I remember seeing a job posting (making less than I make now) and they were saying how they were only going to pay at the lower end of the band (although the band stretched to more than what I make now) and I wanted to apply and interview just so I could say to them: "So you really don't want the best or most experienced candidate, you just need an adequate candidate that you can pay poorly.......Good Luck with that."
I like to call what a hiring manager goes through as the "Hiring Paradox". In the Hiring Paradox you basically have two options: Do I #1 Hire a rock star who will desire a higher salary, have other job options because they are so skilled, and who may leave after a few years, or #2 Hire an adequate to poor performer who I know will never leave, but who I will have to handhold, reprimand, and coerce them during their whole career in order for them to be effective?
I always hire the rock star and let them make things so much better, knowing that I will have to replace them in the future, but their work will be excellent while they are there rather than the adequate person who will do the bare minimum and stay for twenty years at the same position.
I don't understand the companies that want to limit themselves by painting themselves into a corner by only desiring lower salaries. The phrase "Penny wise, pound foolish." comes to mind. Perhaps companies should state their desired range, but state that they may consider other salaries depending on circumstances and experience. Perhaps though they are hoping to catch the younger, ambitious, go-getter type of person and I can understand that, having been that person in the past (the younger part especially) but I also understand the wisdom of experience and how much that is really worth.
I have a personal example. I was working as a contract CISO at one agency replacing a very ineffective CISO. After a certain amount of time had passed they were allowed to hire the CISO position internally. I, along with others, assumed I was getting the position as I had performed very well and was very well liked amongst the IT folks. Well the management changed right before this position came open and the newly minted CIO (who was a good manager but not a good leader) decided that he wanted to go with a cheaper, younger, less experienced option and convinced the new director to chose someone else. Everyone was shocked. The CISO office now is in complete disarray. I'm sure the employees hate their new boss and the CISO hates them and doesn't fight for them. The new CISO didn't have much leadership experience (but was 35K cheaper) and is struggling. The CIO also demanded, as part of the hiring process, that the CISO position be moved back under him instead of the current situation where the CISO was a peer and reported directly to the director. Now the CISO has less bargaining power and serves at the mercy of the CIO. In a way, I am extremely glad that I was not hired as I knew when they made that person the CIO, that he would be a very ineffective leader. He rules as a tyrant in an organization whose organizational culture in IT, is one of fear. And he doesn't understand organizational culture. His selection only made the culture of fear worse. I warned management of this before his hire, but they ended up retiring and the new management wasn't made aware of this before they hired him.
I tell you all of this to show that how companies, by choosing to go the cheaper route, while it may be fiscally responsible, it is not a good long-term strategy. It may even end up costing the agency some EEO complaints and general ineffectiveness. Several key IT people have already left and several others have job applications out as well. I imagine the CISO will look to move on soon too (his previous longest stint was only a year and a half). So while they may have saved some money, they will end up costing themselves more money in talent loss, ineffectiveness, and employee morale. It can create a downward spiral that will continue until the management gets replaced.
So if you are ever in an interview and you are asking for the higher end of the salary range, make sure to show how your experience is worth the extra money. And you are not alone in running into the low salary buzzsaw.
