Learn Hardcore Spanish (Spain): Habría aceptado ese trabajo si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor. - I would have accepted that job if the company had offered me a better salary.

This is the standard way in Spanish to express a past unreal / hypothetical condition (like English “third conditional”: I would have accepted… if the company had offered…).

Structure in Spanish:

Result clause: condicional compuesto (perfect conditional)
→ habría aceptado = I would have accepted
If-clause: pluscuamperfecto de subjuntivo (pluperfect subjunctive)
→ me hubiera ofrecido = had offered me

Typical pattern:

Si + pluscuamperfecto de subjuntivo, condicional compuesto
→ Si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor, habría aceptado ese trabajo.
(If the company had offered me a better salary, I would have accepted that job.)

Your sentence just puts the result clause first, which is also correct:

Habría aceptado ese trabajo si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor.

Could we say "Habría aceptado ese trabajo si la empresa me había ofrecido un sueldo mejor"?

No, not with the same meaning.

me había ofrecido is pluperfect indicative, not subjunctive.
In a counterfactual / unreal past condition introduced by si, standard Spanish requires the subjunctive: si + me hubiera ofrecido.

Using si me había ofrecido would sound wrong or at least very odd in most contexts if you want to say “if the company had offered me (but it didn’t)”. It could only work in some very specific storytelling contexts where the condition is real, not hypothetical, e.g.:

No sabía si aceptar el puesto. Si la empresa me había ofrecido un sueldo mejor que el anterior, lo aceptaría.
(Even here, many speakers would still prefer the subjunctive.)

For your sentence (a clearly unreal past condition), you should keep:

si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido…

Why is it "si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido" and not "si la empresa me habría ofrecido"?

Because in standard Spanish:

The if-clause (si) in an unreal conditional does not use the conditional tense.
It uses the subjunctive (here, the pluperfect subjunctive: hubiera ofrecido).

So:

❌ Si la empresa me habría ofrecido un sueldo mejor…
→ considered incorrect in standard written Spanish.
✅ Si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor…
→ correct.

Using habría in both clauses (e.g. Si me habría ofrecido…, habría aceptado…) is a common mistake influenced by English (if it would have offered…), but it is not accepted in formal Spanish.

What’s the difference between hubiera ofrecido and hubiese ofrecido? Can I say "hubiese ofrecido" here?

Yes, you can say me hubiese ofrecido here with exactly the same meaning:

me hubiera ofrecido
me hubiese ofrecido

Both are forms of the pluperfect subjunctive and are grammatically equivalent.

Nuances:

In modern Spanish, hubiera is more frequent overall.
hubiese sometimes sounds a bit more formal, literary, or old-fashioned to some speakers, but usage varies by region and by person.
In everyday speech in Spain, you’ll often hear hubiera.

So all of these are correct:

Habría aceptado ese trabajo si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor.
Habría aceptado ese trabajo si la empresa me hubiese ofrecido un sueldo mejor.

Could I also say "Si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor, habría aceptado ese trabajo"? Does the order matter?

Yes, that version is equally correct and very common:

Si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor, habría aceptado ese trabajo.

In Spanish:

You can put the if-clause first or second.
When the si-clause comes first, you normally add a comma after it.
When the si-clause comes second, you usually omit the comma.

So both are fine:

Habría aceptado ese trabajo si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor.
Si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor, habría aceptado ese trabajo.

Why is it "me hubiera ofrecido" and not "hubiera ofrecido me"?

Because object pronouns like me, te, le, nos, os, les, lo, la, los, las usually go before a conjugated verb in Spanish.

Here, hubiera ofrecido is a conjugated verb form, so:

✅ me hubiera ofrecido (correct word order)
❌ hubiera ofrecido me (incorrect)

General rule for these clitic pronouns:

Before a single conjugated verb:
→ me hubiera ofrecido
Attached to an infinitive or gerund:
→ haberme ofrecido, ofreciéndome

So you could also see:

Si la empresa *me hubiera querido ofrecer un sueldo mejor…*
Si la empresa *hubiera querido ofrecerme un sueldo mejor…
Both are correct; note where *me attaches.

What exactly does "me" express in "la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor"?

Here, me is an indirect object pronoun meaning “to me”.

