Ask Slashdot: Should You Tell Future Employers Your Salary History?

An anonymous reader writes: During the interview process for a technology job, I was asked to fill out an application which included questions about my compensation history. When I asked why, I was told that it was part of the background check and wouldn't be used to determine the size of the offer... What is the risk for the employer of not knowing that info? Is this standard procedure or part of a trend at technology companies?
The original submission asks if this is ever a legitimate question -- or more to the point, "Is it anything more than an attempt to gain negotiating leverage?" So leave your best answers in the comments. When you're interviewing for a new IT job, should you tell future employers your salary history?

Comments

Never give a number

[Anonymous Coward]

You should never ever ever give your salary history. It will NEVER help you and will only ever fuck you over. Anyone that claims it's for a background check is lying their ass off and no employer will ever confirm a number. Just put $1 or $0 and when they ask you can simply tell them that's not important and/or it's none of their business.

Re:Never give a number

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a good idea if you never want to get hired.

In theory, your previous salary is irrelevant. In actual practice, companies want that information because they view it as an indicator of how much you want to be paid. Unless you are interviewing for a job as CEO or other high level position, 99.9% of all companies want to pay you as little as possible.

If you were paid $100k in your previous job but they are really hoping to pay someone $50k, telling them your previous salary will almost certainly result in you not getting the job. Withholding salary information will also result in not getting the job.

Leverage is a fantasy. You have no leverage. THEY control who gets hired. Companies will hire whoever will work for the lowest wages with no regard to skill or qualifications. That's pretty much the entire basis of the H-1B program.

Re:Never give a number

[Anonymous Coward]

The way I usually respond to "what was your previous salary" question is "Yes Sir, I know how to keep a secret. Next question please." It's like asking a salesmen the same question, if they are any good, they wouldn't respond or they'd game you. I prefer the honest approach just to see how stupid the headhunter is.

The only thing that matters is the value and opportunity I represent to your company right now. If I come along with a packed Portfolio, letters of recommendation from executives with dollar amounts in them, and so forth, the discussion needs to be how much or the offer to try the job out for a month, paid of course, and see how things go.

The only kind of employer that hires a head hunter to fish around for cheap labor (if you ever get a number on a phone call or an e-mail, or a very narrow salary range, it's fishing), or wants to know your existing salary upfront, is one that thinks of their employee's like any fixed piece of equipment and treats them as such.
If you get into the habitation of treating all people like fixed equipment, and treating all equipment the same, pretty soon the really great ones move on and all you are left with is a string of bad people. As a result, many of those businesses are an absolute nightmare to work for. They have an insatiable appetite to find ways to cajole, prod, and otherwise manipulate their labor into doing often immoral and unethical work; insecure people tend to need others around them to feel insecure as well.

Ignore them, let them die, go work for the competition.

Re:Never give a number

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Leverage is a fantasy. You have no leverage. THEY control who gets hired. Companies will hire whoever will work for the lowest wages with no regard to skill or qualifications.

But conveniently, declining to provide your salary history will often prevent you from accidentally accepting a job with such a poor employer.

There is only one reason a prospective new employer would ever need to know your previous compensation details, and we all know what it is. Asking what level of compensation you're looking for in a new job is a perfectly legitimate question, but there's no reason any honest and reasonable employer can't just ask it directly. If they don't, and if they won't let your refusal to give history go, you might as well take advantage of the insight you've been given at an early stage and walk away before you waste any more of your time on them.

Re:Never give a number

[nerdonamotorcycle]

Exactly. Salary negotiation is a game and the first person to name a number loses. Asking someone their complete salary history is like saying to someone, "Let's play poker, only, i get to see all of your cards and you don't get to see any of mine." You wouldn't play poker with someone like that, would you? Similarly, don't go in to a job interview with someone like that. And furthermore, it's a red flag for how the company treats their employees. Run far, run fast.

Re:Never give a number

[uncqual]

As a hiring manager, I want to know your last salary and perhaps some salary history for a couple reasons.

First, if I have a req for an engineer with a range of $160K-$190K, if you are making $220K I know it's unlikely that you will accept this job. If I'm really excited by you in an initial interview, I might find another position and talk with you about considering that one instead. If' I'm not really excited by you, I'll not pursue it as there's no reason to waste the team's time interviewing someone who is unlikely to take the position and/or will start out with low morale and will likely leave before your on-boarding costs have even been recovered.

