OT: Job offer pulled as a result of salary negotiation
Trying to take advantage of the multitude of expertise from the users of the site, especially those in hiring positions and/or HR to see if there is any experience with this kind of thing.
Disclaimer: job is a union position with no room to negotiate advancement beyond the union-negotiated contract pay step schedule. It is possible, however, to be placed at different levels when hired.
Long story longer: I applied for a position, went though 2 rounds of interviews and was clearly the #1 candidate from the start and throughout the process. Ref. checks and Xscripts already done (no issues there). I get a call from the HR director who offers the position with the starting salary and wants 48hrs for me to respond. I am pretty content with the job I have (wasn't even looking for a new position but was asked by an acquaintance to apply to the new position). I ask about flexibility re: starting salary and she mentions that in some circumstances she could get approval but likely not in this case. She ends an email later that night reiterating the offer. I respond to the email explaining my additional years of unique experience and how I'm interested in the position but would like consideration for those additional years beyond their initial offer. I basically ask for 13-15% more than what they offered which I thought left a decent window to meet somewhere in the middle.
Maybe I was to forward/firm in the email, but HR director lady responds to me by rescinding the offer b/c they "have a deliberate recuitment and selection process and we would not want to be put in a situation or have you in a situation where you are unhappy with your employment opportunity." I was pretty shocked. At worst, I thought she'd just say,"no, we can't do that please have your decision re: the original offer by the agreed upon timeline."
Now, the main person who actually interviewed me (twice) and made the decision to select me, set up interviews, call my references, check all my documents, etc. was pretty shocked that the HR person essentially trumped her and the entire hiring process. Everything I've seen on the web, reddit, some others I know were pretty confused too. The more I think about it, I'm starting to consider it pretty unprofessional behavior on the HR director's part to rescind an offer just b/c I attempted to negotial starting salary placement, but moreso that she singlehandedly trumped the entire hiring process at this place. I mean, instead of all these questions the committee asked me across 2 rounds of interviews, they could have just cut to the chase and asked me if I'd take $XX,000 dollars with no questions asked. What a complete waste of time.
I guess my questions are, 1) any experiece with salary negotiation resulting in pulled offers of employment? 2) anyone in hiring/HR have any explanation for this? 3) any recommendation about how I should follow up?
I have no criminal history, all references were checked, called and verified prior to the HR office taking over the process. I'm kind of at a loss, but it's really no big deal b/c like I said I am pretty content with my current position. Everything I've heard/read is that you should always negotiate starting salary in a professional manner, stating the reasons for your worth to the company and your excitement for the position, which I thought is what I did. Thanks in advance for indulging in the discussion.
yep, although I didn't need the job, it was a solid option that caused plenty of stress going back and forth on the potential of both option for the better part of 3 weeks.
I'd be WAY more upset if I'm the hiring committee and chair who had to schedule all these rounds, call references, check papers, etc etc etc, when one simple questions likely avoids a big fraction of that. PLUS, wtf, WE (speaking for the hiring committee/chair) decided on this guy - wtf do you as the HR director know about jack shit re: these candidates?
Sounds like a rogue HR minion.
Related link: http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/05/why-recent-graduat…
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
How did you know you were "clearly" the number one candidate from start to finish? You received an offer, but maybe you were candidate 1A with several candidate 1B's waiting in the wings. You looked like a tough negotiation, so they turned to a more "eager" applicant.
that could very well be the case. but I was asked to apply by someone at the place, they called me mid morning the day the posting expired, they called me the morning after the 1st interview to set up round 2, they contacted my references very quickly who subsequently told me they are looking at me as a top candidate if not the #1, and they offered me the position the next business day after the 2nd interview. It was kind of obvious. but there couls have been candidate 1A, 1B, 1C. but the difference b/t 1A and 1B is the same as the difference b/t 1 and 2 when the rubber meets the road. it's semantics.
