itschaffey

What do you think will happen with Angular after 2.0?

What would you say is the best way to describe React?

Node haha? Dang. As mentioned in an answer to another comment, perhaps framework was the wrong terminology to use, and something more all-encompassing to reflect what is wanted would've been better.

What do you think a developer using Javascript should use/know right now?

Noted – use of terminology could've been more accurate, but for the purpose of this article we tried to keep it quite simplified. Perhaps the wrong approach with regards to accuracy.

What were your thoughts on the broader points of the post?

Hi Jonaldomo - could you clarify what you mean?

I think both followup questions are valid. As others have mentioned in addition to yourself, there is wariness of companies' intentions, which ties into getting someone for less/value/than what they're worth.

On the flip side, case may be they genuinely can't afford to pay as much - but potential applicants may be swayed if they trust in them, and choose to forgo a higher salary or accept other compensation methods or benefits.

No need to apologise - it's a perfectly justified way of putting it. Could be considered a cynical view, but justified still.

Ah, oh dear haha.

That's fair logic - what if other forms of compensation were included in the listed range? (e.g. top end of band + equity)

To get in touch/an understanding of the company/team?

Ah sorry, I've muddled myself somewhat with 'bid to play.'

But what you've said here would be appropriate when it comes to the best in their fields. And not just with salary (other compensation, care packages, etc). But would 'competitive' be less appropriate than something like 'negotiatiable?'

Job titles have definitely become weirder/amgbiguous/watered down over time.

Instead of salary range, what would interest you? (firm, tech stack, vision?)

That's a reasonable assumption in all fairness. And I would agree that the other 'perks/benefits' need championing in cases where firms can't match market value (whether it be equity, healthcare, daycare, or even free beers/billiards on Fridays).

'Decent' could have a connotation of 'good' (though that depends on the source, and the location targeted) - it's in my vernacular, but would agree, it can certainly be offputting, and a case of your second point - milking for cheap.

How might companies tackle the issues some have listed here of displaying salaries, while not deterring people (assuming they're being fair, not exploitative).

Enjoying it at the end of the day is the key thing, on a personal level and as a team. Shame it ended, but seems an understandable reason.

Now, having an ex-POTUS reading their is one helluva bragging right for him!

It is admittedly not a totally methodical study, but the discussion is sort of compelling.

Human nature would suggest as much (we'd certainly hope for reciprocations of actions that demonstrate trust in the everyday at least). But as others have mentioned - there are drawbacks to being transparent, even with the potential benefits from the created virtuous circle.

a-d are all valid points, and (c) is certainly one crux when it comes to listing a higher-paying jobs - is listing 'competitive' the only way of combatting this (what about the application process finding the most compatible skill-wise, person-firm fit-wise, etc)?

Great point re: salary bands, and existing employees reading listed job openings.

Each side of the bands/'competitive' debate has +/-s for sure. By 'bid to play' do you mean a 'race to the bottom' sort of thing re: salary/compensation?

Mm, it does suggest value in an acknowledging way.

Any other words/phrases you've seen in your job travels/perusings haha (for better or worse)?

So a displayed salary range (perhaps $5-15k in swing?) in any case offers something more tangible/clear than 'competitive'?

I could certainly agree with that. It doesn't confine a company to a certain $x, but isn't as opaque as the bog standard 'competitive.'

Your rationale is certainly a strong one - salary is but only one consideration in the end.

What was your experience with the former white panther like?

'Decent' is brilliant haha! :) Not seen that one yet. Your modus operandi, and note of caution are also spot on IMO.

Transparency (not just on salary, but role/skill expectations too) would appear to build trust. What can firms that can't offer as much do, do you think?

Showing salaries would seem to be a way of offering transparency. One worry might be people going for a higher paying role with just that intent.

Why do you think companies might not show salaries?

That's a fair enough comment, job application processes are getting longer and more time consuming - sometimes out of need for getting the right people.

Any ideas as to why salaries might be left as something broad like 'competitive'?

Ouch. We're still using PHP but appreciate what you're saying. What tech stack are you using at the moment?

Are there any other factors that influence your decision when applying for a new job? e.g. Prestige of the company, tech challenges, etc?