Second, the person who knows you best as an employee is likely your last employer. If they were paying you an unusually low (or high salary) taking into account the company as some are known to pay high while others pay high, they likely don't think you are very valuable (or think you are very valuable). This is an interesting hint to me.

In all cases, if there's a reason that the applicant knows their last salary (and perhaps salary history) is problematic, they are free to explain early on (as in, "You may notice that my salary was very low at my last position. This is because I was working for my brother-in-law and trying to help keep his business afloat as a family favor.").

As a hiring manager, I try to bring people in as high as I can without creating disparities among the group between engineers of similar skill and productivity. This is simply logical -- when raise time comes around, I get x% to spread around and I don't want to consume it bringing people "up to grade", I'd rather spend it rewarding people. It's usually much easier to get another $15K for a new hire (esp. when the position has been open for a while and the boss really wants it filled) than it is to get another $15K a year later to give the new hire a "grade adjustment" raise.

I don't worry too much about overpaying under-performers though -- I tend to get rid of them fairly quickly (usually with them resigning, but occasionally via more painful routes). But, even if I am overpaying an under-performer, I still get a percentage of their inflated salary to hand out to other members of the team (and give the overpaid employee little if anything -- which also helps getting them to decide to move on elsewhere!). The logistics of this are a little trickier than described here, but that's the general scheme.

Re:Never give a number

[Anonymous Coward]

if I have a req for an engineer with a range of $160K-$190K, if you are making $220K I know it's unlikely that you will accept this job.

Then be upfront yourself. Tell the potential recruits you're willing to pay up to $190K and let THEM decide if they want to apply.
Of course, everyone wants to withhold information to enhance their bargaining position.

Re:Never give a number

[ChrisMaple]

Generally, any company that gives specific information beyond "He worked for us from 2003 to 2009" is opening itself up for a lawsuit.

Re:Never give a number

[buss_error]

You use the phrase "as a hiring manager" frequently, so I will borrow it but only once.

As a hiring manager, I know very well there is very little justice or logic in payscales. PHB's and HR (if that isn't redundant) set the rate. I've seen it for more than two decades without ever seeing a single counter example. YMMV. I don't have a problem personally if someone declines to tell me what they made. It does, however, cause HR to refuse to schedule an interview if they even bother to pass the resume up to me.

Re:Never give a number

[lgw]

I'm paid well, so I always provide my salary in the first call with the recruiter. No point in wasting my time in they're not in the ballpark.

When young and underpaid, I would respond with "my salary is a joke, and the punchline is $X". Any large employer is going to pay you at least market rate if you're a software developer, and that certainly worked well for me, getting a 40% raise when I left my first and third jobs.

So, in my experience, if you're below market, you might as well say so and make it clear that's not going to be OK. If you're at market, there's no point in hiding it, since that's what they'll assume anyway. If you're well paid, then you really want to tell them upfront. All the cases point to telling the recruiter your current comp package.

History before that is none of their business, though.

Re:Never give a number

[lgw]

Nonsense. You don't know how large companies work. The cost to the hiring manager is exactly "1 req". Salary doesn't come into it. Large companies can afford you, as long as you're not way out of line with the market. The hiring manage is usually desperate to find anyone qualified, and will delight in the cases where market rate is a large boost over the candidate's current salary. We as a left-coast company love to interview people from elsewhere just for this reason - the "shock and awe" of the salary disparity between the left coast and most other places is enough to overcome any trepidations about relocation.

Re:Never give a number

[uncqual]

The problem is, and this is from years of experience, applicants will still waste your time as a "backup" (or even "backup backup backup") option.

Also, many applicants assume that the range is "negotiable" and think that they can somehow, in the last throes of negotiation, get an offer over the top of the range. (They are wrong -- as a matter of principle I don't do that. If the headhunter kicks in $10K of their commission to beef up the "sign-on bonus", I'll do that -- and that's surprisingly common when closure is looking tenuous).

Most people, esp. those seeking high salaries, think they are better than they are (this is a common human trait - ask 100 developers if they think they are above or below the median skill level and I'll bet about 80% will assert that they are above the median). It's a waste of my time and the team's time. I've got code to write (well, usually designs to review but...) and they have code to write -- interviewing, unlike developing software, is not something we do because we enjoy it.

