28 ms·

New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

718 points by mendelk 10y ago

mrcactu5 10y ago
umm... laws like this don't last very long. employers quickly develop work arounds. I will be interested to see what hiring managers try (or fail).
- thinkmilitant 10y ago
  This can't be true 100% of the time or the hiring/working condition would be roughly the same regardless of legal environment. This, at least to me, does not seem to be the case.
droopyEyelids 10y ago
This is a beautiful worker protection, and it makes me feel optimistic about our country's future.
- mrcactu5 10y ago
  keep telling yourself that... this law is bullshit
  - MichaelApproved 10y ago
    How so?
    - mrcactu5 10y ago
      you will see...
      - lovich 10y ago
        so no answer? If you have a reason I'd like to hear it. I cant think of a problem with this cause it makes the information disparity between employees and employers more equal, but Id like to hear any counterargument
        mrcactu5 10y ago
        i don't think the law will improve the information disparity. I think employers will quickly find ways around it as they always have and it will promptly be business as usual.
        droopyEyelids 10y ago
        I see perspectives like yours very frequently in many topics of discussion. The point I'd like you to consider: The ease with which something can be done can affect the probability and frequency of an action without affecting the possibility of the action.
paulcole 10y ago
Good. Not enough people realize the best way to answer this question is with a straight-up lie.
- tlrobinson 10y ago
  Could that be considered fraud?
  - paulcole 10y ago
    If lying during a job interview is fraud then lock me up.
  - maxxxxx 10y ago
    Employers lie about salaries all the time. I Know plenty of people who were told their salary was one of the highest of their coworkers where in reality they made less than most. Is that fraud?
  - wbl 10y ago
    No more than "my wife thinks we need to take the children out of school, so I'll need the money to make that possible" is.
  - sidlls 10y ago
    No more than: * We hire only the best * We value your career progress * We are transparent about the company's strategies and financials * We value taking the time to think through the design of features and products And so on. Most of which are, to be charitable, only very loosely applicable when they aren't outright lies.
    - antisthenes 10y ago
      * We think of you as family!
- Arizhel 10y ago
  Yep, take the true answer and inflate it 20% or more. Make them think they're getting a bargain.
xyzzy4 10y ago
This is bad for the free market and freedom of speech. I hope it gets challenged on First Amendment grounds.
- davexunit 10y ago
  The free market is trash. Employers must be regulated.
  - Double_a_92 10y ago
    Worker Unions should do that, not the state.
    - ydt 10y ago
      Why?
      - splawn 10y ago
        My guess is that political ideology demands it.
    - davexunit 10y ago
      Unions are part of the solution, but so is the state. Unfortunately, the state has been destroying union power for years with things like "right to work" laws. I happen to think that all workers should have protections, not just those in unions.
    - literallycancer 10y ago
      Just think of the state as a more inclusive union.
- maxxxxx 10y ago
  I see my past salaries as trade secret of my business. So it's good that I can protect this secret.
Ultramax 10y ago
Seems like an ethics test. Will you tell the truth about your previous low salary or lie to make sure you don't get lowballed? Then for the employer, will you decrease the salary to match previous low rates or wages? Or will you pay him/her the market rate regardless? Personally, I have always been asked how much I made at previous places. I prefer to give a range than specify individually.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  Some ethics test. The employer is already failing at ethics by asking this in the first place, so I have no problem lying to them. This is no different than them asking if you have kids, if you're married, etc.
- cjbprime 10y ago
  > I prefer to give a range than specify individually. FWIW, this is likely almost as bad for you in the negotiation as giving the number. You will simply always get offers towards the bottom of your range. It is better to refuse to answer, and just say you're looking for a market rate salary for this role.
  - eru 10y ago
    Giving the number doesn't have to be bad for you. (But it can be.) But yeah, never give any range. Not when talking about previous compensation, and not when talking about what you want. Just give them straight up numbers, if you give anything at all. And you should definitely give them a number about how much you want to be paid. You want to set the first reference point. And yes, that means you will have to do your own due diligence about how much the market can currently bear for your (interviewing) skills. But you need to know these numbers anyway.
