wilmott.com

thanks all for advice, will update with what happens

There must be some special circumstance(s) that you are leaving out. At the face of it, your "real constraint" of a minimum 80% salary (do you mean total compensation?) increase in a job market that is not exactly strong seems borderline ridiculous. Without a competing offer close to that range, I think any hiring manager will have the hardest time justifying that kind of bump. If you are in fact that far below market, then the rational approach would be to offer you a decent premium to where you are now (say 20-30%) and promise to re-evaluate your comp as you demonstrate your value in the new position.

If they want you bad enough they will offer you market rate. If your current rate is indeed 80% below market rate, then it is quite strange that you stayed in your current position this long.

QuoteOriginally posted by: closduboisQuestions:1) Did I screw up by disclosing current salary and not saying point blank that I'd only move for 1.8X?2) How likely is the offer going to come in <<1.8X in this case?3) If it does come in low, how should I respond if my real constraint is >1.8X?Not that I mean to second guess you but that far below market seems a lot. Are there some other variables baked in here? Bonus expectations? Different locales? I worked some numbers around for what I think could be X for analyst upto VP or so and frankly in my opinion, and without knowing more, if indeed you are that far below IN BASE TERMS, you should move at anything > 1.3X and keep working your way up.In short, what the bear said.

Regardless of whether your current employer is screwing you over by paying significantly below market, it will be extremely difficult for any hiring manager to justify an 80% bump in pay. Most I've seen is 10 - 15%, maybe if the switch involves moving to a higher COL area they might bump you up by ~25%. Anything more than that and you'd have to be an absolute rockstar in your field with a solid, proven track record. In other words, I think the odds are against you getting your targeted comp on this one =/

A friend of mine was in a similar situation when moving from a software vendor to a bank, the low end of the range initially quoted by the headhunter was significantly more than he was earning at the time. The headhunter quickly backtracked and started lowering his expectations, he was offered the role at a figure well below the range he was initially quoted but which still represented a decent increase for him, he accepted it and then jumped ship to another bank within a few months, after a year at the second bank he moved again to a third bank and was finally within the range he'd have initially felt was 'fair' for the first role.If the system is heavily geared to value people mostly based on their previous/current compensation could refusing to disclose current compensation work? I mean telling an outright lie isn't on (though some people seem to get away with it) and job hopping too much is risky and means you've got a few awkward questions at future interviews. Suppose you say, in the example of my friend, that you're aware that compensation at vendors can be significantly lower than at banks and you'd therefore rather not disclose your current salary/would be prepared to move for a reasonable offer based on your skills/experience - would that simply rule you out from further consideration/breach any HR rules or would some hiring managers be prepared to make an offer to a candidate without knowledge of their current compensation?