My Thoughts: Who Should Give Salary Range in Interview? IMO Companies

Yes, I am very biased as I have only been an employee. And I want to believe that even if I were a manager, providing the salary would be in my best interest too. But until that day happens, my thoughts will always be biased.

First, there is only one reason for a company to request the interviewer's salary range. Purely a power trip to see how much fear someone has in not getting the opportunity. Sure there are plenty of blogs and articles about psychological analysis for one's ego.

Because if the ask is greater than their budget, they can cut all ties even if the candidate could potentially provide greater value than they expected. To me, that means they are not looking for the best candidate.

If the ask is within their range, then they can kind of expect a somewhat amicable interview process.

If the ask is lower than their range, this is the same as within range but now they have the option to offer less. And there are plenty of blogs and articles that suggest that this is not in the interest of the employer. Also there are comments and feedback that candidates were offered more than they expected.

Personally, I have never had an employer give me more than I expected. In most of companies, I have also learned that I was paid much less than my peers even though I did the same work if not better (yes, I know this sounds very biased... perhaps I should write a blog on why I think I was not only better but preferred).

Among all the people I have worked with, I have never heard of anyone within my circle that was offered more than they asked. I don't quite ask, but talking about salary does come up every so often typically around review season. But this is more implicitly implied since I do not ask explicitly.

Back to the point

The main reason I do not believe I should ever share my expectations is that I want to get paid for the work that I will be doing. If they are asking me to work 20 hours per day, I don't mind being paid half the normal salary. If I only have to do half the work of my peers, then I don't mind being paid half their salary.

So until I know how much work I will be doing, why would I give what my expectations are? If I give my real expectations and it greater than the offer, I will never know if they are offering easier work which I may consider.

My other point

What is the big deal with companies not providing the salary range?

Some say they want to save time in case the range is too far apart. If I can see the range, then I can save you the trouble and skip over your job post. I would save you the trouble to even calling me to ask my salary expectations.

They may miss out on some good candidates. Yea, and then you would not be able to afford them and wasted all that time anyways.

Salary expectations do not match all industries and all geographical areas. Why force the candidate to give a static number that means only something in one place and time and industry? Let me decide whether it is worth my time to do that line of work.

If you don't get enough candidates then offer more. If you get too many candidates then lower the offer. 

My conclusion

So I believe a fair negotiation between company and candidate is far greater than the ability to pay less or even the perception of paying less. Even if you were a fair company, I will never know. It will always be over my should that I could have been more aggressive.

The company has the power to replace you. I have no power to change the amount of work I will get after I get hired (except for quitting). 

I think the HR industry has a great potential to be so much better. I think there are still many opportunities for new companies to enter the market purely by hiring the right people. I also believe there are plenty of people who are willing to build a career just to be at a fair and just company for a lower wage. But because we are asked first, the general candidates fear to be paid too low which thus causes us all to fear those who fear.