Is it reasonable to request a higher salary when joining a controversial company?

Question

An example of such a controversial company is Huawei.

I have deep ideological objections to joining such a company if the allegations against them are true, but it's obviously hard to tell how true they are from the outside. Therefore from my perspective I'm taking a risk - if the allegations are true, then:

• I will definitely resign. No two ways about this one.
• On the other hand, this means I need to start another job search.
• My CV might also be permanently "tainted" since I'd have to list the time I spent at this company, which might scare the next employer. In fact it might scare the next employer even if the allegations turn out to be untrue.
• What will I say in a cover letter / interview for the next job? It seems ridiculous to write "help, I need to escape from this controversial company". However, it could come to pass - if the company is oppressive enough ideologically, I might end up resigning before securing a new position.

The obvious way to offset this risk is with a higher salary. Is it reasonable to request a higher salary in this case? If so, how do I say it? The "I'm taking a professional risk" line seems rather off-putting, in fact I am already not sure how much to say about the controversies in the interview.

Answer 1

You can ask for whatever salary, and you don't need to justify that to anyone, apart from the people you are negotiating with.

It's unlikely that they'll agree with your rationale.

You'll also lose a bit of credibility by openly admitting that your ethical objections can be swayed with money.

Answer 2

I'd just ask for the higher salary and wouldn't bother with an explanation. Justify it to yourself as you see fit but you don't need to justify your salary requirements to prospective new employers.

If you did want to justify it you could probably just lie about and inflate the salary at the job you're leaving. That'll work unless they ask for paycheck stubs from your past employer, which, in my experience, is quite rare.

My CV might also be permanently "tainted" since I'd have to list the time I spent at this company, which might scare the next employer. In fact it might scare the next employer even if the allegations turn out to be untrue.

I think your concerns are a bit overblown. Huawei has a lot of employees working for them. A lot of good employees. Any company black listing them solely because they worked at Huawei is effectively shooting themselves in the foot. And Huawei isn't the only tech company that has a dubious track record. There's also Facebook, Uber, etc. All of them have, at one time or another, been darling children of silicon valley, where all the top people wanted to work. Black listing anyone who's ever worked at those companies is giving your competitors a great gift.

What will I say in a cover letter / interview for the next job? It seems ridiculous to write "help, I need to escape from this controversial company". However, it could come to pass - if the company is oppressive enough ideologically, I might end up resigning before securing a new position.

Just say "I'm looking for better opportunities" and leave it at that. Just tell people why you want to work for them - they don't need to know why you want to leave your current job. Look to the future - don't fixate on the past!

Answer 3

I would strongly recommend that you not work for any company where you have ethical reservations about that company or their business model. It will eat at you throughout your time working there and will taint the next job search - not because of their reputation in the marketplace, but inside yourself in how you find the next job.

I've had clients where I thought I was making a mistake taking them on and they have all turned out to be bad experiences that cost me.

Answer 4

Whether "dirt money" is attributable to an employment isn't so much a function of your personal opinions, but of the opinions of the majority of the available workforce.

A company with a truly appalling reputation may have to pay over the odds to get work done, but if many others don't see it that way then the wage may simply be the ordinary market rate.

When you say "if the company is oppressive enough ideologically, I might end up resigning before securing a new position", I'd be wondering what sort of "ideological oppression" you'd be expecting, if not merely the standard kinds such as ideologies of economic exploitation and hostility to collective bargaining (e.g. what one finds with Amazon or Uber).

And look at this from the company's point of view. Your objections and flightiness don't make you a more valuable worker, but if anything a less valuable one (than an employee with full confidence in them). If you were perfectly honest with your rationale and perceptions of them, in order to justify your pay demands, they'd probably want to cut your pay rather than increase it. In fact, they'd probably ask, why did you even apply for such a job?

The possibility of higher pay does not clearly explain your application, because you rationalise it merely as insurance for the risks you are running, so you could just as easily accept lower pay elsewhere and run no such risks, and keep a clean conscience.

There is also a contradiction between the strong ideological objections you claim to have, and the fact that you're perfectly willing to risk being caught working for a firm who turn out to be ideological undesirables, so long as they compensate you ahead of time for the public soiling of your own reputation that will result.

The hallmark of strong ideology is that it is inconvertible with personal advantage, and that a cash payment from the devil doesn't make up for being ideologically embarrassed. And if the pay premium you seek is seen less as a personal advantage and more as a penalty to an employer with an as-yet unclear nature, then that is a market for lemons, since the angel will be penalised unfairly by your lack of confidence, and the devil insufficiently penalised by your giving the benefit of the doubt!

If you really want to be a mercenary getting paid for dirty work, then be honest at the interview that you have principles available for sale, that it is other people's opinions that you want compensation for, and you've come to discuss the terms the devil may be offering for a deal. And if it emerges publicly that they are the devil, then you won't be walking out due to your own principles, you'll be walking out because at that point they still aren't paying you enough to deal with the opprobrium you sustain from others.

They may insist they are not the devil, and refuse a deal on any terms which suggest that they are, but then you've found out what you wanted to know.

Answer 5

The real answer to this question is simply don't work for a company who you have an ethical or ideological aversion to.

It is unlikely that any company will "taint" you for working at anther company, and especially not at a megacorp. Imagine if some company whose CEO liked Donald Trump blacklisted anyone who had ever worked for any company in Silicon Valley because Trump said all those companies are super-Liberal and hate him; that would severely limit their talent pool, both in quality and in quantity. And it's the quality part that's actually the core of the issue: Large companies have a huge talent pool and are able to pick and choose who they want, which means they get the best people. If a company decides not to hire someone because they worked for some "controversial" large company, be it a FAANG megacorp, or a Chinese megacorp like Huawei, or what have you, then they're probably shooting themselves in the foot because their pool of potential staff would be significantly reduced in quality because most of the high quality people have worked for those types of companies.

The thing about your resume is that you are the one who writes it. You can put on or leave off any information you want. Small gaps in a resume are usually not even asked about or considered; I have a small gap in my resume for a job I chose to leave off, where I worked there for about a month and it's too complicated to explain the circumstances of why I left, so I decided it's better to leave the gap. However, the longer the gap the stranger it is, so if you worked for the company for years, then you probably don't want to leave the gap.

The other question is, what question do you want to answer and what method do you think you'll be able to answer it? Using the example of Huawei, my guess is you are referring to the (suspected) transactions with Iran for which one of their senior employees is currently being detained in Canada. Do you honestly think you, as a random junior employee, will get access to the information which will tell you whether or not those transactions occurred, when, and with whom? The fact of the matter is, a company doesn't go around internally parading its dirty laundry, because that's how whistleblowing happens. Realistically speaking, you're not going to get the information you want, if it's as bad as you think it is (to make other companies blacklist you). If you have suspicion that. makes you unconfortable, you're better off just staying away altogether.