8 ms·

> You will always need the job more than Comcast will need you Where is the evidence for this? This is by no means an obvious claim. No one in the world needs

by lend000 10y ago

> You will always need the job more than Comcast will need you Where is the evidence for this? This is by no means an obvious claim. No one in the world needs "the job," even though most people need "a job." Do companies exist that are more moral/popular/friendly than others? Of course. And some of them are successful in part because people want them to succeed due to their aforementioned characteristics. That is freedom. There is a market for moral hiring practices, just like every other kind of morality. > Comcast knows how much the pay every one of their employees, you the job seeker do not. Actually, this is completely false. You have a pretty good understanding of what they pay employees in similar positions (if you've ever heard of Glassdoor), whereas they have very little understanding what you were making in a past life, especially if you worked at lesser known companies. > Comcast is only asking so they can figure out the lowest pay you'll accept. You have no way to figure out how high they are willing to go, so you start out at a disadvantage. Of course, their goal is to get a deal, just like your goal is to get a big sale. Sounds like a free market at work. What's the problem? > Limiting a company's ability to ask intrusive questions in no way impinges on individual liberty, you are not a company, and a company is not a person. What if I am a consultant, sole proprietor, prime contractor, etc.? As I already mentioned, not all employers are corporations. It DOES infringe on freedom. And it's not like there is this nebulous, evil entity named Comcast that wants to ask the question -- it's the people in the business making business decisions, who decide to ask the question to better inform their offers (whether this is a poor decision is subjective, both morally and otherwise). > If you choose to not answer, they likely will not hire you Sounds speculative -- I need data for such a broad generalization. > if you lie and they find out, they will likely fire you. Sounds really speculative -- would you think it's common to go back in time and try to find old salaries? I appreciate that you're putting "likely," but I would like to see some evidence that it is indeed likely (defined as more than 50%). > If they lie the you about the pay range and you accept, you have no recourse but to quit if you catch them in that lie, which brings us back to point #1. I think it's pretty universal that you know your compensation in the contract before you accept the job -- it's just as much your fault if you take a job for the salary that they say you might see in a future promotion. As you can see, I'm extremely unconvinced by any of your arguments here. I'm open to seeing another side of this if you have more compelling arguments, but I hope you can see that the world has not fallen apart thus far without this regulation in place, and I don't think there is any benefit to outweigh the losses/loss of freedom. If you can somehow show that employers are infringing on peoples' freedoms by asking this question more than the freedoms of the employers would be impacted by not being allowed to ask certain questions, then that would be compelling. But I don't see it.

phkahler 10y ago
Most companies have multiple employees, where most employees only have one employer. You are 1/n to them and they are everything to you. The power differential is staggering particularly for a cable company.
- lend000 10y ago
  > You are 1/n to them and they are everything to you This is false! You are 1/n to them and they are 1/m to you. Where n=number of job seekers and m=number of employers. Both numbers are very high. EDIT: You can have many employers over your lifetime, and you are not bound to any one during your job search. m does not equal 1.
  - pmiller2 10y ago
    No, m=1, typically, because most people only have/can have one employer.
  - sidlls 10y ago
    Most of the time m is a number smaller than 10. For many small businesses n might be the same order of magnitude, but for often it is at least an order of magnitude greater. The ratios just aren't close in most cases.
FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
You have a very naive, non-nuanced, and absolutist view of the world. > Actually, this is completely false. You have a pretty good understanding of what they pay employees in similar positions (if you've ever heard of Glassdoor), Are you serious? Do you really think Glassdoor is a legitimate authority for salary at companies? They do zero verification and are mostly dependent on people's honesty. Personally, I've signed up for no less than 10 Glassdoor accounts with companies I've never worked for with salaries way above and below my pay grade. Contrast that with Comcast, who, by law, knows exactly how much each employee makes down to the penny. > Sounds really speculative -- you think it's common to go back in time and try to find old salaries? No, it's not speculative. If a company finds out that you misrepresented yourself, they will in all likelihood fire you. I've seen it happen a few times, they don't just pretend like you didn't lie. And your earlier posts left me a bit puzzled > you can choose not to work for employers that ask the question in the first place, especially if they coerce you into providing records This is not a meeting between just two private parties. It is the meeting of a large organization with vastly superior resources with (usually) a citizen. We, as people, are given certain rights enshrined in various legal documents. Corporations are fictitious entities created to limit risk and thus do not possess certain rights. > Where is the evidence for this? This is by no means an obvious claim. No one in the world needs "the job," even though most people need "a job." This is simple math. Generally, 100% of your income will come from Comcast if you work for them. Your impact on the financial fortune of a billion dollar company is negligible. > Are all employers corporations? And even as such, this is just outlawing information. I do not understand how so many on the left support such a measure. I don't mean to disparage you, but are you an adult? Information is the most vital and valuable resource in this, the Information Age. Visuals are information, yet I am not allowed to watch or record you having intercourse. Juries are not allowed access to media during a trial. Although I agree with their actions, Chelsea Manning and Snowden released outlawed information. In terms of hiring, there are a number of questions that are outlawed for good reason Here are a few: How old are you? Are you married? Are you pregnant? Are you a US Citizen? Do you have any disabilities? What religion do you practice? What is your race? > Why is free choice so difficult to understand? This is why I question your age/maturity. You do not possess absolute freedom. You can't do whatever you want, you live in a society with other people and we have rules. I don't agree with it, but you are not free to make crystal methamphetamine even if it is 100% for personal use. You are not free to walk around naked. The canonical example is you are not free to yell fire in a crowded building. I just don't understand how you've lived long enough to know the english language yet don't understand that there are limits on your behavior. 3 year olds know they don't have absolute freedom.