Re:Never give a number

[Anonymous Coward]

As a hiring manager, I want to know your last salary and perhaps some salary history for a couple reasons.

First, if I have a req for an engineer with a range of $160K-$190K, if you are making $220K I know it's unlikely that you will accept this job.

if you really think this, then asking the prospective employee what salary they are seeking accomplishes the same goal. then, the only difference between how you want to handle this and how an employment-seeker should handle this is who gains the upper hand in salary negotiations. obviously you prefer your method because it gives you the upper hand. you either don't realize this, or are being disingenuous in your reasoning.

Second, the person who knows you best as an employee is likely your last employer. If they were paying you an unusually low (or high salary) taking into account the company as some are known to pay high while others pay high, they likely don't think you are very valuable (or think you are very valuable). This is an interesting hint to me.

you're assuming that their last employer's salaries have kept pace with the job market. i have often found this not to be the case, particularly in a strong job market. you're also assuming that their last employer pays employees according to how valuable they are. i rarely seen this to be the case, especially for long-time employees.

being good at their job and being good at salary negotiation are often two independent skills, and withholding current salary information is a good tip for people who aren't good at salary negotiation. if you don't believe in leverage, tell us about how you include a salary offer in all of your job postings, and make salary information for everyone in your company available to all of your employees.

Re:Never give a number

[AmiMoJo]

First, if I have a req for an engineer with a range of $160K-$190K, if you are making $220K I know it's unlikely that you will accept this job.

Just ask for a ballpark salary expectation up front. No need to know history.

Second, the person who knows you best as an employee is likely your last employer. If they were paying you an unusually low (or high salary) taking into account the company as some are known to pay high while others pay high, they likely don't think you are very valuable (or think you are very valuable). This is an interesting hint to me.

In other words, you punish loyalty.

Sticking with a company, even when they are financially unable to offer good raises, or just not switching jobs every few years tends to result in a lower salary. It's better for the company though, as they get a talented employee with deep knowledge of their products rather than a someone who sees them as a mere stepping stone to something better.

This is why I don't discuss previous salaries. It's never really a discussion, they only want to know so that they can make faulty assumptions and make a low offer. You pay what I'm worth or you go with the second best candidate.

Re:Never give a number

[Gussington]

As a hiring manager, I want to know your last salary and perhaps some salary history for a couple reasons.

None of which are legitimate. If you asked me that I'd withdraw, which means you'll only ever get dead wood or desperate candidates. Hardly a good strategy for attracting quality talent.

Re:Never give a number

[Phaid]

Working at a smaller company has its downsides, but it's posts like this that remind me how much worse large companies are. So, thanks for that.

Re:Never give a number

[sunking2]

Just because you have reason doesn't make it any of your business.

Re:Never give a number

[Anonymous Coward]

// the "shock and awe" of the salary disparity between the left coast and most other places is enough to overcome any trepidations about relocation.

This "shock and awe" is nice until the candidate gets the "shock and awe-shit" of housing prices on the left coast...

Re:Never give a number

[uncqual]

It sounds like you may want to reconsider where you work if there is little justice or logic in payscales where you've been working over the past 20+ years.

If you don't get to see a resume until HR has vetted salary, you're almost certainly losing good candidates for no reason. It's only after I'm interested in a resume that I care about salary (and, usually, after the phone screen or at the end of the phone screen if it went well -- it depends on the circumstances). When "resumes" (often just a LinkedIN link) come in through friends and acquaintances of a candidate, of course salary information is not available -- but if you wait to get salary information to do the first review of qualifications/match, the best candidates may have already been given an offer elsewhere.

Re:Never give a number

[uncqual]

I actually almost never work with more candidates in the tail end of the pipeline than I have openings.

Only a tiny fraction of those in the earliest stages of the pipeline make it to the end so of course I have to work with multiple candidates concurrently at the earliest stages -- just as I expect that I'm not the only person looking at a candidate's resume that just appeared in my inbox. On the rare occasions where I've had two candidates who I wanted to hire and who ended up at the end of the pipeline but only had one opening, I've been able to wrangle a new req (sometimes an existing open req assigned to another area or sometimes a brand new req) to make both offers - smart companies don't let a great candidate walk just because they didn't have an "opening". The vast majority of the offers I make are accepted (often after some negotiations) so that colors my technique a bit.

