alex504 · HackerTrans

قبل 5 سنواتdiscuss

I agree with this 100%, just want to add that the key is to be proactive and take the forks. If you are a halfway decent programmer and can navigate the job market in a halfway decent way you will end up with a high paying job. Some people are terrible at the latter and it is painful to watch.

alex504

قبل 5 سنواتdiscuss

He did not actually create or do this https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1ujvrg/jerry_seinfeld...

alex504

قبل 5 سنواتdiscuss

> You've conveniently not addressed the concept of forcing companies to transparently compete by requiring a salary range.

I'm not arguing this. Again, I agree that these practices are good for employees.

>I think a lot of where we disagree is that you believe that shopping yourself around and asking for a raise is the proper way to obtain your full worth in a market, whereas I believe (and the author believes) that providing an average salary or salary range gives transparency to the process.

I agree that providing an average salary or range gives transparency, I just don't buy the idea that it somehow benefits underprivileged groups more.

There is nothing stopping anybody from negotiating or trying to find a good value in the market. If being a woman means they are less likely to negotiate (which I don't believe), they need to learn to negotiate, because they don't have a choice. It is how the market sets prices, and there is no way around it. Setting a range helps, but it doesn't remove the need for negotiating.

> The Howard and Heidi case study indicates that aggressive behavior impacts a woman's likeability more than a man's

I agree with this, even if the "study" itself is laughably weak. But basically all the study is saying is "sexism exists".

Based on my experience I do not believe this has a connection with negotiating. Everyone can and should negotiate. Having been on both sides of the table many times in negotiating compensation, I have never felt that "this candidate is too aggressive or no longer likeable because they are negotiating" was a factor.

Employers understand that negotiation is necessary as it is the only way to set fair prices. I would need a lot more evidence to buy the idea that it is somehow discriminatory. The author provides none.

> This is relatively strong evidence that minorities and women ARE being disadvantaged in an environment where the average pay isn't specified.

This is correlation and not causation. The fact that women and minorities make less has been established many times. I just don't see any evidence that this is because they can't negotiate. The author needs to provide evidence that the process of negotiation itself is discriminatory, and that salary ranges will somehow alleviate this problem. Based on my fairly extensive experience I don't think it makes sense intuitively.

> I think a lot of where we disagree is that you believe that shopping yourself around and asking for a raise is the proper way to obtain your full worth in a market, whereas I believe (and the author believes) that providing an average salary or salary range gives transparency to the process.

These aren't mutually exclusive

alex504

قبل 5 سنواتdiscuss

> Howard and Heidi case study

This is the crux of the argument, and it is something that needs stronger evidence from the author. The Howard and Heidi case study is not related at all to how someone will be perceived negotiating a salary. It is a very weak piece of evidence.

It also doesn't make any sense to me, and doesn't match up with my experience hiring or being part of the process. Women and bipoc have the same leverage in negotiations that white men have. If the employer wants to hire them, they will pay what they are willing to pay them. If someone wants to work for a company, they will take the amount they are willing to be paid.

> A salary range effectively puts a floor on how much you can underpay someone. Does that fix every problem? No, but it's certainly better than the current system.

Maybe salary ranges do help people that are being absolutely fleeced by their employers. Again, I do not buy that has anything to do with gender or race. This happens when people are simply not doing basic things like applying to multiple companies or negotiating at all, or staying at the same company for years without a raise. It is true that many, many people do this and end up being underpaid. There is no barrier for someone in an underprivileged group from learning that they need to negotiate and shop around.

As you said, a salary range might help a small amount for people who are being taken advantage of but they will still be underpaid. The only way to actually get what you are worth is to navigate the market. It is a very simple process.

> Why does this have to be a prerequisite for getting your full worth? Negotiation skill has nothing to do with the actual ability to do most jobs.

