Slashdot Mirror
Dealing w/ Relocation Package Bait and Switch?
An anonymous reader asks: "I got a R&D job offer with a large company in Philadelphia area last week. It includes a relocation package that they told me was standard for my position. After I accepted the offer and made plans to terminate my current job, the recruiter handed me off to their relocation department, where I was told that my relocation package is significantly less than what I was promised. The relocation manager tells me that whenever there is conflict between their relocation policy and the offer, their internal relocation policy supersedes. Is this type of switch-and-bait common practice in corporate America? If you have gone through this nightmare before, any advice on how to respond to it?"
First, you describe it as a 'nightmare'. Is this a deal-breaker, or not, for you?
If it's not, and you'd honestly take the job even without the better relocation package, then your goal is just to try to negotiate, right?
If it IS a DEFINITE deal-breaker, call them up and tell them that, bluntly but softly: "I'm sorry, but that's what I was promised. I don't want to cause any trouble, but for me right now this is definitely a deal-breaker. Please talk to whoever you need to talk to," get info on how long it will take them to make a decision and arrange to call back, and then call back.
If it's not a definite deal-breaker but you want to negotiate, the procedure is the same, but use softer wording.
"Bob, you told me that there was [blah] to help me get there and get going, and they're telling me [blahrg]. I'm just really concerned, and I wanted to let you know where I'm at with this. I'm really excited about coming on board with you guys, and I'm really looking forward to it, but my situation right now is that without an adequate relocation package like the one you described, it just might not make sense for either of us."
Also, mention to them that there are two ways that this is bad -- first, that the financial hit you'd take from the lower relocation package is enough to make taking the position a lot less attractive. But second, that taking that hit -- a substantial financial penalty -- is enough of a negative for you that it just might not make sense to start off what you *had* hoped would be a long and mutually rewarding career by being asked to take a big financial penalty.
You didn't quit your job yet, right? You haven't yet taken a dump on your supervisor's desk, right? So you can survive. If your prospective new bosses react to these kinds of reasonable concerns unreasonably, you're better off where you are, so expressing your concerns can only help you.
I heartily agree with this. I've never had a company back-off from a request to get everything in writing prior to acceptance.
The other thing I'd do is bring this up with the manager/director/whoever that hired you. As a manager, and I am one, I would not be amused with an internal bureaucrat who underminded a legitimate offer with the result of a new hire coming in the door angry. That's no way to start things off. Give this person a chance to address the issue.
Another point is that his/her reaction will likely give some idea as to what degree they will support thier team. It may be that he/she can't do anything, but give them the chance and make them aware
Computer Science is Applied Philosophy
When someone says "get your offer in writing," that doesn't mean an e-mail from Joe Department Manager saying, "Hey guy, it was great talking to ya, and guess what? We want to give you the job! Isn't that cool?"
... why start off a new job in an adversarial position? Even if you sue them for the compensation they didn't pay you, you'll be out of a job. But I agree with the GP: Get it in writing anyway.
... it is a formal proposal. It's not exactly a contract, but for all intents and purposes both parties should expect to treat it like that.
An employment offer in writing is written by the HR department, not the person you interviewed. It has a signature at the bottom. It will probably arrive at your home via FedEx or registered mail. The package might also include other materials, such as a brochure describing the company's benefits package. The letter itself might also have a space at the bottom where you put your own signature, and you will return that copy of the letter to the HR department when you accept your offer.
The other posters are right when they say that recourse for a hiring bait-and-switch is tricky
It's odd to me that anybody would have reached the point where they quit their previous job and were actually planning to move out of their home without getting the terms of the relocation deal in writing. If an offer letter showed up that didn't include those terms, I'd send it back and ask for them to be spelled out. No HR department should refuse that request. If they did, that would be a big, huge, three-alarm red flag to me that the company is not on the level.
The point is that a real offer letter is not an offer as in "hey how about this"
Look at it this way: In any kind of situation where you are considering taking a new job, don't think of yourself as a supplicant asking a company for work. Think of yourself as a supplier who has something to offer that company. What you're offering the company is your work.
Now, suppose you weren't just one person -- suppose you were a different kind of supplier, like a concrete company that owned some cement mixer trucks. If your local municipality offered you a job pouring concrete on a few work sites, wouldn't you want to get the terms of that offer in writing? Where and when are your guys supposed to show up, how long is the job expected to take, and what are they offering to pay you for that amount of work?
Taking any other kind of job, even if it's just a job in an office, is no different. If they don't want to spell out the terms of the deal for you, then you should view that deal exactly the same way you would if you were the boss of a cement company and the customer didn't seem to want to negotiate in good faith.
Breakfast served all day!