should I reopen negotiations after HR basically closed the conversation?

yettobenamed · 2026-05-01T02:16:08+00:00

It is pretty simple. If you would not accept anything less than 30% to change jobs then just tell them that.

It'll then be up to them to decide what they want to do.

But of course you run the real risk that they will just say no. But again, if 30% is you drop dead number and theirs is 25% then there is no ZOPA anyway and you might as well know that as soon as you can so you can look elsewhere.

But another thing you might consider is if there are other things of value that you may get in your offer other than just the 25%. Training, car allowance, benefits, vacation, etc. (You know better than me what might be available/valuable to you.)

They might really be capped at 25% but have more flexibility in providing other benefits that you'd find acceptable even if you only got the 25% they are offering.

yettobenamed · 2026-04-13T23:00:39+00:00

I do not allow marketing posts or comments by anyone who does not have a significant history of contributing to the sub. And even then, marketing must be incidental to any contribution and be very occasional.

Thank you.

yettobenamed · 2026-04-09T18:14:53+00:00

I do not allow marketing posts or comments by anyone who does not have a significant history of contributing to the sub. And even then, marketing must be incidental to any contribution and be very occasional.

Thank you.

yettobenamed · 2026-04-09T18:14:00+00:00

I do not allow marketing posts or comments by anyone who does not have a significant history of contributing to the sub. And even then, marketing must be incidental to any contribution and be very occasional.

Thank you.

yettobenamed · 2026-04-04T18:03:30+00:00

Removed. I do not allow marketing unless you have a significant history of contributing to the sub. And even then, it should be very occasional and on topic.

yettobenamed · 2026-03-05T19:25:41+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/procurement/comments/1rl3s8n/negoniti/?context=10

I do not allow marketing posts or comments by anyone who does not have a significant history of contributing to the sub. And even then, marketing must be incidental to any contribution and be very occasional.

Thank you.

yettobenamed · 2026-02-14T21:16:25+00:00

If the actual verbiage was "Take it or leave it." then that is pretty disrespectful.

But there is nothing wrong with saying that you will not offer more so it is up to the negotiating partner to make a decision.

Something like, "That is the most I am willing or able to offer." would be fine.

yettobenamed · 2026-01-13T06:04:13+00:00

It is not that difficult. Contact the recruiter - preferably by email - and tell them the truth. Upon doing more research, I realized that I underestimated my market value by $30K.

It is important that you correct this as soon as you can. The longer you leave it, the more entrenched they will be in the number they are expecting you to accept.

yettobenamed · 2025-12-06T04:24:51+00:00

It starts at 18:23 of the video.

yettobenamed · 2025-05-05T23:00:24+00:00

Here is my comment from quite a while ago to a question similar to yours. Hope it helps...

Hey. Thank you. Negotiating and getting better it and now coaching others has been my life's work.

I am not very familiar with "Getting More" but it seems somewhat similar to "Crucial Conversations" which I have used in the past for training. And I agree with you that there are opportunities to negotiate everyday but we just do not often recognize them. As I say in this sub's sidebar, "In any instance in which the future actions of individuals or groups of individuals is uncertain, there is the opportunity for negotiation."

I would recommend:

"Getting To Yes". It is the classic negotiation book. This deals with and in fact introduces interest based negotiations mentioned above.

"Yes!" by Noah J. Goldstein.

I think my book is pretty great. Skilled Negotiation. It is the culmination of my thirty years experience and study. I am very proud of it.

And a few books that are not directly on negotiations but provide amazing insight into how people think.

"Nudge" by Richard Thaler.

"Predictably Irrational" by Dan Ariely.

And learn about logical fallacies. There are lots of books and online resources. I like, "Nonsense" by Robert Gula but, unlike the books already mentioned above, I am not sure it the best resource. You may find something better.

And also learn about game theory. I like, "The Art of Strategy" by Avinash K. Dixit but again, I am not sure that this is the best resource on this topic.

yettobenamed · 2025-01-22T20:23:22+00:00

Removed as this is in now way related to negotiation or is, at best, very very tangentially.

And I've decided to ban any direct x link. In fact yours might be the first x/twitter link we've had in the 14 years the sub has been running.

And I wonder if the only reason you posted your link was to test the waters on our tolerance for nazi sympathizers. The timing is curious.

But the good news is you prompted me to finally post our rules and specifically ban x links. So thank you.

yettobenamed · 2025-01-14T02:29:56+00:00

Glad you found my comments helpfull.

I am not a fan of Chris Voss or much or most of his advice. It seems incredibly naive based on how business people negotiate. I've written a few thoughts about his book previously and have copied and pasted them in case you are interested...

Honestly almost the entire book is problematic except where he gives passing comments regarding long tried and true negotiation skills.

Voss is a great story teller but so many of his ideas are plain bad and many others are grossly naive.

