[eldridgea]

~2019 I led a team of highly qualified security R&D folks inside Cisco (we were part of an acquisition), these folks were effectively highly specialized SWEs. But because the title was something like "security researcher" it was compared against the closet Radform ladder which was closer to to compliance officer.

This meant the specialists were on a ladder with often lower pay than a standard SWE, and I couldn't shift the bureaucracy enough to change that. People left for all sorts of reasons but a big part was being able to get 2x-4x the total compensation at other companies.

[HelloMcFly]

If anyone else runs into this issue, typically the direct route for things like this is to get involved a discussion with someone in your Total Rewards / Global Compensation team. These are usually the people that confirm the mapping of internal positions to benchmarks, and there is huge between-organizations variability in the quality behind that process.

Many times normal managers or more generalist HR Partners (especially if more junior) may not appreciate that this is a data error vs. a frustrated hiring manager trying to tell you their subjective feelings are more correct than policy.

That having been said: I still think the whole thing stinks.

[ndesaulniers]

HR is not your friend. Corporate Confidential by Cynthia Shapiro is a recommended read.

My advice; get a better offer elsewhere, then see if HR wants to pay you your worth.

[dboreham]

I have some insight into this space (compensation analysis) through a family member. Either the VP was incompetent, or the mismatched job situation was used as cover for the outcome they intended (people leaving). "The bureaucracy" exists to serve businesses interests, and legal risks to same.

[ndesaulniers]

Sounds like first hand experience observing wages being suppressed as a result of Radford/Aon.