scrubbedexpat141

Yes. No. But I have worked with companies who have asked to see them. It's pretty rare.

Like you've said, some people will happily do it, some won't. It's a non-issue to me if that candidate has made the range they want clear. This will normally be accompanied with what their current deal is.

EG
Currently on 50k total + medical
Seeking 55-58k

The latter figure will come from proper discussions to give a proper, serious range that if an offer comes in, the company can fully expect the person to accept.

I send details of required package. This will 99% of the time be within the budget we have and be a 3-4k range where I KNOW the candidate WILL accept without hesitation.

Making this shit abundantly clear early on is paramount to not wasting anyone's time.

I said just give them, because if you've made your 'current' and 'seeking' clear, with proper thought having gone into it then payslips should be irrelevant to both sides...it might just be HR being a bunch of ****ing fannys.
But this is a case of; if it's only 1,000 more why won't they give me it....if it's only 1,000 low why won't you just take it? Neither side wants to budge but both claim it's a minimal difference. The worst spot to be in because someone ends up joining unhappily.

scrubbedexpat141

Sorry, that sounded wrong. It's a joint conversation of:

What they're on
What that means after deductions for housing/car/flights etc (depending on package)
What this role is paying
What that means after deductions etc.

You can't possibly get to serious, detailed, accurate salary requirements for someone until you break it down together and work out how it will be worthwhile or not, together.

Bahtatboy

Unfortunately all you can hope for is that the HR department is as out-of-tune with the business as most HR departments are, and that the people actually running the business aren't as lazy or unimaginative. In my considerable experience the HR department doesn't reflect the company (except on one occasion when it was headed by a true professional), or if it does its purely by chance. They're a barrier to be crossed at selection stage, and you have to roll with the punches. Good on the OP for not revealing his current salary but, sadly, it could've gone the other way.

norsk

I know mate, but you could do the exact same thing if they tell you how much they are looking to earn. And that way they have a fighting chance of getting market rate pay even if they have worked for crappy companies up until then..

Especially in this region it seems like companies are happy to bring people in from the real world on 20% less than market rate and some hiring managers I know personally will take it as a personal victory if they manage to do so even though the poor sod they hired will be looking for another gig from the moment they are on the ground...

The problem arises when the next company then refuses to give them a fair chance at getting market rate salary (by requesting pay slips) as the ones to bring you in were c@cksuckers and paid you less than they should have..

Like so many other things in this region the employment market is ultimately fubar'ed.

weasel decentral

Sure all extra information is good, but the breakdown I would expect is only from your offer only. I certainly would not have some one breakdown my existing package to generate a comparison, that's something I will know myself (or should know).
If this is a potential senior role I would be reluctant to employ anyone who cannot do basic sums to be honest.

Edit to say: bizarrely I am considering a role which pay 25% less than I get at the moment, but even though I will consider a cut in pay I will still not reveal what I am getting paid now to them

scrubbedexpat141

Salary levels are so disparate in this country, let alone region that it's beyond difficult. I know good payers, shit payers and middle payers and look for people in them accordingly.

I'm not having a dig at all, but trust me, for every shit company that underpays a good guy, there is a candidate just as difficult

scrubbedexpat141

I don't get it to be honest. It just makes you look difficult.

I can tell you what my next placement's mortgage payment is in the UK, what their car payment is and to the nearest 50quid what their disposable income is after those two big expenses.

Without that information I can't tell a person from the UK (for example) how a package in Qatar compares. All they'll do is ring a 'mate' or something and get told that a two bed apartment starts at 20,000 a month.

weasel decentral

That's the information you should give him; the ME related stuff. He can work out his current position himself. If he can't do that he is basically a moron.

Bongoman2

Why not advertise what the packages are? How is it that only one side of the negotiation table has to reveal their status?

Surely if the package is negotiable, then the factors that come into play are the experience and qualifications, and have bugger all to do with their current package?

scrubbedexpat141

I agree but you'd be surprised.

I generally advertise salary, for a lot of our work in Qatar the packages are a strict structure based on strict rules, so I can accurately tell someone the exact range they fall into.

It works nicely when both sides can give accurate information and have a sensible discussion about it. When either side are difficult or cagey it means the whole process will be like that.

Bahtatboy

Because there are too many wankers and arseholes, both inside and outside HR, who are determined to employ people for no more than 10% than they're on at the moment. I've worked with these people, and some in particular who have no grasp whatsoever of what can make a good company great.

If I ever have to go through an interview process again, if there's a hint of that from anyone outside the HR dept, then I'll just walk away. Any manager who has the mindset to pay someone based, almost solely, on what they're on at present is very, very likely to be a god-awful manager and an unpleasant person to boot. IMHO and long experience.