Re:Never give a number

[Gussington]

but you are likely limiting your horizons by refusing to accept common industry practices.

Asking for a salary history is not a common business practice.

the last thing an engineering organization wants is someone who stands on some false principle...

Lots of crazy assumptions in your response, but I and most others I know prefer an employee who stands up for real principles such as privacy. Hiring weak minded fools that gladly roll over at the first threat isn't a recipe for success.

Just inflate history

[SuperKendall]

Give them the history that demonstrates the salary you want, then if they reject you you are better off.

Re:Just inflate history

[phantomfive]

Nah, I'll give you some methods. There are plenty of companies doing surveys on the topic of salaries, you can pick them up (I snagged one from a manager at a previous company). Glassdoor will give you a ballbark idea. Here's another article, that gives you some good starting points. It's a little old, so salaries have moved up since then.

Another technique that works is: when a recruiter calls you, ask for $30k more than you really want. If the recruiter seems happy, then you asked too low (which means you should ask for $50k more next time). If the recruiter sounds a bit terrified, then you asked for the right amount. The last time I got hired, I scared away a lot of recruiters this way, but not all of them. The ones who weren't scared away were the ones I wanted to work with (and I got within $2.5k of my asking price).

to persuade people in a negotiation you need to be able to get some kind of source to be able to prove your claims.

No, there are plenty of techniques you can use. I strongly suggest reading this book, because you are going about it the wrong way. In fact, if you go up to your boss and say, "My salary is below average, here is proof," he'll probably look at your proof for a while, then say, "You are right, my boy. Let's talk about this during your next performance review and see what we can do for you." At the next performance review, you'll get a 2%-3% payraise, if you are lucky. To some degree, facts don't matter during negotiation.

Re:Just inflate history

[ranton]

Give them the history that demonstrates the salary you want, then if they reject you you are better off.

I just lost a good candidate I was hoping would join my team because the recruiter lied about previous salary during negotiations, and it pissed off our CTO. I still don't feel we should have lost the candidate just because the recruiter was slime, but I didn't get to make the final decision (and maybe there was reason to believe the candidate was in on it).

All I know is that lying about these things will really rub people the wrong way.

Re:Just inflate history

[hambone142]

I've found that Glassdoor has pretty accurate company-specific salary information. For generic position information across companies, it may be as you say. I know this because of looking at specific position salary information for my company.

If they ask your salary history

[Anonymous Coward]

If they ask your salary history, then ask the salary history of people who have held the position and the salaries of everyone at the table.

Only if in your best interest

[ranton]

Earlier in my career I never gave my current salary, because I was looking for 20%+ raises each time and giving the information would probably only hurt me. But now that I am in my mid-30's and making far more than most of my counterparts with similar job titles, giving my salary helps ensure I don't waste time with any company which cannot provide similar compensation. Most companies don't realize top IT talent often get Senior manager / Director level salaries even without many if any managerial duties, so I need to weed them out quickly. Either that or they immediately start treating me as a consultant, because many companies are more comfortable with $150/hr full time consultants than $200k "permanent" IT staff members (even for long term gigs).

Re: Only if in your best interest

[ffejie]

I completely agree with this. I was recently in the job market, and had this question asked everywhere. After not providing it for a bit, I realized it wouldn't hurt. It would frequently help. I specifically wanted a new job that was a good opportunity which also paid me about as much as my last jobs, which were great jobs. I didn't want to take a pay cut. I made it clear I wouldn't be accepting a pay cut. Using previous salary helped me weed out at least two companies that would have paid greater than 20% less than previous jobs.

Once, this totally backfired. I was interviewing for a job I was, arguably, underqualified for. It turns out they were looking for someone more senior, and wanted to pay 100% more than I had been paid at my previous job. When they found out how little I had been paid, they finally realized I was a bit too junior for the role.

Re:Only if in your best interest

[ranton]

Giving them the salary you want, as opposed to your salary history can achieve the same result.

Giving your current salary is just another signal you can use to give more confidence to an employer that you are worth the salary you are asking for. A high salary and promotions from within a company (instead of during a job hop) are both decent indicators that your previous employers were very happy with your performance. These are probably better indicators than some arbitrary programming assignments or generic interview questions.

