I think one should also have a better opening line than "I don't know, you're in a much better position to judge my worth to the firm than I am." Something along the lines of "I can do x, y, and z for you and my skills are in demand in the current hiring climate. I think that I am worth $xx to your company."

I'd be interested to see if anyone had a good comeback for that

The other option is treating the firm number as what it is, which is a suggestion which they intend to scare you into not negotiating. The CEO heard the firm number line once, too. He laughed at it, because haha, it is funny.

I don't really like self-help/improvement books and the like, but this was just no-nonsense and straight to the point.

Also, while the position was for a junior developer, I already had over three years full time experience. I also didn't feel like I could negotiate a specific increase for the next review. And considering the increase they gave me at my next review, I'm sure I would have 'negotiated for' less!

I'm just saying it's not always possible to negotiate a higher salary.

OK Dave, I understand having worked at large organizations before that sometimes our hands are tied. I still think we can make this happen, though. How much vacation comes with the offer? [Hear answer.] You have enough authority to approve a higher number than that, right? [Hear affirmative.] Great! In lieu of giving me the $85k you would like to give me but can't, why don't you instead approve X extra vacation days?

A close variant of this line worked on a Japanese megacorp. Your HR policies are not as rigid as theirs are. Really.

For example, in 2008 I took a step into the big leagues (as I saw it). I had a mid-grade developers salary ($75k) for a couple years, and 7 years in the industry, and I wanted to step up.

I found a great opporunity for a profitable bootsrtapped startup in a beautiful city but one that was not by any stretch a technology hub.

I nailed a phone interview. He asked what I was looking for. I said $110k, match my current 3.4 week vacation, and $6k for relocation. He asked what I was making now. "About 10% less than that" i said. (I fibbed).

I focus on the top-line. The relo and extra vacation were nice, but most importantly they were bargaining chips.

I was flown down for interviews. Things went great. HR directory during the interview asked my comp needs, I told her the same I told the manager on the phone the previous week.

Everything went great. I flew home. Two days later, I get a call from HR lady.

"We think you'd be a great addition to the team. We'd like to extend you an offer."

Her offer was.... $75k, match my vaca and my relco request. My heart sank.

I paused for a moment and said "I make more than that now (lie). My original quote has some room to negotiate but that's outside my range." To which she said "We think this is fair, many of our senior guys make this." We talked for 10 more mins, I was getting nowhere. She was your usual hard-nosed HR type. So I excused myself and told her I'm thrilled they made and offer and I'd like some time to think it over.

For a moment I was bitter. That this was all a waste of my time. I flew across the country. I told them up front the range I was considering. Twice!

But then I thought, it's possible that they have no less a notion of actually paying me $75k than I have of actually getting everything in my quote.

So, I decided I needed to skirt HR. The hiring manager gave me his card at the interview. I called his office line. I said "Look, let me level with you" (lie) "The comp package I presented to you is fair I think. But I'd be willing to give a little back and earn the rest on merit once I'm working for you. I think being on your team would be a great thing for my career. But i just cannot take a pay cut to work for you." He asked what I was making now. I reiterated my fib from earlier. "I've hit bonus here every year, and my total comp is about $100k exactly."

I thought, I'm making him wince. He had to feel like he came up with a good deal. But my lie here boxed him in. He could offer $100k -- a lateral move -- but that seems a little wrong. He could do a token increase -- $103k but that seems almost a joke.

I hadn't yet actually made a counter-proposal, so I did just that. I was going to start by sacrificing the extra vaca. That extra 1.4 weeks vacation was a benefit worth about $3k a year at this rate. But in my preamble he just in passing made a comment about the vacation not being a problem because it's a small company and HR isn't really involved in that, the manager approves vacation without any guidelines or limits.

So, the next lamb on my list was the relo money. I had 3 positions built-in to my $6k quote:

1) I designed it so they could easily counter at a nice round $5k, feel like they got a good deal, and my relo was largely paid for.

2) I would propose that I pay for relo out of pocket and the reimburse me only for the movers themselves -- about $3k

3) Outright elimination.

I said "honestly, I really want to come work for you (true). I know my current comp is so high that you're boxed-in a bit, I'm already up against the top of your range it seems. (lie).

"I've used United Vanlines before. They were great. Some looking around made me feel the movers themselves would cost about $3k. In lieu of cash, I would be happy to pay the relo out of pocket and then submit the invoice from United for reimbursement. "

He talked around it for a mement then he tipped his hand a bit: "I like the creativity", he began, "but honestly the CEO here is against any kind of cash payment for new hires. No signing bonus. No relocation. Etc. He pays it, but begrudgingly. We feel we'd rather spread that money around to existing team members because you never know how a new hire will work out."

