Hacker News Reader

: you can turn part of that salary into more vacation time

there are not many companies hiring you for full time at $x that will allow you to work 3 days a week for 50% of $x, much more likely they will let you go and hire somebody else (unless you've been there forever and are the only person that can do something, in which case the company should worry about you getting hit by a bus)

money can be used to purchase many things, but in our field work/life balance is not one of them, unless of course you mean be lucky to have a good exit and then for the rest of your career you can work on what you like for part-time, but that is not realistic if you need a salary to put food on the table

I wouldn't exactly say that. I just had a friend get a full-time position. He negotiated his work week to less than 40 hours, with full benefits. That said his hourly pay did seem on the low side.

> there are not many companies hiring you for full time at $x that will allow you to work 3 days a week for 50% of $x, much more likely they will let you go and hire somebody else (unless you've been there forever and are the only person that can do something, in which case the company should worry about you getting hit by a bus)

Your calculus is a bit off. A company will not hire you part time because employees need time to learn the job. This includes the culture and political aspects.

Once you've been there for awhile, that all changes. Now you're a part of the company, so the company is going to be way more willing to jump through hoops to keep you around. The reason they wouldn't let you come in at 3 days a week, is the same reason they will start letting you (if you negotiate it right) after you've been there a year or so. It's tougher and more expensive to assimilate a new employee than it is to make a productive current employee happy.

If you can show to the company that the bottom line won't get impacted by a proposed change, make it clear that you'll leave unless you get your way, (hard to do convincingly) and offer an acceptable path to move from A to B, then you too can find work/life balance.

It's not impossible, but it's not easy either. I'd put it as being slightly harder than getting a 20% raise, which I've done. Now that I think about it, if you want a 20% raise, then one path to getting it might be to start the process of negotiating something like this, (to let them know you're serious about not being happy) and then come in one day and ask for more money. If you play your cards right, they'd be much happier to open up the checkbook than to deal with the prospect of having half their workforce ask for the same thing you just got. (that's the real reason they don't want part-timers. Even if they can trust you not to abuse it, what about the next three people that ask?)

Another approach is to suggest you split a job with another person. I have seen several young mothers take this path as they don't need full time daycare, and don't end up with a long employment gap.

Some companies won't be willing to consider it at all - but I think you might be surprised at how many would. I've seen it happen for multiple people, even at companies where that's the last thing you'd expect.

We've been conditioned to believe that $$ (and in our field, equity) are the only knobs that can be adjusted during negotiation. In reality the actual field of negotiable variables is much, much wider.

YMMV of course, and negotiating for non-cash things can often be harder than negotiating for more cash, but it's eminently doable and is in fact done all the time - just poorly advertised.

Note: this is also why ability to negotiate for cash is and important skill. It's often easier to negotiate for cash and then trade that cash for non-cash benefits rather than negotiating directly for what you actually want.

> in our field.

I'm working in the same field as you, and I talked my employer into a remote position abroad in a region with more statutory leave than in the US, working four days a week. All this was done without a pay cut.

Knowing your own worth and having a clear idea of what you want from life allows you to buy work-life balance.

Sorry but I disagree; What about companies such as Netflix with their unlimited vacation time? I have definitely started to see many more software and consulting companies who started to follow suit so I think it is realistic

We've heard of plenty of companies say they offer unlimited vacation time. Have we seen studies about how much it gets used?

Not sure.. I think we have to wait for places like Netflix to publish their data (if they decide to) .. but I can tell you from first hand experience I worked in such as company and I loved the flexibility and I have given such flexibility to those who report to me and the results were great.

Netflix says they don't even collect vacation data, which means they can't be pressured into publishing it and nobody can prove that their employees don't take any.

So if I were to decide that I was going to take every Monday or every Friday off, that'd be kosher?

> Don't want tons of money but want great work-life balance? You can turn part of that salary into more vacation time, more flexible working conditions (remote?), one day off every single week, more benefits, and other things that matter to you.

Fyi, you are being idealistic here and not realistic.

Many, many companies will block you on taking unpaid time off and/or more flexibility. Too many for this to be a reliable option, particularly if you are an expensive employee and don't want to cut your salary massively.

I literally asked to work remotely [same hours, salary, etc] and their response was +1 week PTO, +$X/year instead. Basically, I can't cut my salary enough that they'd let me work remotely. I'd have to find another job.

Some things money just doesn't buy.