- dpark 10y ago
  > I prefer to give a range I've never understood this tactic. Specifying a range seems like a good way to underprice yourself. If you give a range, the recruiter will simply assume that your current salary is very close to the bottom of the range. Now, if you mean that you give a range of previous salaries, the recruiter will know your best previous salary anyway. And they'll probably knock a fair bit off the top assuming you're padding.
thoreauway 10y ago
When does this take effect?
ballenf 10y ago
Would have rather seen a bill also legitimize complete and total lying in response to the question. Answers or claims regarding past salary may not be verified or used as the basis of any employment action.
- comicjk 10y ago
  A bill to legitimize lying would help people who know about it. But the people who most need the help are those who have never heard about this controversy or don't think they have the power in the negotiation to consider lying. The way NYC did it, the law protects the most vulnerable.
  - ballenf 10y ago
    True. I edited my response to say "also" thinking about your point. I like my proposal less and less, honestly. I'm personally not a very good liar, so it wouldn't help much. Also, there's just something that feels wrong about normalizing lying instead of fixing the root problem.
jimparkins 10y ago
Have a google for: "can i lie to a employer about past salary" - it really really messes with people - people feel super uncertain about how to approach this situation. Throwing any confidence they have during the negotiation out the window. Even now I hesitate to write this as a million people will come out and say never lie - what if they found out. More than banning. There needs to be acceptance that if someone asks you. You are totally free to make any damn number up that you like. Seriously. Its a sales situation. It should not be like your under oath on the stand. Which is how most people view it.
- tarr11 10y ago
  That's not how (good) sales works.
  - aswanson 10y ago
    Tell us how good sales works.
    - tarr11 10y ago
      Sales people doing relationship/long-term sales can build trust with customers. If you are purely transactional about it (and willing to say anything to get maximum salary) then it may work, but it also may backfire. If your hiring manager is the one you are lying to, they will also be responsible for your raises, promotions and bonuses. It's a long term relationship, one which can last beyond the current company you are at. It's a small world in technology, and beyond hard skills, your reputation is all you've really got.
      - aswanson 10y ago
        Thanks for the quality response.
  - devmunchies 10y ago
    haha. yeah ok. My company has sales guys closing 6 to 8 figure deals every quarter and they "stretch the truth" all the time. Its part of sales. Thats why I only did sales for 2 years... the pay is the best but its an emotional roller coaster.
gdulli 10y ago
I'll have to find some way to bring it up myself. A higher than usual salary history is a good tangible signal to future employers and I'm not going to give it up.
- mbillie1 10y ago
  Way to see the bigger picture for employee rights here.
  - gdulli 10y ago
    I didn't say I'd fight against the existence of the law. I said people who are hurt by the law should retain the same negotiating power they had before rather than lose their right.
    - ballenf 10y ago
      You won't lose any negotiating power. Just because they can't ask doesn't mean you can't counter an offer and ask for a higher salary. If they want you and think you're worth it, you'll get it. Just don't see them not being able to ask really shifting the negotiating power much if any for you.
      - gdulli 10y ago
        Likewise, just because an employer offers a lower salary than you want based on your salary history doesn't mean you can't counter with the salary you want. If they want you and think you're worth it, you'll get it. The benefit of telling a prospective employer that a previous employer decided you were worth an above-average salary vs. simply requesting an above-average salary without context is obvious.
- nommm-nommm 10y ago
  Nothing wrong with saying just that.
southphillyman 10y ago
They are trying to pass this in Philadelphia in May. Comcast and the local Chamber of Commerce are suing to stop it citing that it's a Freedom of Speech violation. Besides being able to freely low ball candidates who started behind the 8 ball (women/minorities/people who didn't go to elite schools), is there a real argument for companies HAVING to know your previous salary?