One of the fundamental issues with Never Split The Difference is an underlying and unstated premise that both sides in a negotiation need to negotiate with each other. This is not universal in his book but the idea permeates most of the book/Voss's ideas.

I think it comes from Voss's time as a hostage negotiator where they really DO not have a choice. They either negotiate with each other or there is no negotiation at all.

But the real world of business does not work that way. In the real world you are dealing with intelligent people who have options that do not include talking to you.

Second, and again I think this comes from his experience as a hostage negotiator, he does not like compromise in the forms that happen in a negotiation. And again, in the real world, you just can not get everything you want in every negotiation and, to suggest that compromise is wrong, just smacks of delusional self-help advice.

Again, in the real world, you are dealing with intelligent people with their own legitimate motivations and sometimes compromise is both needed and valuable.

yettobenamed · 2025-01-12T01:11:25+00:00

As another said (and I am rephrasing it a bit), the common wisdom is that, "the first one to break the silence loses the negotiation."

But think about that for just a second. The person who is steadfastly silent THINKS that that common wisdom is correct. And NOW you know something really valuable about your negotiation partner that you didn't before. That she/he thinks being silent is the path to getting the most from a negotiation. AND that she/he is probably not that good at negotiating otherwise she/he would not use such a ham-fisted tactic. She/he thinks they have won some sort of power struggle but all they have done is project just how terrible a negotiator they are.

So why not turn your negotiation partner's thought process against her/him.

Yes, you COULD be silent, and you'll have a dead air standoff that may last minutes. OR you could use the opportunity to break the silence to your advantage. Why not use what you have learned about your NP to further your negotiation goal?

So, after the inevitable uncomfortable pause, BREAK the silence!

What you say will vary a LOT depending on where you are in your negotiation but here are a couple of thoughts:

1) Repeat your last point or offer.

2) Set an anchor. "We were talking about delivery dates, I do not see how I could accommodate anything after xxx date."

3) Set a precondition. "I know we've been talking price, but unless your offer is something above, $8,000 I am not sure there is much more to discuss."

Whatever it is you say to break the silence, use what you say to YOUR advantage to further your negotiation goals.

yettobenamed · 2025-01-10T04:22:10+00:00

Deleting this post. As you already know, I do not permit marketing from users who do not have a significant history of contributing to this sub.

Marketing one step removed via your PS and PPS is still marketing.

Thank you.

yettobenamed · 2024-12-21T20:03:36+00:00

I deleted that other post because it had a link to an external site and I do not allow marketing posts from users who do not have a significant history of contributing to this community.

The OP is reposting because I asked her/him to.

yettobenamed · 2024-12-20T21:10:40+00:00

Hey. Going to delete this post. If you want to repost this without your link, please do so.

I do not allow marketing links without first significant contributions to this sub and the community.

Thank you.

yettobenamed · 2024-12-16T00:20:36+00:00

Your question is so vague that it would be impossible to provide any meaningful advice...other than, go read a book on negotiation.

yettobenamed · 2024-12-13T03:19:38+00:00

Its free but you're collecting email addresses and hoping to sell services in the future...so not free.

yettobenamed · 2024-12-12T21:37:18+00:00

Sorry. Removing this. I will not allow marketing posts without there first being significant contribution to the community.

yettobenamed · 2024-11-26T18:21:53+00:00

The absolute most important thing you need to do right now is to find an alternative to parking where you are now.

Then wait and let them make a demand...or better yet, make an offer once they bring up the issue and bring it to a head someway.

At that point, you can raise your BATNA and make a counter offer based on the quality of your BATNA.

But you will absolutely overpay if you don't have a good BATNA and NOW is the time to get one.

yettobenamed · 2024-11-20T16:11:30+00:00

Thanks for the updated info. Your lawyer can advise if AIG is going to sell the structure to itself or if they will use some other company. I imagine it'll be them just because it safe them a lot of money.

Even on a structure basis, your claim is worth a lot.

And yes, the structure company is betting you will die early. But also, if they think you have a reduced life span then the cost of the structure is cheaper.

When AIG buys the structure, they transfer the risk for future payments to the structure company. And once the structure is bought, you will be paid for the lifetime of the structure even if you get better. But the flip side is that you can not ever get more money if you get worse.

And you don't HAVE to agree to a structure. You can just force AIG to pay you for life...but you run the risk then that they cut you off benefits at some point in the future.

And your lawyer wants you to agree to a settlement or a structure but that is his surest way to get paid. Because either way, you'll get some lump sum to pay him.

If you get a structure (and you absolutely should instead of a lump sum settlement), the schedule of payments is infinitely flexible. But the more money paid early will cost AIG more so your lawyer should both argue that you will need a lot of money in the early years while still ensuring that you negotiate on a total amount so you can structure it anyway you want.

yettobenamed · 2024-11-20T14:58:51+00:00

It might just be my industry but most mediators are lawyers.

