stay on task.

SVreX wrote:

mtn wrote: Eh... Not necessarily, as long as they're happy to live in that area for their entire lives. That is presuming that the cost of living is aligned with the salaries. I'd assume that the average house there would be around $50k. But I do agree with you, my above statement was just playing devils advocate.

Well, not $50k, but it is only $84k. No snow, no winter clothes, no heat bills, no snow tires, no salt on the roads (and therefore no rust), etc. Costs are much less. Additionally, the standards are much lower. So, keeping up with the Jones doesn't cost nearly as much. But mostly, it is generally a cultural thing. If you were born and raised here, it's home. And some people (like me) get stuck. You spend 20+ years in a place and moving becomes really difficult, mostly because you've got no contacts anywhere else. Trust me, I'd move in a heartbeat if I could.

A minor part of why I'm looking for a new job now at 24. Moving from my bubble economy town in Central Illinois to Chicago, for a lateral move my income would increase about 18%. My savings rate (in relation to the salary being made) would decrease, but the actual savings would increase. In the long run, I can retire to a cheaper area if I want, but I can't retire to a better area if the pay isn't here now.

chandlerGTi wrote:

z31maniac wrote:

Mental wrote: I am having the opposite problem. My recruiters have found me jobs in my area at my desired pay scale and I am too educated to get the interviews.

I've had that happen a few times, "Uhhh, yeah, you have too much 'experience' for them." IE, we want someone with your skills but don't want to pay them.

What I dislike (this scenario has played out a couple times for me) is they won't even give you a chance, even though 1) they say you are overqualified which means they get more for their money 2) they already made a $ offer and I'm ok with that. Ridiculous!

It means that their perception is you will leave at the first opportunity to make more and use your skills more fully.

They will loose all the time, effort, and money they have invested in you for training, etc, and be looking to hire someone again.

It's not that ridiculous.

GameboyRMH wrote:

SVreX wrote: Additionally, the standards are much lower. So, keeping up with the Jones doesn't cost nearly as much.

Conversely, I've heard an argument that being poor isn't bad if the Joneses are also poor. Never from anyone in the position to know first-hand however. I disagree with it.

I've been in the position to know first hand. There is SOME truth to it.