It doesn't have anything to do with how good you are at your job. But it does have something to do with how much you get paid for doing your job. The market sets the price of your labor, and you have to engage with the market as best you can. That is just the reality of working in a market.

alex504

قبل 5 سنواتdiscuss

> posting a salary range has many positive downstream effects

I agree. I'm just not sure if I agree that it particularly benefits underprivileged groups. I don't see a compelling argument being made by the author that the system of negotiation specifically is biased. Whether a salary range is posted or not everyone has to negotiate and engage the market. There is no way to get around this and if you aren't willing to do it you are going to be taken advantage of.

A salary range posted by the company who is trying to hire you is not going to tell you how much you should be making there. They are going to try to pay you less. It seems like what people really want is for employers to magically pay everyone exactly what they should be making without negotiating, which is simply not possible, because nobody knows what they should be making until the market sets a price.

> The first is that better candidates will get the maximum salary out of a company, and less qualified candidates will get less.

I'm not assuming this. In my experience whether someone negotiates more or not at all has more to do with their experience around the process in general. More junior candidates or candidates who haven't switched jobs more than once or twice are more likely to be underpaid. I personally screwed this up about 4 times before learning my lesson.

> minority candidates will be looked at differently when asking for money

I don't disagree with this. I don't see how posting a salary range changes this. If the company / market is willing to pay less to an underprivileged group, that is going to be reflected in compensation regardless of whether a salary range is posted or not.

> There's also the difficulty of determining one's worth

The way you determine what the market is willing to pay is to find out what the market is willing to pay. There is no other way to do it. For someone looking for a job you should try to get multiple offers, negotiate them, and see how much you end up with. That number is as close to your market value as you are going to get.

> this ignores the fact that our society is set up to encourage confidence in straight white men and discourage it in many other group

I guess I really just don't buy this argument as it pertains to this topic. Negotiating compensation shouldn't be a matter of confidence after a certain point in your career. After you have done it a few times it is not very intimidating. It is a fact of life and something everybody needs to learn to be comfortable doing. If you can't become comfortable doing this, you are going to make less.

alex504

قبل 5 سنواتdiscuss

What she is saying does not line up with my experience regarding how this works.

> As a woman... I’m unlikely to bring up the topic of salary with a potential boss.

If you have that attitude you are going to make less money than someone who negotiates. Period. Companies will try to pay anyone, no matter their race, gender, or religion, less. There is also no reason to feel bad about discussing salary - it is a part of the process, just like submitting your resume and interviewing.

Would publishing a salary in a job description make things more equitable? I don't think so. The keyword in job market is MARKET. It is not as simple as publishing a salary. Every role I've interviewed candidates for had a range we were willing to pay. The best candidate will get the maximum of the range, and a candidate that we are less excited about will get the low end. The candidates are always being judged against other candidates, and how much we think they will cost. What we are willing to pay fluctuates and depends on how we feel about the candidate after the interview, how badly we need someone, and how many other candidates there are at a given time.

Just like in any market that is this small, there is negotiation involved. Employers want to pay less, employees want to make more. The way you arrive at a price is making offers until both sides agree.

That is simply the way it works. It is a barter system. I don't buy the idea that women / bipoc can't navigate this system. It is something you have to learn. White men aren't born being able to navigate it - it took me about 5 years to be fully comfortable with the process. Before that I was underpaid.

alex504

قبل 7 سنواتdiscuss

It sounds to me like you will reach a better practice without the app regardless of cost. I would force myself to do it without the app for 20 or 25 minutes, just wait for the timer to go off. Do that a few times and it will get easier. From my experience you will get better results this way as the guides are ultimately a distraction.

alex504

قبل 7 سنواتdiscuss

Not sure what your practice is like with the app. But for a stability practice which is the more common type, I would set a timer and sit with good posture so your skeleton is supporting itself. Focus on your breathing especially within the body. It's important not to meditate from the head but from the body. When your attention wanders and you notice it go back to concentrating on your breathing.