I think you revealed the answer in a reply to another comment: you are in secondary education. Unionized school district positions don't have a lot of wiggle room for offers, and good districts - and I'm assuming you would only move to a 'good' district - get a lot of applicants these days. The district where my children go to school on Long Island gets over 300 applications per open position, typically, the best teachers from other districts trying to get in to a high-paying district with wealthy parents of over-achieving brats. If someone doesn't take an offfer, they move right on to the next person. And that person is probably just as qualified.
I'm not denying the HR person didn't handle it well but I'm not surprised at all knowing the field you are in.
they kind of don't, but there is room in most district-union contracts I've read (and I *know* there is in this one) for the board/supintnt to place people onto a higher 'step' in the salary scale when hired initially. My current school did just that. So they can do it without too much red tape. they just didn't want to b/c of $5-8k? b/c the HR mgr didn't "feel like it?" b/c the 2nd choice would for sure take it no questions asked? pretty lame reasons if you're a parent in that district payin 6-8k in taxes every year.
the other point I agree with is, they do get plenty of apps and I'm sure a small handful are very solid candidates. but it still doesn't look good that the HR division of the district isn't taking the best candidate as recommended by the hiring committee (which, BTW consisted of a parent, 2-3 teachers, a student, 2 admins, and later on... the bldg principal and an assnt supintdnt). If I were a parent in that district that would be interesting info to know.
I wondered what type of salaried union position we were discussing.
I've got 17 years of HR experience in non-union manufacturing. Occasionally I've had room to negotiate, but generally I try to be generous enough with the initial offer to make sure the candidate accepts.
My counterpart at the employer in question handled things a bit roughly. Without knowing more, I'd bet that the other respondents are correct in assuming this was a move born of expedience. She decided you were not worth the trouble, perhaps because she had other candidates that she felt would accept the standard salary.
There are certainly HR people who contribute to the bad reputation of the profession. On the other hand, many people come to the HR department expecting their agenda to be the same as HR's agenda. This is sometimes but not always the case. People who aren't prepared for HR's answer to be "no" are quick to resent HR, which is easier than looking in the mirror.
BTW, it's funny that the OP mentioned reddit, because I read an article in today's WSJ that reddit itself does not allow salary negotiation when hiring people. Their policy is to extend take-it-or-leave-it offers.
I saw the same thing re: reddit! very weird
"wealthy parents of over-achieving brats"
Class-envy takes are so edgy. Who talks like this, seriously? Making fun of kids for being gunners. It's cooler when blue collar kids smoke dope and play videos games all day and talk about their high school football career for the rest of their life.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
There is a 99% chance that we've heard only 50% of the story.
"Maybe I was to[o] forward/firm in the email" . . . "Now, maybe I was too forceful/blunt (it was over email) but I didn't think so."
I'd like to see the email before agreeing with some on this thread that the person who pulled the offer was in the wrong. Seems a potentially critical (and readily available) piece of evidence to me. Show us the email.
***
***
I could have said explicitly I would listen to a counter offer if possible, but I decided to play it a bit more firmly due to A) knowing what I'm worth B) knowing I'm the 1st offer C) I have a job I'm decently happy with and D) knowing that those are reasonable requests offered in good faith in a professional manner while reiterating my sincere interest in the opportunity at the new place.
Quoting contract language to an HR person says, "Becuse you are obviously not as knowledgeable of your own biolerplate contract as I, the smart person here, am, let me bring it to your attention."
I've been quoted contract terms coming from HR people. "Well, according to the contract... we can't do that." which isn't the actually case - it's just easy for them to play the, "we can't b/c union" card. I wanted to take that card out of the deck.
Right to wrong, I see how HR is viewing that as a negative. They'd never admit to it, but if you're HR in an environment where you have to deal with employees filing grievances and you have a candidate quoting a CBA (which they're not covered by yet) to you asking for a 5 step raise your first thought is probably that this employee is going to be a pain in my ass down the line. They're thinking that you're going to run to the contract and union rep and file grievances in the future, plus they have to pay you more! Personally, I just don't think they want to deal with it and there's probably somewhat of a "don't tell me what my contract says" reaction going on too.