"Being a shrewd negotiator is an absolutely critical skill in life, even if you don't want the best-ever-salary. If you know how to negotiate the best-ever-salary, you can trade it in for things that do matter to you."

What if I am absolutely at peace with what I have? There are plenty other skills that I would put as more critical than negotiation. Its not an absolute.

"Don't want tons of money but want great work-life balance? You can turn part of that salary into more vacation time, more flexible working conditions (remote?), one day off every single week, more benefits, and other things that matter to you."

I want to make the same point as tetraodonpuffer. Its not easy to say I will work 50% less, give me 50% less salary.

Salary growth is generally exponential, some % per year. Negotiating even a slightly higher salary early in your career can mean an extra million dollars in your 401k at retirement. You say money isn't that important, but is it really not worth polishing up your negotiating skills a little bit for a million bucks?

If salary growth is important to you, there's also another way to get it. Whenever I have changed jobs, the increase in salary has been like an order or magnitude more than what you would get if you stayed. (2% vs 20%). I am not saying you should always be looking to change jobs, but if you are looking for salary increases, negotiating is only one way to get it.

I think you're strongly agreeing with each other?

Negotiating is something you do while you are in a job and while you are switching jobs. Even when switching jobs your negotiation ability can mean a dramatic difference in how much you are compensated.

> "but if you are looking for salary increases, negotiating is only one way to get it."

Well no, negotiating is the only way you can get it - you have to negotiate with the next company too. Switching jobs might get you a 15% raise by default, but a good negotiator can make that 50% instead (or 15% + a bunch of other perks).

I say "I am currently at X now, and I am looking for Y% more" and the recruiter/company says "done". If you consider that negotiation, yes I am negotiating.

According to other people on here (including patio11) its a more subtle, nuanced and longer drawn-out game.

Edit: Key point here is that I am not gauging how much I can get out of the company. I have a number in mind that I am comfortable with, and asking for that.

Edit - Response to the comment below from Consultant32452: That was never in question, I fully am aware of the lack of money obtained as a result of non-negotiation. It just doesn't matter to some people, as they are not optimizing for the highest amount they can get. Maybe they are already well off, or the salary they "non-negotiated" for already is a good-enough amount for them, or are optimizing for other things. Hence once cannot say that negotiation is "necessary".

You're certainly negotiating, you're just doing so in a way that will statistically mean over the course of your career you will make hundreds of thousands of dollars less.

I think Patrick's blog post about salary negotiation opens with an illuminating metaphor. In a nutshell, are there any strange but ultimately trivial tasks you wouldn't do for 20 minutes for $100,000? Because that's the trade you're suggesting is not worthwhile.

>If you know how to negotiate the best-ever-salary, you can trade it in for things that do matter to you.

Personally, I'd rather not spend my life playing games with people who are constantly trying to capture the most value in a relationship at the expense of the other person.

Tell me what the job is, what it's worth to you, and let's mutually determine if this relationship is a fit.

> Tell me what the job is, what it's worth to you, and let's mutually determine if this relationship is a fit.

That's basically the same as Patrick's advice. The difference is that you're expecting an employer to do that naturally, and he is encouraging people to ask employers to do that. It seems to work pretty well, anecdotally, and it's not all that scary.

Some of the other responses have zeroed in on trading $ for time, missing your important point.

Money and time are just poker chips - big, valuable ones, but 2 among many. Figure out what's important to you and what's important to the company, this sets the board. Then start trading chips.

The conversation isn't the hard part, intimidating as it might be. Determining what you value, and how much, so that you can begin the conversation is where it's tricky. It's easy and comfortable to skip this analysis, pretend that money and time are the only variables in the equation, and then leave something else you value undiscussed and unclaimed.

There's a great article (2012) I often refer junior developers to who are interested in approaching negotiation in a more productive way (with an emphasis on the most important chip to many of us, salary): http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/

Yes. Two of the most important aspects in my mind, apart from time and money, are the people you will be working with (are they good), and the product/the kinds of problems you'll solve. Both are high on my list of what I look for in a job: http://henrikwarne.com/2013/03/26/what-do-programmers-want/

> Being a shrewd negotiator is an absolutely critical skill in life, even if you don't want the best-ever-salary. If you know how to negotiate the best-ever-salary, you can trade it in for things that do matter to you.

Exactly. But then most people will just bend over and wilt at having to deal with a car salesman, as if that's the gold standard of having to negotiate something (it isn't by any stretch). Or they will disparage and throw barbs at the same, as if a great price should just be handed to them on a silver platter.