by lend000 10y ago

phkahler 10y ago

Most companies have multiple employees, where most employees only have one employer. You are 1/n to them and they are everything to you. The power differential is staggering particularly for a cable company.

lend000 10y ago
> You are 1/n to them and they are everything to you This is false! You are 1/n to them and they are 1/m to you. Where n=number of job seekers and m=number of employers. Both numbers are very high. EDIT: You can have many employers over your lifetime, and you are not bound to any one during your job search. m does not equal 1.
- pmiller2 10y ago
  No, m=1, typically, because most people only have/can have one employer.
- sidlls 10y ago
  Most of the time m is a number smaller than 10. For many small businesses n might be the same order of magnitude, but for often it is at least an order of magnitude greater. The ratios just aren't close in most cases.

FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago

You have a very naive, non-nuanced, and absolutist view of the world. > Actually, this is completely false. You have a pretty good understanding of what they pay employees in similar positions (if you've ever heard of Glassdoor), Are you serious? Do you really think Glassdoor is a legitimate authority for salary at companies? They do zero verification and are mostly dependent on people's honesty. Personally, I've signed up for no less than 10 Glassdoor accounts with companies I've never worked for with salaries way above and below my pay grade. Contrast that with Comcast, who, by law, knows exactly how much each employee makes down to the penny. > Sounds really speculative -- you think it's common to go back in time and try to find old salaries? No, it's not speculative. If a company finds out that you misrepresented yourself, they will in all likelihood fire you. I've seen it happen a few times, they don't just pretend like you didn't lie. And your earlier posts left me a bit puzzled > you can choose not to work for employers that ask the question in the first place, especially if they coerce you into providing records This is not a meeting between just two private parties. It is the meeting of a large organization with vastly superior resources with (usually) a citizen. We, as people, are given certain rights enshrined in various legal documents. Corporations are fictitious entities created to limit risk and thus do not possess certain rights. > Where is the evidence for this? This is by no means an obvious claim. No one in the world needs "the job," even though most people need "a job." This is simple math. Generally, 100% of your income will come from Comcast if you work for them. Your impact on the financial fortune of a billion dollar company is negligible. > Are all employers corporations? And even as such, this is just outlawing information. I do not understand how so many on the left support such a measure. I don't mean to disparage you, but are you an adult? Information is the most vital and valuable resource in this, the Information Age. Visuals are information, yet I am not allowed to watch or record you having intercourse. Juries are not allowed access to media during a trial. Although I agree with their actions, Chelsea Manning and Snowden released outlawed information. In terms of hiring, there are a number of questions that are outlawed for good reason Here are a few: How old are you? Are you married? Are you pregnant? Are you a US Citizen? Do you have any disabilities? What religion do you practice? What is your race? > Why is free choice so difficult to understand? This is why I question your age/maturity. You do not possess absolute freedom. You can't do whatever you want, you live in a society with other people and we have rules. I don't agree with it, but you are not free to make crystal methamphetamine even if it is 100% for personal use. You are not free to walk around naked. The canonical example is you are not free to yell fire in a crowded building. I just don't understand how you've lived long enough to know the english language yet don't understand that there are limits on your behavior. 3 year olds know they don't have absolute freedom.