Hi.

Is any more polite than:

Hi.

And typically those high performers either get promoted or leave to find higher paying jobs.

I have hired many employees throughout my career, and never once have we posted a position for which we would have taken a junior engineer or someone with 12 years experience and a PhD. Even at small startups. Not that we weren't hiring both types of people at the same time. But we weren't hiring them for the same position. At my current company we have open positions on our hiring page for 4 different levels of software engineer.

In the case where someone applies for a position that doesn't fit, we let them know and move them over to a different position in our applicant tracking system.

>A 2 year junior dev may be able to accomplish the same goal as the 12 year one, but much slower due to lack of experience, and you don't know if you'll find either until you start interviewing.

I have never worked somewhere where they would give both these people the same title. If the more experienced dev can do the job so much better that you're willing to pay them 50% more, they aren't doing the same job. Why would you give them the same title. I don't know anyone with 12 years experience (that would be worth 50% more) who would be willing to work somewhere with a junior title.

>If John Carmack and a junior dev both apply to the role of "Software Engineer", I see zero reason why a company shouldn't be allowed to offer him a substantially higher comp due to his experience.

Who is saying the company can't post 1 job title and a gigantic salary range. Of course they can. I'm just saying that it's stupid.

If you hire John Carmack and John Bootcamp grad, they aren't doing the same job, so what's the point of pretending like they are by giving them the same title. At that point you might as well just have one title for every position in the company. Just call everyone "Employee" and have a salary range of $1-$5,000,000.

>He'll likely accomplish the same goals more quickly, more efficiently, with better code practices in mind.

If he's producing so much more/better work that he's worth huge multiples more, then he's not doing the same job. There's no reason to pretend that he is.

>Having to put it under the guise of "a different position" is just befuddling to the process. It's the kind of unnecessary legislation that pushes companies to find shady ways of solving problems.

None of these laws say a company can't post 1 job with a huge salary range. It's just stupid to do so because it sets the wrong expectations for everyone involved.

You also don’t need put $50k-$5,000,000 just in case John Carmack applies. If he does happen to apply to your junior engineer position, you instead interview him for another position with a higher salary band.

We definitely wouldn’t hire an unqualified person as staff and just pay them less.

Or an overqualified person as senior and pay them way more. That just doesn’t make sense.

Companies also routinely have permanently open positions without exact numbers of positions.

Surely if they are worth 50% more, you can give them a better title to go along with it.

Why would you hire those 2 people for the same position? If the PhD with 12 years of experience is worth 50% more, then why not give them a better title?

If you find a candidate who you really think is worth 50% more than the average salary for Role X, then obviously that candidate is qualified for Role X + 1.

In the early 2000s, you could get decent work just knowing HTML.

> I would second guess SaaS startups that start by building the infra/data models unless they’re going for a highly technical play

Do you not see the problem with these 2 statements. Of course not dealing with non JavaScript is easier for a JavaScript developer.

> You can get something in front of your users tomorrow.

This is something we’ve been able to do with Rails or Django for nearly 2 decades now. I can do something similar with more interactivity with Phoenix LiveView and Postgres these days.