- snarf21 10y ago
  This is a very contentious subject. There has to be a negotiation at some point and employees have to share what they are willing to accept and the employer has to share what they are willing to pay. There is some validity to the idea that an employee is worth whatever they can get an employer to pay them, so their previous salary is an indication or ballpark of what that amount might be. I think a less infringing question is for the employer to ask for the salary the employee is expecting. Then there is no lying and the employee can try for a 20% jump or more and see what happens. They can also just ask for the employer's offer but in practice the employer is going to go up slowly and find the lowest salary they would take anyway.
- specialp 10y ago
  There really isn't. In a negotiation knowing the price paid for a product previously, or in this case a person, is a distinct advantage to the person paying. And will do nothing else but perpetuate low pay for underpaid people. Think of the scenarios: 1. I made X at my last job where X is far less than what you are paying your current employees. Well as a business owner and negotiator if I offer them X + a small bump I can probably get away with paying less. 2. I made X at my last job where X is far more than you are paying your current employees. You either are going to stretch the budget, or negotiate. So it is always a negotiation unless the person says they made less. A true negotiation is "How much are you asking for?" A person selling products isn't going to tell someone what they are selling their products for to a competitor. They are both going to negotiate a price or decide not to do business.
- metaphorm 10y ago
  > Comcast and the local Chamber of Commerce are suing to stop it citing that it's a Freedom of Speech violation. that's gonna be a hard case to make. freedom of speech is typically your right to say something that you want to say which is not at all the same as compelling someone else to say something they would rather not.
pmoriarty 10y ago
I never answer questions about my past or expected salary, not to employers and not to recruiters. Most employers don't ask, and the few that have (perhaps by having a part of an employment form ask for previous salary) have never made my leaving that information out an issue. Most recruiters, if they even ask, respect my decision not to talk about it, but I've been pressed hard on this by a handful of recruiters, and have had this be a deal breaker for a couple of them. One recruiting firm admitted that they were paid by the employers to get this information. I wasn't getting paid to give this information out, however, and it's worth more to me to keep it private as I'm placed at a disadvantage in negotiations if I name a number first. It's still a seller's market for IT talent, and there are plenty of other fish in the sea, so if some recruiters can't accept that I won't name a number, it's their loss. It's great that NYC is taking the lead on this, and I really hope the rest of the US follows suit.
- louisswiss 10y ago
  Agree with you in principle (your previous deal with company A is absolutely none of company B's business) but I would like to challenge you on one point: > I'm placed at a disadvantage in negotiations if I name a number first. ... This is unlikely to be true. Generally, in price negotiations it is advantageous to name a number first. This is known as anchoring and basically the theory is that the end result is better for you if the company has to wheedle you down from 170k than if they anchor the price at 100k and you have to argue them up from there. Plus, it saves a lot of wasted negotiation time on both sides if your price is just way too high for the company and this is clear from the beginning. (edit: I'm talking about expected salary in general, not disclosing your current salary level)
  - vidarh 10y ago
    Note that this assumes your information about your market value is at least roughly in line with their information about your market value. If there's a big discrepancy in what you believe you're worth, then the benefit can easily flip the other way.
  - alistairSH 10y ago
ajeet_dhaliwal 10y ago
Well done New York City! London needs this desperately, most recruiters here won't let you proceed without it, unless you apply directly.
inputjoker 10y ago
It should also ban potential employee disclosing the pay of previous employment. Otherwise it would become a norm soon that the companies specifically won't ask about it, but will hire only the candidates who disclose it by themselves, which makes the candidate to disclose the previous income by themselves for having a better shot at getting hired.
aphextron 10y ago
I never understood this one. I have always told recruiters straight up that I'm not going to disclose that information. Nobody involved with making the hiring decision is going to be asking you how much you made at your last job.
mbroshi 10y ago
The analogy is not perfect, but all the time people like to know how much a house or car sold for in the past, or how much a stock traded for the in past, etc. Seems like useful data. Now, I'm not advocating for or against this particular question, but I sure do hope there is data collected and studied on the effect this has in NY before anyone jumps to conclusions. I feel it's too easy to have a knee-jerk reaction on this one. There is no way to know whether this helps/hurts/is neutral for any particular class of people without studying its effects.
