"We want top people."
"We want to pay average."
"We want top people."
"We want to pay average."
[1] Your ability to negotiate effectively is helped/hampered by your knowledge of their field of candidates. Ergo, they inevitably say 'top people', to skew your perception of your competitors to their advantage.
Sure, but that's what makes them scum. It's bad-faith negotiating.
What usually wakes HR up is a detailed spreadsheet of the value you add to the business and that you will be going elsewhere unless you are properly compensated, as well as when they bring other people into it saying "Ok, lets get them in here and get their salary up too" or "fire them if you need extra money, your lack of money to pay me is not my problem, this is a business, I am not your bank, if you need a loan call them."
Grow a pair and walk out on the spot, if you can't then save so next time you can. Thats how you negotiate by putting the business in a position where it is fucked if they don't do what you want, just like a business plays its min wage employees. Letting people put themselves into stupid positions is a two way street.
It's bad faith to contend that a programmer is nothing more than an inert substance. I'm not talking about emotions or morale or anything woo-woo like that, just that programmers do more than coal. You can't burn a person and get code as a result.
HR workers who follow your logic do a disservice to themselves and the company, because when a programmer is performing under expectations, HR is not going to say, "well, they're a piece of coal, what do you expect?"
No, programmers are only coal at the beginning, and then the script flips after they're hired. That's textbook bad faith, and "walking out on the spot" always involves having wasted time at least going through the interview process. Charming.
Not disputing that but seriously: what sort of people call other people "resources"? Did they think that's who they were going to grow up to be, when they were kids?
They even know it's wrong because they don't call themselves "spreadsheet resources", they're "HR professionals".
For smaller companies/startups I also prefer to receive fresh hardware (macbook,mini,etc.) at signing.
For me, starting off with a brand new MBP with all the trimmings (incidentally, ~4-5K) translates directly into productivity.
Besides, if I was paying it'd probably be running Plan 9 and have an FPGA duct taped to the back...
I've seen companies burn 100 hours of $150/hour employee labor in order to save $50 on a mouse. You don't want to work there.
Eventually I just bought one for myself. It was $50. Managers made all sorts of excuses, then IT said they wouldn't buy non-standard hardware, and there were particularly a lot of excuses in the vein of, "but then we'd have to buy keyboards for everyone." That they wouldn't consider buying their $100k/yr employees a $50 keyboard every few years was just another symptom of their dysfunctional environment.
Just as a recent example, it took an email to my manager and 10 minutes later a keyboard for $150 was approved. Say it lasts for 5 years - the feeling of appreciation by easily getting what I need approved and bought is worth so much more, compared to what $150 spread out over 5 years of salary would buy them (disregarding that the raise would also cost a more considering taxes and such).
I'd be interested to know going in what a startup's policy on conferences would be.
While I expect most trips to be ultimately grounded in business development (and with good reason), is the company purely focused on talking up a product, or will they accommodate my technical/social interests as well?
Giving a pitch can be fun, as long as I have Plenty of time to chat with other programmers, attend panels, learn something, etc.