Interviewer pay relative to interviewee pay
Discussion
New hires coming in on larger salaries than those already in a company at the same level isn't unusual. Often seen this where those with only 4-6 years experience getting paid more that those with more years of experience who have been at a company for a longer period.
Three options really:
Three options really:
- Stay as you are occasionally sorting out random pay rises
- Look for other roles internally with a pay level you think you deserve, or a strongly worded chat with whoever can sort this pay at your current job
- Look for roles externally, remembering to ensure you push for a good uplift when you leave to the new company.
It's no secret that the best way to get a salary bump is to move to a new company. If you stay at your company, you'll only ever be eligible for incremental increases unless you actually change roles or departments. Couple that with the shortage of IT workers at the moment and salaries for new hires are significantly higher than they were even 5 years ago, due to the difficulty of attracting and retaining talent with skills.
I recently got offered a very hefty daily rate in a contract role, and it's not even worth considering because I changed company a year ago and am in a permanent role where they're paying me well enough that I don't need to consider it. But if I stay in the job long too long, I would expect that the company will start offering new hires with less experience more than I am paid. Why would they pay you more to retain you if they don't think they are going to lose you? In my experience, there are two ways to get a significant pay rise - ask for one, saying you've been offered £X but would rather not leave, or call their bluff and hand in your notice. If you're really indispensable, you'll find a significant pay increase is offered pretty quickly.
I recently got offered a very hefty daily rate in a contract role, and it's not even worth considering because I changed company a year ago and am in a permanent role where they're paying me well enough that I don't need to consider it. But if I stay in the job long too long, I would expect that the company will start offering new hires with less experience more than I am paid. Why would they pay you more to retain you if they don't think they are going to lose you? In my experience, there are two ways to get a significant pay rise - ask for one, saying you've been offered £X but would rather not leave, or call their bluff and hand in your notice. If you're really indispensable, you'll find a significant pay increase is offered pretty quickly.
Sporky said:
HR people often interview people who will out-earn them.
True, but that’s a specific and normal part of their role. A year or so back I was interviewing people for a senior management position in a parallel field that were asking for 50% more than me on basic salary which did feel a bit off. That said it’s not uncommon and if you do it well, it can count in your favour at review time.
Alex Z said:
True, but that’s a specific and normal part of their role.
A year or so back I was interviewing people for a senior management position in a parallel field that were asking for 50% more than me on basic salary which did feel a bit off. That said it’s not uncommon and if you do it well, it can count in your favour at review time.
That's a fair distinction. A year or so back I was interviewing people for a senior management position in a parallel field that were asking for 50% more than me on basic salary which did feel a bit off. That said it’s not uncommon and if you do it well, it can count in your favour at review time.
Maybe you are interviewing to see if they fit in as you might be working on a cross-discipline work together.
If the people being interviewed is totally different role . more elite skills so worth more than you nothing you can do unless you want to do that role in that case learn the skills needed to do it.
If the people being interviewed is totally different role . more elite skills so worth more than you nothing you can do unless you want to do that role in that case learn the skills needed to do it.
Hi,
This is indeed an unusual situation, and I can understand why you are uncomfortable with it, even after nearly 20 years of seeing more or less the whole company pay data - it can still trip my sense of injustice if I see certain individuals pay (or bonus) You do make peace with it eventually.
Specific to your case, I think its a good sign they value your judgement, experience and ability to interview. So that is a positive.
Do you really want to go in to HR and effectively say, I won't interview another person as I am unable to logically detach that there are better paid people / positions than me in the company? I think pay is super personal, if you are unhappy with your current salary then for sure make a decision to ask for an increase, or move companies. But admit that it has NOTHING to do with interviewing people. You already knew that some folks are more senior and earn more than you.
I am in HR
I get someone within in the team to interview - i.e. I was recruiting for a Finance Manager and I got one of the Finance Officers (lower grade) to be part of the recruitment process.
I saw it as development for them and a good way to get a cultural fit to the team. They actually performed really well and have since been promoted themselves.
I don't see how being involved on the interview panel has anything to do with your relative position in the organisation i.e. you're saying you're less senior and therefore don't have a view of what would make a good fit to a senior role.
I've also seen say "heads of" be involved in interviews for Directors and CEOs. Pretty normal and imo a good way to involve all and get a wide range of opinions.
I saw it as development for them and a good way to get a cultural fit to the team. They actually performed really well and have since been promoted themselves.