In reality, that section is there, but it's still probably applied rigiduly. They used it, and you received a Step 5 offer. I highly doubt they viewed that as a negotiation based on that provision.
You email says that if they don't give you more money you're not taking the job. There's a bunch of words around it but that's the clear message. That probably didn't sit well.
Sir, I agree, but I read the contract and know the industry. What I asked for isn't unheard of and is reasonable. Now, maybe this place specifically has an internal policy of never ever considering beyond step XX for initial hires, but I had more leverage than they did and I knew that.
I'm sure they do feel good that they avoided having someone in the organization who knows they are worth more than what a union says and is willing to negotiate for that worth. And I'm sure they feel even better having a 2nd/3rd/4th choice candidate in the union who will never think to ask/demand more than what they are given.
well, the other end of the coin is that I also have a job. It's a push. both sides were obvisously willing to say no. one has to say no 1st, and I just pushed them to that about 24hrs before I likely would have.
So really all you came here for (and apparrently to various other sites) is affirmation of your take on the situation, that you were right and they were wrong or at least anomolous. Got it.
well, I come for the affirmation. I stay for the nike/adidas/apparel debates.
Have to agree with others below, if they immediately pulled the offer I don't see where you had any leverage.
subsequent steps. It is district policy determing that and it is usually an unwritten rule. Not industry standards. Name another industry where you take pay cuts after gaining experience and switching "companies.
Goes both ways. I pulled an acceptance because employer would not sweeten deal. I had an offer to go work for a company. After negotiations and a VERBAL acceptance I realized I was leaving some money on the table with my employer so I asked for signing bonus and they said they would not even take it back to their board to consider (I'm C level) because I had already negotiated. I said something changed I need a signing bonus and they kept to their guns.
They really wanted me but were not willing to make a small concession. I rescinded the acceptance because I knew now how they were going to be down the road with pay increases and bonuses--too beaurocratic and inflexible. I gave them anyother reason for rescinding but I could tell the culture was not what I wanted to get myself into. My guess is you just did the same thing without knowing it and saved yourself from another job change in a few years.
You accepted the job, and then asked for more money? Maybe I'm just out of touch with how things are done these days.
wow, practicly the exact same thing. I'm pretty shocked at the bottom line nature and the amount of power the HR people have in these districts. I mean it's one thing to try and keep costs low, it's a whole different ball game to ignore the professional and expert opinions of those in education who have been doing the diligence to make a call on hiring. What a discouraging experience.
LOL Teachers... smh
Make up the salary difference in that magical wonderland called "summer" that I hear so much about...
My wife's last district was in western Oakland county. They brought in a HR director there who was a complete jerk. Unfortunately this stuff is becoming more and more common in the field of education.
But people are noticing. Parents and lawmakers may not care, but enrollment at places like EMU for Ed majors is drastically down. Will take a decade, but supply and demand will catch up with this process.
got it made and this or that wouldn't fly in the "real world. You know what wouldn't fly...hiring someome one with a decade of experience at entry level compensation. Of course, those same people who blather also affirm there own bloated salaries saying you got to pay to attract and retain talent. Guess kids don't deserve talent.
Fucking joke.
I think it's silly --- unless it's an entry-level job or one with intractable pay bands (and union jobs do fall in this category) --- NOT to negotiate when coming into a job.
But there's always a non-zero chance the offer falls through. You have to be willing to accept that before even beginning to negotiate.
I don't think you did anything wrong, but sadly this is how some companies do business. They have their buckets, and if you don't fall into one, or if you try to jump into a different one, they balk. I'm surprised the offer was rescinded, but I think they basically told you it was take-it-or-leave-it, and when you tried to negotiate more they figured it wouldn't be worth the potential headaches you might cause/have being underpaid. I'm not saying I agree, but as someone who has recently gone through the hiring process on both ends, I see their point of this probably not being a good fit and wanting to move on.
