help with a Annual Salary range

[mlchris2]

I've got a interview with the State and have some questions regarding the job posting... mainly the "approximate annual salary". The posting states $99,999 to $99,999 and then a "pay grade" along with a number.

Now my question; does the annual salary stated in the job posting state the possible starting salary range or does it mean that is the "cap" that one could possibly get paid while in that position... by that I mean would I more than likely start at the low range and then throughout time reach the higher level stated??? I've called the HR dept but haven't received a call back yet...



Mark C.

 

[Noway2]

Hope this helps.

I just went through something similar having recently accepted a state employment position. What I learned is that positions have both a pay or experience grade and a pay range within the grades. For example, the position I applied for has the classifications of "contributing", "journeyman", and "experienced" with descriptions of the experience level (years of work experience and education level) associated with each of those grades. Associated with each of these grades is a pay range. The descriptions and ranges are either set or at least influenced by the state.

In addition to the grades and pay ranges for the positions, there was a hiring range. In my case, it spanned multiple grades and allowed flexibility according to how experienced the final applicant was, while still leaving room for advancement and pay raises within the grade.

Over the last five years or so, I have seen this sort of trend being applied to private companies too. My experience has been that the goal is to try and recruit into the middle of the salary range, rather than the bottom.

 

[mlchris2]

thanks,

This posting doesn't show what you describe, just a simple salary range and grade. They provided me a document that shows the other different positions and the salary range and grade and which they fall under.

I would expect them to initially offer towards the middle of the range listed for the sheer fact that I meet their minimum requirements. But I have double the years of experience they are requiring and feel that the middle... well just isn't good enough. (sorry, don't mean to sound all high and mighty).

I'm hoping that what they posted as far as salary range is what they are going to hire at and not a overall salary range.




Mark C.

 

[Thadeus]

A) Given that most govt. employees are subject to the whims of political budgets, the salary offered or hired at today has no bearing on what the upper limits will be next year.

B) You should be negotiating for the best salary you can get at hire, because once you begin with a company, the best you can usually hope for are cost of living increases of 3-5% at best.

B in particular is not to say you couldn't get a larger increase later, just that if you do, it is typically because you have been promoted... which would carry its own grade and range.

~thadeus

 

[Noway2]

B) You should be negotiating for the best salary you can get at hire, because once you begin with a company, the best you can usually hope for are cost of living increases of 3-5% at best

That has been my experience too, at least as far as private companies have been concerned. With a govt position, you will also be subject to the whims of the legislature and you may not get a raise for 3 years and then get a 10%-15% raise the next.

As one person put it in a thread on about govt work in another forum, govt jobs are often more about the benefits than the salary. For example do you have health insurance (assume a state in the US) and how does its costs compare (health care in retirement is a big govt pay issue), how many vacation days and do they accrue or must they be used, how many sick days and do they accrue, etc.

Having an idea of what your salary worth is, does not sound high and mighty to me. Thadeus is right, it is your responsibility to negotiate for your salary. You also need to decide if what they are offering is fair or if you want to negotiate. You alone know what you need and have an idea of what you think you are worth.

 

[kmcferrin]

Interesting that what they posted wasn't a range at all. I'm wondering if they just put a default value into the field and expected you to sort it out with the grade/scale diagram.

Everything else I'm about to say will depend significantly on what state you are looking to work for. In my experience, most of the government jobs pay OK but have much better benefits than with private companies. Also, most of the government jobs that I have seen (state of Ohio and several county agencies) are union jobs, even in IT. That means that once you get in your path is pretty much set for the duration, with the exception that wages can be increased or cut to meet budgetary demands. But then there is also job security.

From what I have seen the state positions in Ohio pay significantly better than the county positions (Franklin County). If you want specific numbers then there are a number of web sites out there where you can do a lookup on specific positions or even individuals in various states to see exactly what their salary is. Because these are government agencies their records (including salary records) and public and are available via FOIA requests.