Then he said "I'll talk this over. We can probably find a way to match what you're making now if we go ahead and just reimburse you for the movers."

I liked where he was going with that but we werent' there yet. I cut him off.

"Truthfully, you live in a gorgeous city. It's no doubt an amazing place to live. I really feel like a 10% raise and a chance to work for you will make me feel good about the decision to leave behind all my roots here, all my friends and family. I really want to come work for you guys but I feel like any hint of shortchanging myself will start us off on the wrong foot. If we can make another go at that $110k quote, I'd be happy to pay relocation out of my pocket.

He said he'd have to run it by the CEO.

He calls back 30 mins later. "The best we can do is $109k and the normal process where we do a review and increase after 6 months would, for you, be moved to your 1 year anniversary. Now tell me, when can you start?"

I was elated. I just got myself a $35,000 raise. A nearly 50% increase on top of my $75k base.

Having the givebacks is important! It got me a LOT more from than.

A little post-game analysis though:

1) I thought the HR woman always hated me. Maybe because I went around her. Maybe because she thought they were grossly overpaying me. I dunno.

2) I later learned i was the highest paid guy on the team. When I ascended into a management roll I was given access to salary info though, in an oversight from HR, my managers salary was also listed. What did he have the month I was hired? An increase. From $106k to $116k. My negotiation got HIM a raise. A manager can't make less than his reports.

3) Being the highest paid guy isn't a good thing. It's really hard to outperform everybody else. So onlookers -- like, say, a micro managing CEO -- will question the salary gap. Also, I won't forget the day I bought a new Mercedes and I was asked to not make a big deal out of it and if asked, say that "I saved up for this for years." Ugh. Please.

4) NEGOTIATE EVERYTHING in the future.

5) I would've been smart to negotiate myself a future raise. Because I wasn't given any increase for 18 months, and even then only after pestering.

EDIT:

Let me add that I did this to deliberately try to swing for the fences. I was happy enough where I was.

Also, I had a perfect resume for this company. My technical merits were very strong, but more importantly, I had a lot of relevant domain knowledge.

I therefore felt i was in a strong bargaining position. Nowadays, if you're good at what you do, the way it';s so hard to find good devs means you probably are in a strong position as well.

There's no equivalent in the US. There's never any reason a future employer ever needs to know what you earned in the past.

If you work for a government entity, they might be able to find that out, as it may be public information easily obtained, but barring that, there's no way they can find out (legally).

>Plenty of "serious" firms ask about last salary earned (in fact, if you were to fill out an application on line

Are you saying that a "serious" firm would have you fill out an application (online or otherwise)? I thought any career level job would expect a resume/CV.

Big finance firms (EG, top 3 in the world) require tax documentation and will rescind offers if your comp was exaggerated.

It hasn't been worked on since 2003 - one of the original people behind it started cognifty.com several years ago.

I would strongly recommend against doing this, for the simple reason that they will need to know your last salary so they can calculate your tax. In the UK this is the P45 form: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P45_%28tax%29 If you have lied to them, they can terminate you immediately.

Market rate is based on what something worth, not what it costs or what it previously cost so there is no reason for a company to need to know what you previously made.

Having said that, couldn't you just change your terminology and say "package" instead of "salary", then if there is a discrepancy you could say "well, a portion of the package was year end bonus which I obviously didn't get this year..."

I think the take away here is that you shouldn't be discussing previous salary in any case. If I'm asked I always say "I'm not at liberty to discuss contract conditions at my previous employer" or something to that effect. As I mentioned: as a free market entity, I should be getting what I'm worth now, not some variation of what I was worth 2 years ago when I last tested the market.

Not in the US.

Since you mentioned it, I have to say it.... a NEW benz on a 109K salary?? Dude, you just blew your entire 35K raise on a car.

My dad said the same thing as you, though :) You're in good company!

so if you just say X + 5k, you would still be underpaid.

in Russia they act as this, if you refuse to name your own expectations

It's HARD to find good people to hire. And when you make them an offer, you really want them to take it. 5K doesn't make a dent.

However the simplest come back after a salary offer: please let me consider it.

Then a day later or after some thought, reiterate the value you will be bringing to meet and exceed with their expectations/plans, then say: Is that the best you can do?

Then shut up and wait.

I tried this once. It was easier than I thought.

