Salary tips : same position different salaries

In the last three weeks I received a call from 3 different recruiters at different companies for an interview with the same company. Two of the recruiters asked me my rate. I told the first one 93k per year and she said the position was actually offering 105k per year (no benefits). I told to second company the same thing. The second recruiter said the most they could offer was 75K per year but they would offer me benefits. Althought I did not like that offer I told the recruiter to submit my resume for the interview because I really need a job. After doing the math, I realize I really don't like to 75k per year because I don't need the benefits and would rather make more money even if I have to pay my own taxes. I also did not realize it was for the same company until after I told the recruiter to submit my resume. Have I hurt my chances of getting the interview at all because now 2 possibly three different people have submited my resume for the same position and how do I tell the second recruiter I want more money if offered the position.

Are these contract jobs? Sounds like they might be if you're being offered a salary without benefits, and one with (some contract agencies are offering benefits these days). Or is one agency hiring for this job on contract, and the other is posting it as a direct position--which would account for the difference in salary. Maybe one of them is working off an incorrect assumption.

Generally speaking, if this is for the same exact position with the same exact company, whoever submitted your resume first to the client company "has" you. Or it is supposed to work this way.

You'll just have to wait & see at this point whether or not you're called for an interview, and if so, through which agency. If it's with the second one, since you're working with an agency and not direct with the company, I see no harm in tactfully saying, "I was called by another agency about this position, and the salary was quite a bit higher, but without benefits. Can you explain this disparity?" This, of course, after you have accepted the invitation to interview--don't mess that up!

Thanks for your help. Yes, these are contract jobs. However, the company that's offering benefits is hiring as a direct hire. This is the situation......company A has a position available. Company A has contracted with several firms to find someone to fill the position. Company B and C contacted me about the position. Company B gave me all the details, location, name of company, etc., and is offering a hourly rate w/o benefits. Company C just told me the location. After I told company C to submit my info they told me the name of the company and I realized it was the same position, same company. Company C is offering annual salary with benefits. I told company C my info was already sent to this company and they said my info was already submitted also by them. So....you answered the question as to which company will have the upper hand and I hope that's correct. I hope I get an interview and offer out of this.

Your advice was helpful.

I don' t think you' ve hurt your chances at all. If I understand what' s going on, three different recruiters have or are going to submitted your resume to the same prospective employer? If that' s the case, and if I were the employer, I think I' d be impressed that three recruiters were recommending the same candidate to me. That would initially make me think the candidate probably was a very good fit for the job! I do think, however, that it' s totally in your best interests to be as open and forthcoming as you can about how this all is happening with the prospective employer when you go to the first interview, because the scenario is a little out of the ordinary. Just be honest and upfront about what the deal is during that first interview. Make sense?

This is why you need ot be upfront about who you are working with.

A good recruiter will ask who else you have talked to and ask where else you have submitted.

A good job hunter will keep a database and keep track of all details, contact phone numbers and easily spot where this might be occurring. If you have not signed any agreement with any firm, you have the right to apply direct. If neither firm has signed a contract with the employers, it is up t the employer which if either he wishes to choose.

I got burned on this in the past. Some companies throw out dual submissions, has happened to me before. It is their policy.

I think recruiters and employers need to be more responsible about the terms and caveats for handling these situations. Most at risk is the job hunter and the recruiter...seems a bit lopsided.

Going forward, I would work exclusively with one firm, or go solo.

If you don' t want recruiters put a legal disclaimer on your resume that nobody may reproduce, store in a searchable database or forward your resume to anyone for any reason without your express written consent. I had to do that on mine once and it saved me a lot of headaches.

I agree and that makes sense. This "recruiter thing" is all new to me. In the past, I have worked as direct hires from the employers. Your advice is well taken. Thanks

I agree with what your saying to a certain extent, however, working with one recruiter may decrease my chances of finding a job quickly. My resume is posted so i get calls from recruiters everyday. I have not signed any agreements to work exclusively with one recruiter.

How do you know that some companies do not take dual submissions. Were you told this by the company?

Also I am finding that some recruiters do not give all the details of the job until you have agreed that they can submit your resume. Perhaps they do not want you to apply direct with the company.

I think it' s safe to assume that some recruiters wouldn' t want a job seeker to apply directly to an employer. How would they stay in business is everyone did that? Nevertheless, I think our original poster will be better served by being as forthcoming as possible about how this situation came up. Sounds to me, based on what he or she wrote, that they contacted him/her on behalf of the prospective employer, not the other way around. So, in that sense, it' s more the employer' s problem than it is his or hers. Make sense?

I see no advantage to working with recruiters these days, between Monster & Careerbuilder, I have yet to have a live recruiter tell me about a job I don't already know about. In fact, when they do contact me and describe the job, I can usually tell them the name of the company and know as much if not more about it than they do, but of course first let them share all the insight they have on the company. Then, if anything, since I know the hiring company was planning to pay a recruiting fee, I would ask for half of that as a sign-on bonus and save the company money before you even start working there. In return, I have some less ambitious friends and former co-workers (who I advise to sign up on Monster and forget the recruiters but they think they need a recruiter) so I email introduce them to the recruiters that keep contacting me on jobs. I have actually provided more job candidates to recruiters than they have provided job prospects to me, so if I ever do need a recruiter I have two good ones ready to help me (vs. possibly being negative references). Based on that relationship with 3 key recruiters they call me looking for referrals and when i see a job on one of the services, i email to them to get details not in the online ad, such as salary and history on the job, like why the last person left if they did along with the inside scoop on the company and possible pitfalls; this is what I call networking. :)

Career Tips

same position different salaries