________________________________________
CompTIA A+, Network+, Server+, Security+
MCTS:Windows 7
MCSE:Security 2003
MCITP:Server Administrator
MCITP:Enterprise Administrator
MCITP:Virtualization Administrator 2008 R2
Certified Quest vWorkspace Administrator

 

[mlchris2]

They posted a range... I just used the $99,999 to $99,999 as an example. The range they posted was $59k to $89K. The pay range is great, I'm just not sure if that is a starting range or an overall range at the pay grade.

I'm sure the state has excellent benefits. I do worry about state cuts and me being out of a job in a few years thou, but just like any other place, it can happen.

Thanks for all the advice I've received. I have my interview this week and plan on asking the hiring manager about it... I will post later what I found out.

Mark C.

 

[mlchris2]

well I got an answer to my question. I got an email from the HR group and it stated;

"If you are not an employee of the state of X and you are the successful candidate, by recent state directive, you cannot be offered more that the lowest pay step level of $59,000.00 no matter how much experience you have."

not really what I expected to hear...

Mark C.

 

[Glenn9999]

Since I didn't find this thread until now, I thought I'd offer my experiences on this matter too.

What you posted in the post before this is consistent with state government. "Years of experience" are generally equivalent to "years of experience in state government", though they can be flexible to some extent depending on their ability to prove that you require less resources to be useful to them than someone who is genuinely "entry level".

As for salary in a state position, it is non-negotiable, because it is set universally for the position by the elected officials (they can't go up or down, except for the case in the above paragraph). If they are asking you the "expected salary" question, it is to gauge where your salary interest is - whether you would continue working for them long at the your legislatively-mandated salary.

If it helps you make a decision about this, most states are mandated by law to make public their financial books, which includes the names of all state employees, their positions and their salaries. If you wish to research what they are actually willing to pay for these positions, seek this out.

It is not possible for anyone to acknowledge truth when their salary depends on them not doing it.

 

[mlchris2]

Someone previous stated finding the public information, so I searched for it and gave it a good look. I'm very troubled by what I am finding. What the HR says I would make to start in the position vs what the online information from 2007-2009 shows is a huge difference. oh well, Im going to ask for what I feel I am worth... the worst they are going to tell me is no.

Mark C.

 

[Glenn9999]

oh well, Im going to ask for what I feel I am worth... the worst they are going to tell me is no.

That's all you can do, though you know full well what they will offer you. At least that was one of the positive things that came out of my job interview in the public sector. They did come right out and say "here's what we can pay you and it's non-negotiable, so don't bother trying. If you don't like it, there's the door.". That's a lot better anyway than the lack of disclosure I've faced in several interviews in the private sector.

It is not possible for anyone to acknowledge truth when their salary depends on them not doing it.

 

[Noway2]

"If you are not an employee of the state of X and you are the successful candidate, by recent state directive, you cannot be offered more that the lowest pay step level of $59,000.00 no matter how much experience you have."

I'm sorry, but this doesn't even pass the smell test. I don't know what state your in and it may be different than mine, but this just sounds odd. Normally a position has a range of qualifications required. It is reasonable to exepct that any particular candidate will meet some percentage of those requirements. The percentage they meet will be a function of their experience level, in or out of public employ. I am in my first week of state employment. I know that there was a position hiring range and I am certainly not at the bottom of the pay scale, just because I wasn't previously in state employement.

Such a classification may work for unskilled labor where you come into the job with no semblence of qualifications and professional experience, but if you are any sort of 'professional', this simply won't work as it would be totally non competitive (i.e. they won't be succesful in recruiting talent).

If this is the amount they are willing to offer and it is not acceptable to you, then you can walk away.

 

[kmcferrin]

I'm sorry, but this doesn't even pass the smell test. I don't know what state your in and it may be different than mine, but this just sounds odd. Normally a position has a range of qualifications required. It is reasonable to exepct that any particular candidate will meet some percentage of those requirements. The percentage they meet will be a function of their experience level, in or out of public employ. I am in my first week of state employment. I know that there was a position hiring range and I am certainly not at the bottom of the pay scale, just because I wasn't previously in state employement.

Like everything else, it will vary from state to state. Some states are more strict than others, some have more flexibility. If your state's non-managerial employees are required to be union members then the scale will most likely not be flexible. On the other hand, once you get in the door you're pretty much on cruise control for life (unless you choose to leave).

________________________________________
CompTIA A+, Network+, Server+, Security+
MCTS:Windows 7
MCSE:Security 2003
MCITP:Server Administrator
MCITP:Enterprise Administrator
MCITP:Virtualization Administrator 2008 R2
Certified Quest vWorkspace Administrator

 

[mlchris2]

I'm sorry, but this doesn't even pass the smell test. I don't know what state your in and it may be different than mine, but this just sounds odd. Normally a position has a range of qualifications required. It is reasonable to exepct that any particular candidate will meet some percentage of those requirements. The percentage they meet will be a function of their experience level, in or out of public employ.

I agree with you. I would expect them to pay higher in the pay range for someone who has over and above the required years experience... it appears that is not the case thou. I was excited about the job and the opportunity, but that is quickly changing.

Mark C.

 

[Glenn9999]

I'm sorry, but this doesn't even pass the smell test.

Actually in my public work experience (state) it does. Specifically, any kind of advancement was predicated on "years of state work experience", and any other adjustments on the scale were determinable by the hiring managers based on the degree you would be useful out of the gate.

However, it was legislatively-mandated (not long after I gained employment actually), that any new hires would be at the base pay and no more, and that any "promotional" bumps in salaries would only occur if "budgetary guidelines permit". Throw in a few complete hiring freeze periods (many areas were deliberately & severely short-staffed as a result) and you get the picture of how this was in my experience.

Unforunately, with public service, the legislature gets to make all the rules, no matter how silly they might seem.

It is not possible for anyone to acknowledge truth when their salary depends on them not doing it.

 

[Noway2]

Interesting. This is definitely one of those Your Mileage May Vary situations. Before accepting this position, I was reading an article published by my state, North Carolina, regarding an analysis investigation on employee compensation. The objective of the study was to evaluate how public employees are compensated in comparable fields in private companies across the state and against the other states in the Southeast region. The stated objective was that they recognized that in the coming years as more individuals are retiring than entering the work force that they will be experiencing "brain drain." The objective was / is to provide a compensation package that would enable public employment to effectively compete against private industry with the intent to recruit and attract talent. I can sort of understand the policy of your state in certain circumstances AND the salary range definitions would have to be fairly narrow with a large number of gradations. If they try to apply this policy to professional level employees with wide salary ranges, well, the results should be expected. In my case, the hiring salary range had a span of about $50K from lowest to highest. If I had only been offered the low end, it would have been a non-starter as I wouldn't even be able cover my house payment.

 

[mlchris2]

The more I think about it the more I wonder if this is just more or less the states S.O.P.??? In regards to the posting and the information I received prior to my interview. They have my resume and know my experience and hopefully have some idea that I expect to not be on the entry-level pay grade. Cause it is like you said;

If I had only been offered the low end, it would have been a non-starter as I wouldn't even be able cover my house payment.

My interview has been postponed another week, so I havent yet asked. Im not sure if that is a 2nd interview question, but I feel I need to find out, as I dont want to waste their time or mine if I'm going to just get "entry level pay".

Mark C.

 

[Glenn9999]

FWIW, I found the Nevada state employee list (PDF - around page 125). NV seems to work similar to my state. The key to what they'll offer you will be how they'll slot you in those categories listed on the list. Once they slot you in whatever it is, it won't deviate much from what you see.

It is not possible for anyone to acknowledge truth when their salary depends on them not doing it.

 

[mlchris2]

well had the interview and asked. Because of Gubernatorial directive, a new state employee no matter how much experience they have starts at X grade Step 1. within each grade there are 10 steps.

I ended up not taking the job. Too many responsibilities and not enough pay is essentially what it came down to.

thanks for all your insight.


Mark C.

 

[Noway2]

Better luck with the next one. I know it is disappointing to have a prospective opportunity not work out, but one important thing to remember is that you are interviewing them as much as they are interviewing you. In this case, it doesn't look like their qualifications met your requirements.