Most hiring budgets are still built around a number that no longer tells the whole story: what a role is "supposed to" pay. That number matters less than it used to, because the real question a hiring plan needs answered isn’t what a role pays on a compensation band — it’s what it actually takes to move a specific, qualified person out of the job they’re already in.
We looked at our own placement history to answer it properly: 47 completed placements over the trailing three years, weighted across sectors. The finding: on average, 16% above a candidate’s current salary. That’s PHM’s own number, drawn from our own searches — and it holds up well against the broader market data available.
Independent labour-market research puts the general salary bump for changing jobs at 14.8%, against just 5.8% for staying in the same role, with common industry guidance to target a 10–20% increase when negotiating a move.1 PHM’s 16% blended figure sits inside that range, a touch above the general average — which tracks, since our placements are actively recruited passive candidates, not people who applied on their own.
Someone who wasn’t looking typically needs more inducement to leave than someone already job-hunting.
The premium by sector
That 16% is the blended number across every sector we work in. It moves considerably by sector, and with 47 placements behind it, this reads as a real, if modest-sized, sample — not a single anecdote, but not so large that any one sector’s figure should be read as gospel either.
The order isn’t PHM’s alone. It matches a well-documented current story: the AI-driven data centre build-out is straining exactly the labour pools behind our top two sectors. Reporting this year has tracked skilled trade wages up roughly 30% over four years on this demand, with job postings for specialized technical roles like industrial automation technicians and HVAC engineers up 50–100%+ year over year in some trackers, and electricians singled out as one of the tightest-supplied trades in the buildout.2,3 Our Energy & Power and Construction premiums are PHM’s own numbers — but they land exactly where that outside reporting says the pressure is.
Builders are commanding more than executives
The number that tends to surprise people isn’t a sector figure. It’s who’s commanding the premium. Right now, it costs more, on average, to move a skilled builder than a senior executive — this specific comparison is a PHM finding, not something we’re aware of being published elsewhere.
It runs against the usual assumption that premium scales with seniority — more responsibility, bigger title, bigger number. What we’re actually seeing is a scarcity story, not a seniority story, and the external data on trades demand supports why: there is a deeper, more liquid market of senior executive talent willing to consider a move than there is of the hands-on technical and execution talent — the people who actually build, commission, and deliver the work — whose wages are climbing sharply for the reasons documented above.
If your hiring plan still assumes the executive search is the expensive line item and the technical hires are the affordable ones, that assumption is worth revisiting.
Speed is the lever that actually moves the number
The one lever that reliably moves the number is speed — and this is where our data lines up with something we’ve said for a while, for reasons beyond cost: the slow hire becomes the bad hire. A candidate worth a 20%+ premium is, by definition, a candidate other companies want too.
Every week a search drags on is another week a competing offer has time to materialize — and once two or three employers are genuinely competing for the same person, the premium isn’t set by what it takes to move them once; it’s set by a bidding war.
Moving decisively removes that dynamic before it starts. In PHM’s data, a fast, exclusive, well-run search — one that reaches a strong candidate before they’re fielding three other conversations — can bring the total premium down by 10 to 15 percentage points versus a search that drags and lets competition build.
This is PHM’s own finding rather than a published statistic, though the underlying mechanic (competing offers driving up the final number) is standard, well-understood market behaviour. That’s not a small effect. On a senior technical hire, it can be the difference between a premium in the high teens and one that clears 30%.
What this means for a 2026 hiring plan
What this means for a 2026 hiring plan is straightforward, even if the number isn’t comfortable. Budget for the premium, not the band — particularly in Energy & Power, Construction, and Technology, where the gap between "what the role pays" and "what it actually takes to move someone" is largest, and where outside reporting confirms the pressure isn’t easing soon.
Expect technical and execution-level hires to carry real premiums of their own, not just the leadership seats. And treat speed as a cost-control lever, not just a convenience — every week a strong candidate sits in an open search is a week the price is still moving, usually up.
This is exactly the calculation PHM’s exclusive-contingency model is built to protect against: full bandwidth on a mandate from day one, a shortlist built from real market reach rather than who happened to apply, and a process built to close before the premium gets bid up by everyone else who wants the same person.
If you’re budgeting a 2026 search and want a straight read on what it will actually take to land the person you need, that’s a conversation worth having early — not after the number has already moved.
PHM Search is an executive and specialist recruitment firm for mid-market engineering, construction, and technology companies across Canada and the USA. If you’re planning a 2026 search and want a straight read on what it will actually take, start a conversation.