Re:Only if in your best interest

[AuMatar]

It can. But it doesn't always. If I tell them my last 2 jobs were 160 and part ownership (6%) and 180 plus stock, and that I expect a competing offer in the next few days (all of which were true), I set up a situation where they feel the need to come in with a strong offer and not fuck around- I likely have enough money to not be desperate, and obviously past employers values me highly. If I had just come out and asked for 180 I would have gotten it, but no more. If I asked for 200 I may have gotten it, but they wouldn't have been happy. Instead they opened at 200+stock and feel like they got a deal, and I got the high end of what I felt the market was without onerous negotiations.

I've never been asked a salary history

[Snotnose]

Been at this since '81 or so, several jobs (scary to think of the percentage of companies I worked for that no longer exist). I've never once been asked for a salary history. They usually ask for the desired salary, which I leave blank. Let them throw out a number and start negotiating.

Works for me, every job I've ever gotten had a higher salary that the one I left.

Most interesting? I was interviewing at a company when rumors started to fly my company was going to have a layoff. I went to the manager in charge of my job (not my supervisor), asked to be laid off if the rumors were true. Got hired by the company across the street (not kidding, I walked to both of them, they were 1 mile away). Held off on turning in my 2 week notice and, sure as snot, got laid off a week later. Got all the benefits of being laid off, plus after a 1 week vacation I started my new job.

That is the better way

[SuperKendall]

Rather than my flippant answer, I agree that instead it's far better to just tell them the salary you are looking for and let them decide if they can manage it.

Even if they never look it up, it's not a hood idea to fill out anything wrong in a form - just leave it blank.

Federal Gov't Employees

[chill]

Unless, of course, you work for the Federal Government. Then they can just go look up your entire salary history, plus bonuses.

https://www.federalpay.org/employees

It is always fun when someone new joins the Agencies I've worked for. They have the typical "I don't discuss salary" attitude of private sector employees. Then tell them their salary down to the penny and their eyes go wide like it is some terrible secret that has been told.

Re:No.

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I just told them some made up BS number that was more than I actually made.

Be careful. If you ever lie on a job application, that could come back to haunt you, at any time for as long as you work for that employer, or potentially even later.

For example, depending on where you are and what rights you would normally have as an employee, you might find that an employer who somehow found out about your deception could instantly terminate your employment, but without either the employer or the government being required to offer any of the protections or payments you would normally have enjoyed.

If you're having a really bad day, you might then find that someone who knew about your deception from that employer has moved and is now reviewing your next application somewhere else, with a predictable effect on the result.

It's tempting to just make something up for an obviously loaded question like this, but you're almost always going to be better off giving an uninformative but not incorrect or misleading answer if you can't avoid or redirect the original question.

Re: Donald Trump - RacistPresident Constitutional

[naubol]

For the love of god, can we please collapse/grey out/auto collapse whole threads that start like this?

Re:The answer I used last was:

[cetialphav]

That is the position that I have always taken. This all comes down to Negotiation 101. The party with the most information has the advantage. The company knows the maximum that they are willing to pay. You know the minimum that you are willing to accept. The company definitely won't tell you their max so you shouldn't provide your minimum. Providing a salary history gives them a history of your minimums, so you don't want to provide that.

I think most people are afraid that they might be forced to walk away from a good job by not disclosing past salaries, but I have never seen that to be an issue. It is standard practice for the company to ask for this information, but it is also pretty standard for candidates to refuse to provide it. HR is generally not in a position to block the hiring of talented people because of this kind of issue. In fact, most engineers vastly underestimate the power that they have in job negotiations and leave a lot on the table.

So I always just leave it blank on any form I fill out and politely tell them it is none of their business if asked directly.

Re: Donald Trump - RacistPresident Constitutional

[ChrisMaple]

Fine. We'll balance the budget by ending theft programs: welfare, medicare, foreign aid, food stamps, et infinite cetera.

I think it depends...

[gosand]

I think it all depends on where you are in the hiring process. If it is because you are at the offer stage, then tell them. You can give general numbers. I don't think they can actually verify that information though. In general, most companies will only verify that you worked for them from this date to that. Depending on the job, they may do background checks, and they could be extensive. So... they may be able to verify your story. I honestly only vaguely remember how much I was making at some of my last jobs. So as long as you are close it shouldn't be an issue. Lie, and they find out, and you will be dropped immediately.

