[sq_]

Real reason: "oh, look, we might be able to spend less for this person's work"

Tactic: "well, we'd be taking a risk by hiring you, what if you do something bad again? or if this turns in to a PR problem?"

[cheez]

That was almost verbatim lol

[freepor]

If they refused to hire you I’d be fine with it, but lowballing 10% means they’re not seriously concerned about the risk.

[cheez]

They didn't low ball 10%, it was more like 25%.

[freepor]

If you are an insurance company and you raise someone's rates 25% it's just business -- risk management in large pools. As a hiring decision, though, any percentage discount makes it clear that you're not seriously worried about the risk -- if you were, you just wouldn't hire the person. On the individual hiring decision the risk calculus doesn't work like that -- "they're a greater risk so they'll need to provide more of a profit compared to their salary."