Forums

Folks,
My recruiter just forwarded me a screening document and a candidate's resume. The candidate is asking for 50% more than we would offer for someone with his experience level. He is currently an independent contractor and has used some very 'fuzzy math' to compute his current compensation and his expected salary.

Do I still need to do the interview or just reject the candidate? I simply don't see myself hiring this candidate because of his Salary requirements. His resume is bad (according to MT standards) but then, so are 99.99% of them (including my own) if I applied the MT standard. I can also assure you that my recruiter would not be admitted to study at the Mark Horstmann school of recruitment. Since I can't fire my corporate recruiter nor use the resume as a differentiator, do I still interview this person, to avoid false negative, or just save everyone time and reject them?

pmoriarty's picture

I'm surprised the recruiter would even send you a resume of somebody with a salary requirement so far out of the range. I'd put it back on the recruiter to call the candidate back, give the candidate a more realistic range for the position and, if the candidate is willing to interview at the correct salary range, interview him. Otherwise, pass.

I've seen this several times in my career; a contractor expects to make close to his contractor billing rate for a regular, full-time position. Unfortunately, most of them seem stuck on their number, no matter how much one tries to rationalize it with them.

asteriskrntt1's picture

From what you can see, can the candidate do what you need done? If yes, interview the candidate.

I would also give my recruiter some narrower instructions as to your filtering requirements and expectations.

*RNTT

jhack's picture

Why is compensation even being discussed when it's only the resume floating around?

If the candidate is so focused on dollars, forget them. Find someone who wants the opportunity.

John

wendii's picture

Learning,

I agree with Pmroriarty: call the recruiter, tell them you're interested in his skills and would like to interview, but your range is x-xx. If he would like to still interview, then great, if not, then well, his loss.

I'd also check that the recruiter has gone over the difference between contracting and permanent work and the salary difference which is made up by stability, training, development, benefits etc.

Wendii

bflynn's picture

Interview him. If you make him an offer, do not include anymore than you believe he is worth. In the end, he will have to decide whether he wants to work in direct employment or continue as a contractor. An amazing number of people will accept a number less than what they'd like to get.

His salary "expectations" should be pretty much irrelevant. You will pay what you will pay. It should not be one penny higher or lower because of how he was paid in the past.

Brian

jhack's picture

"He...has used some very 'fuzzy math'..."

Is that someone you want?

John

nogger's picture

[quote]Why is compensation even being discussed when it's only the resume floating around?[/quote]

It may be different in the U.S., but here, companies almost always demand the candidates state a figure when they send in their application. Might be the same thing for the thread starter.

So why did the recruiter forward this application. Didn't he know the salary range and if he did, why did he forward the application. Something to ask the recruiter about.

A question to the people suggesting to interview the candidate without clearing up the salary question first: you do not think this is a potential waste of time for both parties? Especially if it was the company that asked about salary expectation in the first place. Inviting to the interview gives the impression that the figure is in your ball park and not 50% lower.

If the candidate does not want to accept a lower figure, you have wasted your time. If he is willing to think about it, why not play with open cards and ask beforehand?

bflynn's picture

[quote="nogger"]A question to the people suggesting to interview the candidate without clearing up the salary question first: you do not think this is a potential waste of time for both parties? Especially if it was the company that asked about salary expectation in the first place. Inviting to the interview gives the impression that the figure is in your ball park and not 50% lower.[/quote]

Of course its a potential waste. But, you're not capable of accurately clearing up the salary question until you both know more about each other. If you ask them at this point, they do not know enough about you or the job and they will stick with their unreasonable figure. You will reject them because you didn't go through the process to resolve the discrepancy. This isn't a false or a positive negative, this is an unknown negative.

Its an instinct call - if the person looks good enough to interview, why would you choose not to based on your own lack of information?

During the interview, you can resolve the salary question. Do it toward the end when you're more comfortable with each other. If you like the person, make an offer in your range. Almost by definition, everyone will accept something less than what they would like to make. And they will almost always ask for what they want.

Brian

skwanch's picture

You say 'no'.

Interviews are an artificial process designed to keep people out. As soon as you find a reason to say 'no', you move on. Avoid the false positive.

bflynn's picture

It sounds to me like a lot of managers are being less effective by confusing negative information with incomplete information.

I have hired before. I understand how the game works today. That's why I can say that you could do it better. I realize I'm in the minority here and I have no trouble being there.

Brian

juliahhavener's picture

I agree with Brian, actually. There are so many other things that go into 'is this job for me' than cold hard cash. You have no idea where that person stands on their stated salary - it could be their wish list, the form requested a number, so they put one in, but would accept a much lower one.

Money isn't even at issue unless you want to hire the person. Interview, if they've sold themselves effectively and you've sold your business effectively, it may be a match. And it may not - but the last time I interviewed someone incredibly over-qualified, it turned out that they were just what we needed...and vice versa.

Standing in the minority,

Mark's picture

I would interview this person.

And, I'd be fine saying no if they stuck by their (clearly misguided for your situation) salary requirements.

If they're good, explore the salary issue. It may be it shows the recruiter's naivete, it may be they're politically immature, it may be they're arrogant.

While I believe in saying no, I also believe that all managers have time for one more interview...and this seems like one of those times.

Mark

dhkramer's picture

If you require a salary range from an applicant, you are going to get some goofy numbers. I never tell a recruiter my salary expectations, since it depends on the job. Mattress testers accept less than outhouse cleaners.

If it's not off by an order of magnitude, I would go ahead with the interview.