I have hired many people over the years, and I know exactly where you are coming from.
However, most of my experience has been with companies that have a hiring process. Therefore, I don't get to ask those questions. The recruiter may, i don't know what they do as part of their vetting process. I also know that the position pay range is between X and Z, with Y being the mid-point. HR wants you to hire at the mid-point (unless you are hiring internally, then it is 'as low as possible'). Not my rules, but the reality I have seen.

There are obviously downsides to this situation, in that I don't always get all of the information I may need. Also, it doesn't always work out for the candidate. I know, because I have been on that side as well. I was at one job where I was paid well, I got about a 12% increase when I joined it. It was higher-up the food chain too. But my boss was a nightmare, from day 1. I hated every single day I worked there. I tried to make it work... but after a year I started looking.

Recruiters wouldn't ask my salary history, but would ask my current salary. When i told them, they usually would start backpedaling. I would then explain what I was willing to take. There was one promising job, two rounds of interviews went great, it was a great work environment and I really wanted it. I told the recruiter what I was making but what I was willing to take. Unfortunately, he only told the employer what I was making. So I didn't get the job.

How do I know all of this? Because they hired me. A month or so later I got a call from that recruiter, wanting to know if I was still interested. I was! He said salary was an issue, and they couldn't meet my current pay. I reiterated to him what I was willing to take, and after a little negotiating I got the job. As it turned out, the recruiter was a dumbass and didn't tell the hiring manager (my new boss) about my willingness to take less than my current salary. The person they had chosen over me didn't work out, and I am really glad that they came back to me because I am still there and it has been great. I have since learned more about our corporate recruiters, and how terrible they are. I keep that in mind as I have started hiring more people. Remember this - their job is to get people hired, not necessarily to hire the right people. I know that sounds crazy, but it's true. And the strange thing is, they aren't very good at it.

Absolutely Not.

[billybiro]

No, you should never disclose your salary history to any prospective future employer.

Employers will ask this question for one reason and one reason only, to find the lowest possible offer you'd be willing to accept if they decide they want to offer you a position. Many people in this thread that are representing the employers perspective have said that they need this information in order to determine if a candidate's expectations are in line with their budget. Well, that can easily be achieved by either the employer being up front with the salary range on offer, or by asking the candidate not for their actual previous salaries but for their expected salary. That's a whole different question and one which you as a candidate should be prepared to answer (although ideally, you'll avoid giving a direct answer to this question also - see below). Of course, if you do give an answer here, you should still respond with a range rather than a specific number to allow that all important wiggle room within negotiations if you get far enough into the application process.

Too many employers here seem to be expecting the candidate to do half of their job for them - i.e. to divulge information that is detrimental to the candidate and helps the employer make a hiring decision (especially in the negative direction - i.e. helping the employer to discount the candidate rather than offering reasons to hire).

Here's some very useful tips I've picked up over the years for answering the "What is your current salary?" question without actually divulging the salary information the employer so desperately seeks. Also, some great answers to the "What salary are you seeking?" question, too. For this, use the Noel Smith-Wenkle method which avoids giving a direct answer and naming a number - something that will instantly give the other party the upper hand in any salary negotiation.

So, when asked "What is your current salary?", answers are:
- "I'm seeking a salary in the range of $x to $y" (i.e. the Politician's answer - you answer a different question that what was asked).
- “My current employer does not allow me to discuss the terms of my employment”
- “This position is not exactly the same as my current job, so let’s discuss what my responsibilities would be here and then determine a fair salary for this job.”
or finally, for really pushy interviewers:
- “I’m happy to help you evaluate what I’d be worth to your business based upon my skills, experience and the value that I can add to your organisation, but my current salary is personal and confidential, just as the salaries of your own employees are.”

And the aforementioned Noel Smith-Wenkle method in a nutshell is that when asked "What salary are you seeking?" you give three answers for the number of times they repeat the question, or try to pin you down to mention a figure:

1st answer: "I am much more interested in doing (type of work) here at (name of company) than I am in the size of the initial offer."
2nd answer: "I will consider any reasonable offer."
3rd (and subsequent) answers: "You are in a much better position to know how much I'm worth to you than I am."