HR being bypassed by someone up the food chain happens all the time; it shouldn't, but I'm not surprised this happened.
Good luck - sounds like you have a decent current situation, so at least this isn't a massive blow.
This is why I left the Corporate world and acquired several businesses. It is also why I replaced 85% of my salaried and hourly employees during the first year of owning any business. It is now why I have only 1099 commissioned employees outside my admin. Deliver or starve.
Employers suck. Employees suck. Frankly, either create your own path or get used to it.
Hope you hire a good attorney to defend you from the misclassification lawsuit that is almost inevitable 5 years from now.
I have been recruiting for 10 years and this is new to me. I have mutually decided with a candidate that a offer will not work based on salary negotiations. I try to be the most up front and honest recruiter out there. In fact I have told candidates to ask for more money, because of market and if a company was vastly underpaying them. A thought is that you mentioned that you heard there was an internal applicant as well. It could be possible that the HR person wanted that internal to get the job and saw your negotiation try as an out to make that happen. Unfortunately in the world of hiring people play favorites and don't look at the big picture of what it can do for a company. You should negotiate a job offer, unless they literally give you everything you want. One tip in negotations would be to have the market data for the role and city you are in, another tip is to have an idea on the willingness of the company to negotiate on the front end. You can do this by asking if there is a range for pay, or is it a set number.
It is rare that an HR person can trump a hiring manager, so if you want the job after the interviews you can go back to the hiring manager and see if he can push to hire you. Like most people said before, you may have dodged a bullet if this is how the HR team works. It sounds like this person is the reason HR Dept get bad names and people don't want to talk with us.
...as to the problem. If the job you were seeking was 'protected' by the union, and if you came across to the HR person as being 'arrogant' and a potential 'problem' child, HR may have concluded the organization wouldn't be in a good position to deal with you in the event you were dissatisfied after coming on board.
I really don't understand why you are taking so much time to pursue this as you already have a position you are happy with. Drop it and move on.
Many, many years ago I had an executive recruiter tell me that there are three key questions you should ask yourself about your current position:
- Do I enjoy the work environment and the people I'm working with?
- Am I continually learning and being given opportunities to get additional training?
- Am I being compensated fairly for the work I'm doing?
If you can answer 'yes' to all three, you are in a good place. 2 out of 3, be looking. 1 out of 3, be vigorously seeking another a new job.
It's OT no doubt, but thanks for posting this thread. This has been an interesting discussion, and a good representation of the appeal this site has beyond the sporting content.
I had a similar issue happen to me a few years ago. I am still with the same company but was getting pursued heavily by a well-known ad agency here in Chicago. Agreed to meet with them and the interview to job offer process happened VERY quickly. Essentially, as I am on the "client side," leaving for the agency life again meant taking a slight pay cut, according to what they were offering me. Granted, I would save time + money by not commuting to the 'burbs every day, but there was no way I could justify a 10% pay cut for the opportunity to shorten my commute. When she asked what I made (a mistake, as I will always negotiate for what I will be worth in this next role), her offer was far short. I talked openly and honestly and gave her a number I absolutely needed to take the role, i.e. here is how much I'm worth/I need/what my experience warrants, and if they really wanted me they would come and get me. Of course, as an ad man, the language was much softer and more welcoming :) In the end, the difference was like 8k a year, pennies when it comes to the big picture. In the end, however, the salary plus benefits plus other factors led me to decline.
After I declined, the HR director wrote me an amazing email and still one I share with people. I will NEVER work for this agency, talk people out of working there and still have a hard time believing someone at the HR DIRECTOR LEVEL thought this was a good idea. It essentially says:
"Sorry you made this decision, as you will no doubt regret this in years to come. We ended up hiring someone with more experience than you for a lesser salary, so in the end it looks like we came out on top."
UNBELIEVEABLE.
Good luck to you on this next stage of your job hunt. I echo the sentiment of other posters in saying "if that's the culture, you do not want to work there." Find a company that invests in its employees, as a happy worker makes better products.