to think that job advertisements should show a salary?

[TheBloodManCometh]

Job hunting at the moment.
At least 50% of jobs I've seen advertised have had "salary negotiable" or "competitive salary".
Now for me a salary is indicative of the level of the job - i know that an admin job at £18k is too junior for me where a £30k would be too senior. (for example).
I'm always suspicious about a job with no stated salary as I presume that it is going to be really low.
I don't want to put loads of energy into applying only to find the salary far too low!
Even a vague salary would be useful!

Yes exactly, it's a way to pay as little as they can get away with. I don't personally see what is wrong with competitors and junior colleagues knowing what others get paid. I am a civil servant and all pay bands are public. I was previously a lawyer and the firm I worked for had published, fixed pay bands for associates up to 7 years' PQE (although there was also a discretionary bonus - but the majority of the package was fixed salary).

Does it matter if junior colleagues know what their managers get paid?

emsyj IME it can be damaging having completely transparency re salaries. It can create discontent and envy. I havent got a clue what any of my colleagues or manager earns, and in all honesty I would rather not know.

Each person is unique and one person may have been given a slightly higher rate within the same band as a colleague because they may have been in post for longer and earned the right to that bit extra, or maybe adds some value that the company feels is worth a bit more. They are in the same role but one person is definitely more accomplished than the other.

Thats life.

We'll have to agree to disagree then daisy - I know what all my colleagues and managers earn and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I still think that if the salaries the company is paying are justifiable - on the basis of a person's ability, experience and what they bring to the role - transparency harms no-one. It is useful to keep salaries secret when there is an element of unfairness though, for sure. Saves the senior folk from having to answer awkward questions.

the 'negotiable salary' ones always flag those jobs up as canvassers/cold caller jobs to me

I agree it's annoying but sometimes they can't put it on because the salary will depend on who gets the job won't it?

I only know about teaching but the same job advert could attract a newly qualified teacher and someone who's been teaching for 8+ years but isn't particularly ambitious. The range in salary for that same job could then be about £10,000.

So I guess it's often about waiting and seeing for the employer too.

YANBU. I hate this with a passion. No, money isn't everything, but when it comes to working, it is bloody important! Why should we pretend it isn't?

CraztTypeofIndifference that's shocking behaviour on the part of the agent, and I am sure did her no favours with her client (the potential employer) either. Did your DH complain about her wasting everyone's time?

It doesn't take much to work out the bands of salary that a teacher is on. Main pay scale and upper pay scale based on experience and some TLRs for responsibility. I don't see how that's a problem. I've been "trapped" in my salary band for a few years as I've not had opportunities to go through to UPS, or the range of experience to apply for TLR posts. I know that if I applied for other posts, it is not for an enhanced salary, but for other benefits (location, experience, ethos of school...) At least I'm in no danger of wasting time on pointless applications.

I used to work for the NHS and every job was advertised with it's pay band. You might be able to negotiate within that but generally the rules were fairly clear. That meant it was pretty easy to decide what jobs to apply to (ie your band and up to two bands higher depending on your skills/ experience/ the role, knowing that if you went up a band you'd be at the bottom). Now I've moved to Canada, still work in the public sector but here no salaries are shown. This is apparently so as not to put people off applying (benefits are quite good and they hope will persuade people). This is to me nonsensical and very irritating as I am only really interested in being paid at least my current wage and ideally a significant raise. Plus people's actual salaries have to be published over a certain level (including expenses so can be quite deceiving) so it's fairly pointless really. In my field titles are fairly arbitrary so it's very hard to judge whether a job is worth going for or not.

Teaching has always had clearly published pay scales. So while the salary isn't on the advert they usually say main pay scale, or mps +tlr, so it's possible to work out what you would get based on knowing your own experience. An nqt knows what her starting salary is and knows that successful appraisals mean going up a band on the pay scale. That's changing with academies, which is a shame.

I don't know much about other industries but I would be deeply suspicious of any job where they won't even give a ball park figure for the salary.

I am currently looking for another job, as i can no longer make ends meet on the salary i am currently on, thanks to WTC cuts. I find most of the jobs that i am looking at don't mention salary, so i am not going for them. I also find it highly frustrating that i am not told if they are not interested. The endless waiting is killing me! A polite no thanks takes seconds to send out.

Nursing jobs in the private sector are often advertised as being 'competitive salary'. When it is usually anything but.

And they also have a list a mile long of the qualities and attributes that they require the applicant to possess...

I do think private healthcare if rife with this attitude, try and get away with paying staff the least they can and try and keep salaries secret between employees.

YANBU. The whole point of job adverts is to attract candidates. Therefore clearly you include the most attractive aspects of the job in the ad. If the salary was attractive, it would be included, therefore it's a fair assumption that if there is no salary, it is not attractive at all.

It also means that candidates can't easily tell whether the job is at the right level for them, meaning that good candidates might not apply and you might get a plethora of unsuitable candidates.

really really irks me when they advertise a part time job 'flexible hours' without giving a clue when they want you to work those hours. I have three children. It's really fucking important I know what the hours are before I apply!
And the jobs where they want someone to work 'varying shifts, varying hours, must be able to cover 7 days a week, must be able to come in at a moments notice'
In other words: MUMS, WE DONT WANT YOU.

I'm looking at a few admin jobs but my main search is Nanny jobs.
I'm shocked by how many families think it is okay to ask for someone to look after two under 2s and expect full housekeeping and 70 hours a week for about £18k.
Its really depressing actually.

YANBU OP.

Completely agree with this:
emsyj
Any employer that is treating its employees fairly and paying people at a level that they can totally justify based on their skills and experience has no reason to hide its salary levels

The requirement for secrecy, for wahatver reason would worry me. Is it because there is an envious, back biting culture at the company? Is it because the company has rubbish t&cs? Neither of those opetions would make the company an enticing place for me.

Yes numpties hours should be stated on the advertisement as well, I feel. I'm currently a SAHM idly looking at jobs, with a view to applying to any which might suit the hours I have available. I don't think it's too much to ask that we could be a bit flexible, but they should at least give some idea of the hours you'd need to present at work for, so for example a 16 hours a week role which might be somewhere between 08:00 - 14:00 or 18:00 - midnight. Often you don't find this out until interview, so why waste my time applying and the employer's time including me in the shortlist?

None of the jobs I have looked at list a salary, and where I live the hourly paid jobs are likely to be NMW.

TBH, having started out in an environment with transparency about paybands, it's oddly clear to me that the main reason some companies opt for TOP SECRET paybands is because "that's how it's done" - I have tried questioning that and got lots of "oooh noooo can't do that there'd be no end of trouble". Which doesn't make sense to me, but it's clearly a very strongly held opinion.

It's obviously not something that can be challenged with logic from within, as both parties think they have it right. I'd be interested to hear if anyone's worked in a place that's switched from closed to open. How did you do it?

I moved across the country a year ago to live with DP so I needed to find a new job sharpish. I went through two rounds of interviews for a job almost identical to a job that I previously done and knew like the back of my hand, but it wasn't until they phoned to offer it to me that they admitted that the salary was £3.5k less than I was on at the time. I tried to negotiate but they would only go up by £500pa but insisted that I would on the management fast-track, etc. I was pretty desperate to find something but I had the sense to turn that down, and I'm glad I did because three weeks later I was offered my current job on the same pay grade as my last.

I agree with a pp about hours being an issue as well. I have recently interviewed for a job which turns out to include 3/4 Saturdays and no time in lieu. Had it been listed in the advert I would have saved 2 interviewers and myself a wasted hour plus application time.

If salary is not specified and you want to be sure it's not below your minimum requirement, ring up or e-mail and ask! Smaller organisations may well not have salary bands in place, and there might be quite a lot of flexibility with the person specification for the role. The salary may genuinely depend on the skills and experience of the person selected. I think asking the question should at least give an idea of whether a company is trying to pay as little as possible, or whether it's dependent on the successful candidate.

It givrs me the rage. Competitive salary my arse! If they are not stating it - it ain't worth it!!!

fascicle I'm applying to A LOT of jobs - I don't have the time or the confidence to speculatively email every one regarding their salary, unfortunately.

In my line of work there tends to be very generic job titles that could cover anything from an apprentice, graduate, entry level through to step below management.

Most work is also advertised through agencies, and I find pressing them for the company (I can usually figure out the likely salary from that) and the salary range, they will provide the info or at the very least I can say I'm not interested for less than £xx and they'll indicate whether it's worth my time.

It is annoying, but I can see that perhaps they'd go for something within potential and pay them slightly less than an experienced hire depending on the job.