The verb ofrecer is typically used like this:

ofrecer algo a alguien = to offer something to someone

So:

La empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor
= The company would have offered *me a better salary
= literally: The company had offered a better salary *to me.

The me answers the question “to whom?”:

¿A quién hubiera ofrecido la empresa un sueldo mejor?
→ A mí. → me

Why is it "ese trabajo" and not "este trabajo" or "aquel trabajo"?

All three are possible; they just show different degrees of distance, often psychological or contextual rather than physical:

este trabajo – this job (close to the speaker; often something very “present” in the conversation or situation)
ese trabajo – that job (medium distance; something we’re talking about but not “right here”)
aquel trabajo – that job (over there), usually more distant in time, space, or involvement; can sound more remote or “in the past”.

In many contexts, ese trabajo is the natural choice for “that job (we were talking about / I was offered)”.
For example:

A job offer you received before and are remembering now → ese trabajo is very typical.

You could switch to aquel if you want to emphasize distance in time (a job from long ago), or este if it’s a very immediate offer you’re currently considering.

Why is "empresa" feminine (la empresa)?

In Spanish, grammatical gender is mostly arbitrary and must be memorized with each noun.

empresa ends in -a, and like most -a nouns, it is feminine:
- la empresa = the company
- una empresa = a company
- esta empresa, esa empresa, aquella empresa
- mi empresa, tu empresa, etc.

It doesn’t mean the company is literally “female”; it’s a grammatical category. You just need to remember:

empresa → feminine → use la, una, etc.

Why is it "un sueldo mejor" and not "un mejor sueldo" or "un sueldo más bueno"?

All of these have different levels of naturalness:

un sueldo mejor
- This is the most natural and common way to say “a better salary”.
- Pattern: noun + mejor (adjective) → sueldo mejor.
un mejor sueldo
- Also correct and used.
- Slight nuance: putting mejor before the noun can make it a bit more emphatic or stylistic, but the meaning is the same.
un sueldo más bueno
- Grammatically possible, but in practice sounds wrong or at least very odd.
- mejor is the regular comparative of bueno, so Spanish strongly prefers mejor instead of más bueno in this type of comparison.

So for “a better salary”, stick with:

un sueldo mejor (most natural)
or un mejor sueldo (also fine).

Why do we use "sueldo" here? Could we also say "salario"?

Yes, you could say un salario mejor or un mejor salario; the sentence would still be correct and natural.

Nuances (which vary by region and context, and often overlap):

sueldo is very common in everyday speech in Spain for what an employee earns, especially monthly pay.
salario can sound slightly more formal or technical (used in contracts, legal language, economic discussions), but it’s also common.

In your sentence:

un sueldo mejor sounds very natural and colloquial-neutral in Spain.
un salario mejor is just as understandable and acceptable; choice depends on style or context.

What’s the difference between "habría aceptado" and "aceptaría"?

They are both forms of the conditional, but they refer to different time frames:

aceptaría = simple conditional
→ usually refers to a present or future hypothetical:
- Aceptaría ese trabajo si la empresa me ofreciera un sueldo mejor.
  I would accept that job if the company offered me a better salary.
habría aceptado = perfect conditional (condicional compuesto)
→ refers to a past hypothetical that did not happen:
- Habría aceptado ese trabajo si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor.
  I would have accepted that job if the company had offered me a better salary.

So:

Use aceptaría when the acceptance is hypothetical but still possible in the present or future.
Use habría aceptado when you are talking about a missed opportunity in the past.

Are there other, more colloquial ways in Spanish to express the same idea?

Yes, native speakers often express the same idea with different structures, especially in speech. For example (Spain):

Using llegar a + infinitive for a hypothetical past:
- Si la empresa llega a ofrecerme un sueldo mejor, acepto el trabajo.
  (Colloquial; literally “If the company happened to offer me a better salary, I accept the job.”)
Mixing conditionals in spoken language (less formal, sometimes non-standard in writing):
- Si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor, lo habría aceptado.
  (This one is standard.)
- Si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor, lo hubiera aceptado.
  (Very common in speech, though grammar books prefer conditional in the result clause.)

Your original sentence, however,

Habría aceptado ese trabajo si la empresa me hubiera ofrecido un sueldo mejor. is perfectly natural, clear, and correct in both spoken and written Spanish.