who would you hire in this scenario?

Poll - Total Votes: 7

You can only vote on one answer.

This is an entry-level job.

A) they aren’t much experienced, they’re young and coachable tho, but their ideal pay is lower than the starting pay for your company

B) they have the experiences, they’re cocky, and expect five dollars more than the starting pay but they won’t require that much training

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

SatanBurger · 36-40, F

I'd probably go with B, because with A, a person who thinks their ideal pay should be lower than starting pay likely doesn't have confidence in the job and would make me feel uneasy. The cockiness does make me wary though, if it wasn't for that it would be an easy pick whether or not they wanted 5 dollars more.

If I had the freedom and wasn't bound by vampiric HR departments, I'd probably hire A if it they didn't tell me they valued themselves lower but I would hire at the starting wage and then bring the wage up after completing 90 days maybe. I would do that as a bonus incentive to learn the job because technically working would give them experience by which they should be paid more.

So I would go with A if they valued themselves more. You don't have to be cocky about it but you do have to have confidence.

BarbossasHusband · 36-40, M

Cocky and demanding more than starting pay even before getting the job is a massive red flag.

I'd hire A

Lostpoet · M

B. Experience Trumps everything

GeorgeTBH · 31-35, M

ViciDraco · 36-40, M

Depends on how urgent the need is and whether it's a long term position. For longer term positions that a bit of up front investment can be spent in time then A could be a good fit.

If you've got short term need, you can go with B. However, I'd also expect B to jump ship as soon as they get a better opportunity elsewhere. B is good for a quick boost, but probably not a great if trying to plan long term.

Add a comment...