Hello all you communist recruitment agents out there.I have a question for you.Why do you consider a candidate's current salary to be almost a sort of anchor point for discussions when discussing a salary for a new, different role with a different employer doing different things for different clients in a different sector? It seems that many of you communist-minded recruiters out there are of the view that you cannot, under any circumstances, permit a candidate to move to a role where he/she is on significantly more (read 15% or thereabouts) than his/her current salary. A drop is fine, according to you commies, but an increase is not. Why is this?Thanks again for considering this question, and have a commie good weekend all you ultra left wing commies out there! And remember: If you can't beat 'em, just make sure they don't earn more than you!

What a delightful post! It ain't communistic..it is rather super capitalistic...in order for the rich to get richer, the "poor" need to stay where they are my friend! You have not seen anything...just imagine how the world will look like in 20 years time?...maybe India/China will offshore to the UK in orderto save some money?:)))))

Commie, me old China, you've got it all wrong.We're not far enough up the food chain to make the decision that a consultant shouldn't have a large increase on his current salary, it's the capitalist clients we work for! When Big John Wayne says 'Tell me what they earn' then Big John Wayne gets told. And a communist he ain't. Which is why he's rich and we aren't.....yet!

recognise the frustration but the underlying logic may be that every major player has a relatively robust performance management system and so will be sceptical that Consultantski X should leave Politburo1 on grade A and 50K a year to join Politburo2 on grade F and 90K, instead of achieving Worker of The Year and associated rewards where they were.

Hate to say this, but the recruiters are correct. Perhaps you misunderstand their role in the process - they act as agents for the opposition and not for the home team. Hiring managers need a leveling measure and in the absence of detailed information on you, current salary is a proxy for performance, much like degree and university brand is a proxy for intelligence for new grads. Hardly communist, in fact it's the great success of the "talent management" industry that low and mid level salaries have been kept static for the past five to ten years! Top hats for everyone!

Surely that better denotes capitalism? In any case, i'm sure if it were your firm - your hard earned cash - your children's inheritance on the line, you'd operate exactly the same policy. Wake up and smell the roses mate!

No point asking commies as they are thick. That is why they are commies.