- CJefferson 10y ago
  The problem is the one way communication. I would personally have no problem giving out my past salary, in return for the current salaries if all comparable current employees at the company.
  - mbroshi 10y ago
    You can refuse to answer their question. You can also ask them how much others are making at your position (and they can refuse to answer that, too). I don't see where the asymmetry is.
    - ryandrake 10y ago
      It's often more a power asymmetry. You need the job, they have a line of candidates out the door.
  - burkaman 10y ago
    It doesn't go that far, but this bill does specify that asking about salary history is allowed if at the same time you communicate a proposed salary range.
- z0r 10y ago
  The analogy is completely broken. People aren't houses, cars, or stock certificates. The information that is pertinent might be references from former coworkers - can they do the job you are hiring them for? Asking for the previous value of the person as if they were any other commodity is nonsensical. There's not an inherent price to the person, and a higher or lower salary says more about where they have worked (which you can see on the resume or ask about) than how well they have worked (very generally).
loufe 10y ago
"Closing the gender pay gay is important" Come on NYT....
- lr4444lr 10y ago
  Freudian slip, perhaps? https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/01/gay-couples-more-educated-higher-income-than-heterosexual-couples https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/01/gay-couples-...
ransom1538 10y ago
So people on HN are pro employers posting their employee salaries publicly but against previous companies asking what their salaries are. WTF. I must be missing something here. I personally believe your salary is your business. Period. Getting salary information bad, forcing employees to divulge salaries from a position of power is disgusting. Here is me being publicly quartered on HN for pushing back on forcing employees publicly posting salaries: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12805814 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12805814
- jerf 10y ago
  "So [some] people on HN are pro employers posting their employee salaries publicly but [some people on HN are] against previous companies asking what their salaries are. WTF. I must be missing something here." I added some words to your quote in the square brackets that should resolve the confusion for you.
- jakob223 10y ago
  I'm confused by why these things are so connected for you; I think it benefits potential employees to both not have to talk about past salaries and to be able to know what other employees are being paid.
- kesselvon 10y ago
  Companies asking for your previous salary means theyre going to try to pay you with your past salary being a benchmark to work with, not necessarily what the position is worth. Companies posting employee salaries publicly aims for employees at said company to be paid at the same level (with similar experience). There's a subtle difference. Every time I've been asked about salary its been an obvious ploy to lowball my salary due to previous experience of working in a lower cost area. Employees literally have zero incentive not to lie, since employers can't verify
  - Bartweiss 10y ago
    It's also worth recognizing that things are very different if this becomes universal. If one company asks for your salary at another, they get a chance to underpay. But if every company publishes salaries, they don't get to low-ball no matter what you were getting before.
paul7986 10y ago
Totally avoid this question Being asked by setting the salary you seek in stone before going to the interview. Especially if your working with a recruiter! If they suddenly ask this question then they are trying to renege on their promise and for me it's time to go.
Taylor_OD 10y ago
I'm not sure how effective this will be. When I was recruiting It got to the point where I would never ask salary's I would just say, "I'm assume your currently making between XXk and XXk?" and 9 times out of 10 I was in the right range. 1 time out of 10 they would say no and correct me. I just took a educated guess based on knowing the market. Any good recruiter should be able to do the same.