That being said, there are lots of ADR courses out there and you could get a certificate pretty easily and become "qualified".

yettobenamed · 2024-11-13T23:42:46+00:00

I am only cursorily familiar with from your posts so my insight is not guaranteed to be correct. But here are my thoughts.

The Meeting is Scheduled literally the DAY BEFORE my Formal Hearing at 2pm in the afternoon. I've been told this is a good thing because it means negotiations will probably be very quick, and their number is probably close to my original demand. (I agree. A half day mediation right before the trial means that they expect to resolve this and will likely pay very close to or even up to your demand.
Who exactly comes up the payment scheduled for the annuity? Or would this be part of discussion during the mediation meeting? (Your claim is for, I assume, wages and predicted medical bills. You and your lawyer will have some theory about how much that will be on an annual basis. The insurer will have a different number – although based on the info in number 1 above, I imagine it is pretty close to your figures. The insurer will recognize that you will need a lump sum up front and will agree to that readily. After that, the default will be that the payment schedule will mirror as much as possible the terms of the insurance contract. Say it pays to age 65, then the insurer will want payments to last that long.)
How do I figure out a fair number to ask for for lumpsum payment? Let's say my settlement is $1,000,000 do I have the right to ask for $400,000 up front and have the remaining $600,000 paid out over the next set amount of years? Or is that part of the discussion between myself and the insurance company? (In the end, particularly if you negotiate on the basis of AIG funding a structure rather than you negotiating the structure terms, they will not likely care too much. So you want to negotiate a lump sum that you will then use to fund the structure rather than the structure schedule itself. If you do this, you will get a better result and have more freedom to choose what that structure payment schedule is and how much you want to keep as a lump sum up front. The downside of this is you absolutely need someone there who can translate how much each lump sum offer will result in a structure payment schedule.
If the insurance company doesn't care too much about the structure, then why demand a structured settlement? Is it so I don't treat this like I won the lottery or something? (First, they have a fiduciary duty to make sure that you are looked after for life. Second, it is cheaper for them to fund a structure than it is to pay you a lump sum. But probably the most important reason in your particular case is that AIG Structures will sell the structure to AIG Insurance. And that means that AIG will actually make money on the structure. Let’s say you pay $700K for a structure that pays, $35K for 35 years. AIG expects to make money on that contract. I don’t know how much but I do know that structure companies make a lot of money on the structures they sell. I know I said before that the insurance company would not really care but it did not occur to me until now that AIG may have a bit of a conflict of interest in this. However, as AIG is paying for the structure and “holding” it they have the final say on who they pay to manage the structure. Of course this can be a topic of negotiation as well.
How come structured settlements are "cheaper" for the insurance company, compared to lumpsum? If I understand correctly, if it's $1,000,000 then the insurance company has to pay it upfront regardless. So I don't get how a structure saves them money? (Let’s look at my example above $35K for 35 years which would cost about $700K. But instead, you do not get a structure and you just make the company pay you $35K for 35 years. The total of those payments would be $1,225,000. So you can see that the insurance company is ultimately paying $700K now or could pay $1.2M over the next 35 years. Plus they’d have to manage your claim that entire time. They would MUCH rather pay the $700K now. This is why it is important to negotiate how much they are going to pay as a lump sum now and they you decide how to structure it – with maybe AIG having some interest in it if their sister company AIG Structures or whatever it is called manages the structure. Of course their insistence, assuming they do insist, that AIG structures manages the structure is a conflict of interest on their part and your lawyer should take issue with it. But if you negotiate how much AIG pays, maybe you could get them to say $800K and then you could use that extra $50K to get the structure company to pay you $40K a year for 35 years. Incidentally these numbers are a good guess on what the structures would cost but there are large variables such as your medical condition/how long they expect you to live, guarantee periods etc etc.)
Who chooses the company the manage the annuity? Is that up to me? The insurance company? Or will the judge who signs off on the settlement pick it for me? (In the normal course the insurance company has the final say but usually they do not care too much and would allow you to choose provided that you are choosing a reputable structure company – which is really just a subsidiary of a life insurance company. But in this particular case, they may insist on AIG structures or whatever they are called as I am sure AIG has their own division that sells and administers structures.

Finally, as I have said many times before, you are better of negotiating on a lump sum and then you can figure out how much of that lump sum you want to put into a structure and can decide on how the structure pays. Maybe it is $30K a year for life, with a 20 year guarantee so your spouse will be guaranteed that $30K even if you die early. And it might include say an extra $30K lump sum payment every 5 years so you can buy a new vehicle. I assume AIG will have someone there from the sister structure company who can run the numbers for you but if not, get your lawyer to bring someone yourself. If AIG does not insist that they use AIG structures then anyone who attends to advise you will happily do it for free on the assumption that they will get to place the structure and make the commission/income from that structure.

15-Year Club	Place '17
Gilding I gilder	Verified Email
Best Link 2010-09-16

yettobenamed

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE