We see lots of vacancies advertised where salary details are missing, or replaced by words like ‘Competitive’, ‘DOE’, ‘Market Leading’ and so on. Many candidates wonder why, and some are left thinking there’s a negative reason behind this such as the salary not being worth the applicant’s time.
In cases where the salary isn’t as much as it should be but the applicants don’t find out until the end of the process, there is somewhat of a “sunk cost fallacy” in that they have expended so much time on the process already that they may as well keep listening now, even if the amount on offer is disappointing.
We thought it might be useful to explain some of the facts that influence recruiters’ thinking:
Why Publish?
You’ll find that many public sector employers like the Civil Service, Local Authorities and the NHS do publish their salary information when they are advertising for new staff. This is in part due to the fact that they have agreed and very structured salary bands, with little or no discretion to pay outside of those bands. This applies to some larger private employers as well, where they are open about how they reward their staff.
This makes sense as public money should always be relatively easy to account for and the public should always be given this information in an open and accessible manner. The public have a right to know how many people are on which salary band within the local authority or NHS.
The benefits of publishing salary information include:
- Potential candidates see exactly what they will be paid if they get the job, and can work out whether the career move is financially worth it. This stops them applying for jobs that aren’t worth their energy and attention.
- Employers who reward staff more generously than their competition will want potential applicants to see that, to entice them away from existing employers. This is a sound strategy and helps to establish them as leaders in their field.
- Recruiters won’t (or shouldn’t) have people applying who are so unsuitable for the job – the common sense process of self-de-selection comes into play here. This means people will look at the salary and not apply for the job as they have never been anywhere near that bracket before.
- There will be no surprises when the offer letter arrives confirming starting pay. This has been something that has been a deal breaker for many people over the years and is a disappointment for both sides of the situation.
- This approach also tends to imply that there is no room for negotiation outside of the pay rate or range published, again leaving no doubt in the candidates mind of their potential reward package.
- ·Employers want to be seen to be open and transparent about their reward structures, both to potential candidates and to their existing workforce – something that really works well for a positive employee relations environment. This can be especially useful when it comes to showing that they are trying to close the gender pay gap.
And Why Not?
There are many people who think employers have something to hide when salary information isn’t published. It can put some people off applying for new positions, simply because they don’t know if it’s worth going through the application process when the salary might not be enough to cover the mortgage.
There are many good and justifiable reasons why recruiters don’t publish salaries. We doubt any recruiter has ‘anything to hide’ but in fact will have the best of intentions when they make this decision. The main reasons we hear are:
- Recruiters want as many quality applications for their roles as possible: their views can be that they’ll offer a salary which is very much dependent on an individual's skills, experience and value to the company, and this is something they can’t decide until they know who they want for their job.
- Publishing a set salary figure, or even a range, could mean they lose out on those applicants who are ideal for their roles, but who might demand a higher reward package. They may feel that they can’t ask for the rate that they would otherwise work for as there isn’t room for maneuver.
- They might have to attract candidates from their competitors, and as such will want to keep an open mind when it comes to what they will pay to get the right person for their job. This is one of the better reasons for not specifying a salary but their competitors will probably be able to guess the rough range.
- Many employers expect an element of negotiation when it comes to agreeing reward packages, and they think candidates do too, which is something that not all candidates are aware of.
- And finally, some recruiters may not want their competitors to see what salaries they are offering, for a number of reasons, but primarily to keep one step ahead of the game. And in business, that’s sometimes the right approach. It is normally fairly consistent across an industry though, unless your company is offering well above market rates, which can prove to be ultimately uneconomic.
And the right thing to do?
There’s no right or wrong answer here. Every employer is different, some have hard and fast (internal) rules, and some don’t, and all will have different motivations, as described above.
For us, the answer is:
So long as employers make a clear statement in their listing about the rewards relating to the job, then that’s fine. Even if they explain that reward is subject to negotiation, then that’s ok. As a candidate, and even without a clearly defined advertised salary, I’d still want to explore the opportunity.
Some won't want to, for fear their time is being wasted, and that is their prerogative, but many will see the opportunity rather than the potential for their time to be wasted.
