Node haha? Dang. As mentioned in an answer to another comment, perhaps framework was the wrong terminology to use, and something more all-encompassing to reflect what is wanted would've been better.
What do you think a developer using Javascript should use/know right now?
Noted – use of terminology could've been more accurate, but for the purpose of this article we tried to keep it quite simplified. Perhaps the wrong approach with regards to accuracy.
What were your thoughts on the broader points of the post?
I think both followup questions are valid. As others have mentioned in addition to yourself, there is wariness of companies' intentions, which ties into getting someone for less/value/than what they're worth.
On the flip side, case may be they genuinely can't afford to pay as much - but potential applicants may be swayed if they trust in them, and choose to forgo a higher salary or accept other compensation methods or benefits.
Ah sorry, I've muddled myself somewhat with 'bid to play.'
But what you've said here would be appropriate when it comes to the best in their fields. And not just with salary (other compensation, care packages, etc). But would 'competitive' be less appropriate than something like 'negotiatiable?'
That's a reasonable assumption in all fairness. And I would agree that the other 'perks/benefits' need championing in cases where firms can't match market value (whether it be equity, healthcare, daycare, or even free beers/billiards on Fridays).
'Decent' could have a connotation of 'good' (though that depends on the source, and the location targeted) - it's in my vernacular, but would agree, it can certainly be offputting, and a case of your second point - milking for cheap.
How might companies tackle the issues some have listed here of displaying salaries, while not deterring people (assuming they're being fair, not exploitative).
It is admittedly not a totally methodical study, but the discussion is sort of compelling.
Human nature would suggest as much (we'd certainly hope for reciprocations of actions that demonstrate trust in the everyday at least). But as others have mentioned - there are drawbacks to being transparent, even with the potential benefits from the created virtuous circle.
a-d are all valid points, and (c) is certainly one crux when it comes to listing a higher-paying jobs - is listing 'competitive' the only way of combatting this (what about the application process finding the most compatible skill-wise, person-firm fit-wise, etc)?
Great point re: salary bands, and existing employees reading listed job openings.
Each side of the bands/'competitive' debate has +/-s for sure. By 'bid to play' do you mean a 'race to the bottom' sort of thing re: salary/compensation?