I don't see how being involved on the interview panel has anything to do with your relative position in the organisation i.e. you're saying you're less senior and therefore don't have a view of what would make a good fit to a senior role.
I've also seen say "heads of" be involved in interviews for Directors and CEOs. Pretty normal and imo a good way to involve all and get a wide range of opinions.
Gargamel said:
Specific to your case, I think its a good sign they value your judgement, experience and ability to interview. So that is a positive.
It is, however to put another spin on it, a lesson it took me too long into my career to learn:"Hi is that the bank? I'd like a mortgage please. My boss says im a stand up guy, really values me and im invaluable to the firm...
... Sorry., what? Your not going to lend me £XXXX? but I've told you how much i'm worth"
Tbh, and I mean this constructively as you’ve asked the question.
You’ve self-identified as mid/senior level
You come across as very mid.
A senior would know the game, appreciate the swings and roundabouts of it all. See hiring cycles and understand, especially if you’re hiring for a role that’s not even the same as yours, that comp will be different.
To moan and effectively refuse the company to help bring in talent puts you firmly mid to me.
Do what you can to help the company get the best talent and put processes and solutions in place to do so, then you should be recognised as adding value.
You should also know your market rate.
If you’re adding value and know your market rate (for your role not one you interviewed someone else for, which is irrelevant), and you’re unable to get the company to recognise you to market rates…. Then either you’re not as good as you think you are, or your company are goons.
Either way best point forward from there is to try find another job and it will help you Put your current role in perspective.
Moaning and refusing to interview candidates would knock you down a peg or two on my “can I rely on this person in my team-ometer”. Your response here has been to reduce your value. Your battle should be on YOUR pay and YOUR skills for YOUR role.
It sucks you have to advocate for yourself sometimes, but sometimes you do. Given that, think, “how can I show I add most value to the company?”, and of you think about that you may go in on Monday and apologise to HR, say….
“I’m sorry, I’ve just been feeling undervalued recently and the process has highlighted why I feel gapped to market. I handled it poorly. My issue isn’t being asked to interview.
Of course I’m flattered to be invited to interview candidates and I think I can do a good job attracting and sifting the right talent. I’m happy to continue.
In parallel with that I do think I’ll put some energy to better understanding my market value and rate, have you any benchmarking you could share with me for my role? Can we. Schedule a call in 2 weeeks where I can share what I’ve learned and get your view on it?”
Or something.
You’ll get a better outcome that way IMO, even if it ultimately means having to leaving job for another company to get a big bump if your current co won’t bridge gap.
Gl - never fun
You’ve self-identified as mid/senior level
You come across as very mid.
A senior would know the game, appreciate the swings and roundabouts of it all. See hiring cycles and understand, especially if you’re hiring for a role that’s not even the same as yours, that comp will be different.
To moan and effectively refuse the company to help bring in talent puts you firmly mid to me.
Do what you can to help the company get the best talent and put processes and solutions in place to do so, then you should be recognised as adding value.
You should also know your market rate.
If you’re adding value and know your market rate (for your role not one you interviewed someone else for, which is irrelevant), and you’re unable to get the company to recognise you to market rates…. Then either you’re not as good as you think you are, or your company are goons.
Either way best point forward from there is to try find another job and it will help you Put your current role in perspective.
Moaning and refusing to interview candidates would knock you down a peg or two on my “can I rely on this person in my team-ometer”. Your response here has been to reduce your value. Your battle should be on YOUR pay and YOUR skills for YOUR role.
It sucks you have to advocate for yourself sometimes, but sometimes you do. Given that, think, “how can I show I add most value to the company?”, and of you think about that you may go in on Monday and apologise to HR, say….
“I’m sorry, I’ve just been feeling undervalued recently and the process has highlighted why I feel gapped to market. I handled it poorly. My issue isn’t being asked to interview.
Of course I’m flattered to be invited to interview candidates and I think I can do a good job attracting and sifting the right talent. I’m happy to continue.
In parallel with that I do think I’ll put some energy to better understanding my market value and rate, have you any benchmarking you could share with me for my role? Can we. Schedule a call in 2 weeeks where I can share what I’ve learned and get your view on it?”
Or something.
You’ll get a better outcome that way IMO, even if it ultimately means having to leaving job for another company to get a big bump if your current co won’t bridge gap.
Gl - never fun
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff