Call the previous company and ask, what, how much you made? I'd be shocked if a company gave that info out about current or former employees, and I know one of the two companies I've worked for in the past said the only info they'd confirm about you if called is the dates you worked there or something like that.

(not that I'm an expert or anything, just seems like a bit of a privacy breach and/or might put companies at a disadvantage if they freely tell competitors what employees are making?)

(edit 2: or maybe it's to their advantage to freely share this info if it allows them to collude, idk)

In my mind it depends on where your current offer falls in the range you think the second company would offer. If it's towards the top, I'd be inclined to skip the no you give a number dance and let them know.

If you don't know the range then it's optimal to make them give a number first.

Some HR people are pretty clueless. Some of them are regular joes who are filling a role that needs to be done in their small/med company that don't have a degree in Evil Studies and 10 years of experience working at Evil Inc.

No offense to the people who work in HR.

I know I heard "salary verification" on the phone menu of EDS or Accenture, maybe that's different than flat out saying what someone made?

If they have 300 employees are they on Glassdoor? Take the high end of that range or take a number you think will be near the top of their range, add 20% and throw that back. They'll say something like we can't go that high, and then you can ask what they can do. They'll then give you the real number.

Los Angeles employers know you are shell-shocked by the price. They also know that most people give up and leave in short time (average person lasts less than 5 years in the city). They also know that you are likely going to face long-term unemployment (a LOT of self-employed in LA for this reason), and they are going to take advantage of those facts. They are trying to figure out how much time you have to survive in the city before desperation sets in.

I know it's brutal and ugly, but the more you play their game, the more you look desperate. If you come back the next day, you've lost the game, and every time you pick up the phone, you are losing your advantage.

A single job opening is going to get 100 to 1,000 resumes over night, and many of those resumes are from people with top pedigree, in an area with 5% unemployment with 13m people (JR resumes from UCLA, USC, Pepperdine, and that's *just* the local stuff). They have a ton of experience playing their side of the table and the numbers are on their side.

Now that you know the atmosphere and the rules, create your strategy accordingly.

Plus, for reference on pay, there is Glassdoor.

I wouldn't judge company culture based on how their HR department makes offers unless you plan on working in HR.

When they're ready to make an offer, you should be able to get a number from them without offering anything additional; I'd be surprised if you had to work that much harder than just saying any version of what Larry offered twice ("very excited about the opportunity, and ready to hear the offer details"). I have seen places balk at putting it in writing until you give them a verbal yes.

Much easier to figure out how you approach negotiation once you have a sense of where each stands.

TIL being a tech worker in Los Angeles is much like buying a one way train ticket from the midwest to try to become a movie star

Here's how that went.

We hadn't discussed bennies at all yet, and I brought that up first, and they all seem top of the market in every way. He also did a bit of selling the company to me, and actually did a pretty good job. When I pushed back on the salary history, he was cool with that, but insisted on a number to work with. And he did a bit of the car salesman tactic of needing to get it approved by finance/HR, etc., so he really needs a number that he can take to them. However, he did volunteer info about where junior and senior level guys generally come in at, and while the junior number seems accurate, I think he totally lowballed the senior salary level and I sort of called him on it. So I then told him that my current offer is actually sitting a little above what he claimed for senior for his company, and that an offer in that ballpark would be competitive. He was happy to take that number and said he'd try to make that happen, sounding fairly optimistic.

It was not so bad, I guess. One thing I have difficulty with is often approaching negotiations as an adversarial situation, whereas the other guy was totally cool and was kinda amused at how uncomfortable I was. I'm reconsidering the idea that having a very skilled negotiator at the other end is generally worse for you. They might sometimes negotiate more surplus for their side, but they're just better skilled at figuring out terms that work for both sides and making a deal happen smoothly that might have fallen through with a clumsy negotiator. I guess I'll have to see what they end up offering. If they match the other offer, it is gonna be a tough decision.

Also, he tried the "we need to know what you're making now to make sure we're not paying you less" line, which was pretty loltastic. I guess they ask for salary history because some capitulate right away, so why not just ask, right? Just like how good poker players will take down pots that nobody seems to want. So hate the game, not the player, and learn to play the game better, is the lesson.

Salary history should be an easy no go. "That's confidential with my current/past employer and if we make this work, I'll extend you the same courtesy going forward". Bam, done. I'd have absolutely no patience for any pushback there.

Salary expectations are different. You're both trying to get the upper hand. I think good negotiators make you feel like "but they're just better skilled at figuring out terms that work for both sides and making a deal happen smoothly that might have fallen through with a clumsy negotiator." while still getting the upper hand.

Like in your case he got you to tell him basically the lowest number you'll accept. Which isn't really great for you.

Not sure what alternate reality some of you live in - but I know tons of people making good money in the LA tech scene. If I was willing to drive to Santa Monica or similar distance (which I may be at some point) I'd have a ton of opportunities to choose from.

Yes you may have to start small and work your way in. But github side projects help massively in that. There isn't much equivalent for an actor trying to break in - and it's about 1000x harder.

As usual Davet is way off the mark about this stuff.

Nice 1000th post!

That's not at all what I was saying. He's at a disadvantage because there aren't as many programming jobs as there are developers. He's new to town, which marks him high risk and, at the least, not privy to... stuff.

Sure, you have good paying jobs, but you also have the sweatshops paying peanuts.

Also, Google, Snapchat, Tinder are not the largest nor highest paying companies. This is in contrast to SF where all employers are competing against mega tech employers, so the employer has much leaa to risk.

Really? It was my job to basically find employees to screw over, at more than one place. Sorry if I see the signs and call them out.

I think you were solidly over the top pessimistic and negative in your depiction. Experienced software engineers/developers are pretty much in high demand everywhere.

That's typically for banks or other lending institutions to confirm salary information before the give you a mortgage or other loan. (Or in cities like NYC, a landlord needing income verification).

Most big companies have an automated way of doing this because its such a frequent request. Typically the employee will get some kind of authorization code from their employer and send this to Big Bank.

Employee authorizes Big Bank to verify salary with employer.

Big bank calls automated number, enters authorization code and gets the figure.

That makes sense, my guess is I heard it around "employment verification" and made the wrong assumption.

Yeah, in my experience, employers will only ever give out start date, end date (and maybe job title) as employment verification - to avoid any potential lawsuits, presumably.

Few things make me feel like as much of a ****ing moron as using npm.

I have typescript 2.2.1 installed globally. I want to update it to 2.2.2, as that's what the newest VS Code update wants to use. I have found no combination of flags I can attach to npm update to make it update. The docs certainly suggest it should:

Does "latest" have some special meaning here where it's not actually the latest version until I run another magic command to update the "latest" pointer?

npm update -g typescript: stays at 2.2.1.

Add --save (idk); no change.

Make it typescript@2.2.2; no change.

I finally give in and npm uninstall -g typescript / npm install -g typescript. It installs 2.2.2. **** this piece of **** package manager, why do I have to do that?? Why can't the "update" command actually ****ing update something? **** you.

Could it be that the 0.0.1 is considered a patch not a version?

Those are the easiest ones for npm to update, right? Like, the documentation for non-global npm update seems to suggest that unless you have the most restrictive level of version specification (like, you put in your package.json (although I'm not sure what the global equivalent of package.json is) "use exactly this version and do not update it for any reason") 0.0.1-level patch updates will always get applied.

Also, I think I figured out the meaning of "latest" from the example at the top, and npm dist-tag ls typescript says:

SO Y U NO UPDATE IT TO LATEST WHEN I ASK U SIGH

Right - it could be the global default is ^ or whatever - that says use the latest minor version but don't update patches.

Really? The docs aren't clear about what happens in that situation. God their documentation is awful.

Anyway, last question for tonight: I want to use this react component but they be like

and I be like hay I'm on the client side I can't just require this.

Is this where I have to start digging into the browserify/babel/whatever stuff I've been avoiding, or is there a way to use this sort of thing on the client while still avoiding the yaks?

Eh, you are probably right. I thought on this and think it comes down to my own personal tastes and that is getting reflected here.

If I join a small company, I know that I will be making an impact stat, wear many hats, and probably take over a solid portion of the day-to-day operations in a few months.

This other company has 300 employees, and as I see it, it is going to be a political showboat, which, in my interpretation, is already displayed in full force before the job details are ironed out.

To some, playing that game is fun and challenging, like beating the boss level.