As someone who has hired a new grad into a “Senior Engineer” role, it meant the title of the salary band that met the candidate’s salary requirements to make our offer competitive with the other offers he received.
We wanted to hire a junior role since our team was already relatively senior. But the company’s salary bands were not at all competitive for entry-level developers. So we classed the new hire as senior to make it work.
Some companies’ policies are stupid and inflexible and engineers would rather just work around the problem than having to fight against HR.
I'm running a hiring competition right now for a "Senior." The pay band is less than what entry level startups pay. So we rotate through a never ending stream of kids who leave for better salaries because we don't have any higher levels.
Sometimes we do get lucky and pick up a mediocre lifer (like me) so HR sees no incentive to change.
Never take a job for a company where you are not on the value chain!
Because not everyone feels the need to rate their self-worth by how much wealth they’ve hoarded. I’m already set for retirement and I have my house nearly paid off. I’m comfortable and I don’t make $250,000 a year. I barely work more than 32 hours a week and I just got promoted. Full time work from home with a free working trip back to my old stomping grounds to catch up with friends twice a year.
Why would I break my psyche with burnout, stress, and work I despise just to make someone else exponentially more money so I can make marginally more money I don’t need? Miss me with that hustle porn, thanks.
Set for retirement can mean different things. Personally, I run the rat race so that I can retire as soon as possible. Few people actually fit the bill of “self worth = wealth hoarded.”
Maybe he bought a house in the neighborhood. Maybe he really likes writing COBOL. Maybe his spouse works there as well. Maybe he is simply extremely risk averse.
There are a number of good reasons somebody might decide to stay put, even if it might be more lucrative or exciting elsewhere.
I worked at a company where there were lots of managers, directors, and coordinators. And just as many people under them. When I reached the top of my band I had to hire someone. Not because there was more work that needed to be delegated but because I had to move up to the next title "manager" and needed at least 1 person to manage.
Prospects, if they can overcome the flattery of being offered a title beyond their skill and experience, should actually recognize such as a warning sign. After all, a company willing to do such a thing is likely a place full of stupid and inflexible policies where HR has too much power.
Sorry you have to play such games to get decent talent, but beware a nasty side effect: your actual senior engineers are going to need new titles to reflect the peer group they actually belong to. They may be (and perhaps rightly so) insulted by the insinuation that a new graduate is equally valuable to the company.
We wanted to hire a junior role since our team was already relatively senior. But the company’s salary bands were not at all competitive for entry-level developers. So we classed the new hire as senior to make it work.
Some companies’ policies are stupid and inflexible and engineers would rather just work around the problem than having to fight against HR.