Money is temporary. The experience, the people, the company culture, their mission, and growth are more important to be than money, in general. They are priceless facets.

However for most people a job is a job. As someone said the skill that they value the most and are at expert level at is apathy.

Also Jeffrey Fox says always go for salary - it is what everyone uses to measure your value and that is what they value so....to each their own.

Are you after a job or are you trying to creating a future for yourself?

I remember a recruiter told me to take the job that was not able to outbid for me in a bidding war. I thought that was odd. As she said, these people loved you and they are a established profitable company. The others are startups, that are just looking for just in time body and never mentioned why they valued me. I went with the money, actually I went with the technology because it was sweet - stupid mistake. I wished I listened to her.

Money has marginal utility for me. After a certain amount I do not care. Isn't that ultimately made me the geek I am, spending time on things that others saw very little social value?

Lots of companies say something like, yes our salaries are low but it's great experience that will set you up for the future. That may be true... But someday you have to actually get to that future.

I always say, in business there is no such thing as cheap or expensive. There's only worth the money, or not. Well the company is buying your time...

And this is exactly why I go for the absolute maximum I can: I care about my own projects more than I could ever care for any company or their projects. The more money I get the less I have to work for other people.

If the company can overuse its employees, it will regardless of what they are paying for salary.

If you are going for money (which if you have no other choice) than maximize! You will be abused so at least get the moola for. There is a reason why they call work work and have to pay people for it.

In the above scenario, where the job is just a job go for the money and kiss up to the boss. Less work and you are well insulated in crisis as others have mentioned.

There are plenty of people at work who do nothing more than be friends with the execs. They add little value in a company. This oddly considered acceptable. It is almost as if work is daycare for your not so bright but very happy friends. It reminds me of the cliques in high school.

Sadly this true in even in startups. So-so went to high school with the founder. Great but the nice guy is incompetent. Basically you soon realize that the startup is an adult daycare center as well.

You should please consider the effect it has on the overall profession. If you are not getting remunerated appropriately for the value you create, that surplus is captured by someone else. If this continues at a systemic level, many interesting people who could have been your colleagues will be turned away from the profession. The layman's description of what you are doing is is "pissing in the pool". You are, of course, free to make your choices and live by them; but please make sure you are building a healthy ecosystem in which you can indulge in activities that give you pleasure.

It depends on the size and culture of the firm; is the "decision maker" your future boss or someone in HR you'll never see again? You generally don't know the answer to this so early in the process. Respectful negotiation is never damaging, but it's important to be careful. The "I have an offer from Goldman at $90k" tactic is a bad idea. It's not really respectful negotiation at that point, because you're trying to exploit a competitive offer rather than arrive at what is fair.

Also, the decision-maker might call your bluff and either (a) say, "fine, go work at Goldman" or (b) call Goldman and verify your offer. By the way, if (b) happens and your story checks out, it's still bad for you because the mere act of checking up on someone is an act of distrust and, even though you were "proven innocent" that person is going to remember the call as a token of having not trusted you.

What definition of fair are you using such that what you're worth to someone else isn't a key consideration?

If both A and B choose the tech company, shouldn't they get the same pay? B's alternative is irrelevant to what he deserves at the tech company. Obviously, if the money is important to him, he should take the Goldman offer instead.

Someone out there is willing to pay $110k for his time. Ergo, $110k is a fair price to ask for his labor.

Tell you what, let's talk about waffle irons instead of people. Say I'm throwing a giant waffle party and I need ten waffle irons. I ask around to my friends and neighbors and offer them $5 for their waffle irons, and most say, "Sure, sounds fair. Not like I actually use the thing."

But when I get to one guy's house, he says, "Well, I'd love to help you out . . . but the elementry school already offered me $10 for my waffle iron."

And I say, "$10? Don't they know they could get a waffle iron for $5? What makes yours so special?"

And he says, "I don't know. Maybe they want them clean. Maybe they want a particular brand. Maybe they don't know they can get them for $5, and maybe it's that my wife teaches there and they want to help her out. Doesn't matter. School offered me $10, but if you'll pay me $10 as well, I'll let you have it instead."

Now, you seem to be saying that $10 is an unfair price to ask for his waffle iron, and that he's greedily exploiting a competing offer to get extra money out of me. But from my perspective, the guy's waffle iron is worth $10 -- to him and to the school. They have their reasons, and their reasons don't matter. If the waffle iron isn't worth $10 to me, I should move on and find somebody with a $5 waffle iron to sell.

Things are worth what people will pay for them. I do not know an alternative sensible definition of "worth".