- burkaman 10y ago
  The bill also makes it illegal to "rely on the salary history of an applicant in determining the salary, benefits or other compensation for such applicant during the hiring process, including the negotiation of a contract" even if you find out without asking.
kelukelugames 10y ago
I dislike employers who take advantage of employees. I dislike New York City's solution too. There are other ways to empower employees and not asking about past salaries won't eliminate the pay gap. But I'm not an expert so maybe this is a step in the right direction and can result in lasting changes.
arunitc 10y ago
Here in India, you are not only asked your previous salary, you have to provide your last (sometimes three) payslip while joining. Some companies have a policy of NOT giving more than a 30% hike from your previous salary - you need top management approval for such a hike.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- anupshinde 10y ago
  At the time of joining - is usually for background verification. Most companies don't even care what your last pay was. Even if you are paid higher, they are going to play in their range. However, during negotiation, if you lied about your previous pay just to get a better hike - you would get flagged, may get fired and get yourself listed into an unofficial blacklist. Its more of an ethics issue than just a pay mismatch. > Some companies have a policy of NOT giving more than a 30% hike from your previous salary These companies are telling you "loud and clear" - "we don't care about talent". There are other companies that would pay "fairly" as per their bands - even if that means a 100-200% hike
  - thammudu 10y ago
    I have been through job searching recently in India and I have applied for 10s of companies most of them are statups. > At the time of joining - is usually for background verification. Not just during joining, many companies asked my previous salary and expected salary during the first talk. Some companies did not even contact back when I refused to disclose my previous salary. Salary discrimination is everywhere in startups, not just by gender also by number of years of experience, University, Degree, previous company... My opinion is "every employee doing the same job should be paid the same."
lr4444lr 10y ago
A lot of the analogies and reasoning I'm reading here is faulty. Nothing stops HR depts. from sharing information which to a first degree of approximation would give them an idea of the market rate for the positions they're filling. Companies are already free to rescind offers if they find out that you've lied about aspects of your past work history. It's part of what at-will employment is. This is about interfering with the negotiation of the individual job seeker. If I can't ask for your salary history, then I might miss out on the competitive advantage you as a candidate have in that you're willing to work for less over potentially more qualified people as you build your skill-set and expertise. The right way to help those who are taken advantage of is education about how to bargain and what information they need and need not share, not legislation.
infodroid 10y ago
As far as I know, there's nothing to stop employers from exchanging salary information directly with previous employers under quid-pro-quo agreements. And there's nothing to stop employers from buying/renting this information from third parties, such as recruitment agencies or brokers in personal data. All of these are arguably more reliable sources of salary information than asking the candidate directly.
rodionos 10y ago
What effect is this going to have if the state agency wages are already online: https://catalog.data.gov/dataset?tags=salary https://catalog.data.gov/dataset?tags=salary
awinter-py 10y ago
we should make it illegal to ask about college degree. That would erode the signaling value of a degree and bring down the price / paper value of a diploma.
ElijahLynn 10y ago
That is fantastic news! I recently interviewed with a prominent Drupal company, Forum One, and was shocked that they not only asked for my previous salary, but previous 3 salaries and also wanted me to verify them with pay stubs! I told them no and the interview stalled after that. That was a sad day, I really wanted to work with them but what they asked for was unacceptable. They were not in New York but I welcome this law everywhere.
- pixl97 10y ago
  >I told them no and the interview stalled after that. That was a sad day, I really wanted to work with them You assumed you wanted to work with them based on a false idea of what that company was. It sounds like you lucked out.
dudul 10y ago
I interviewed at a big phone/ISP company a few months ago in MA. They would not make me an offer unless I shared my past W2 with them for them to make sure my past salary was what I claimed it was. Needless to say, I laughed at them and walked away.
jondubois 10y ago
I think this law is silly. If you don't like this question, then you can either choose not to answer it or use it to your advantage by 'rounding up' your numbers - This should actually help you with your negotiations as an employee. In the unlikely event that they ask for proof, you can always tell them that your personal finances are a private matter between you and your accountant.
- s73ver 10y ago
  Not really. Someone who is not in a strong bargaining position is not going to be able to push back and say no. The company will say, "Answer or we don't hire you." And while you might say "You don't want to work there anyway," I know I like being able to buy food and pay rent much more than I like not being hired. By banning the question outright, they make sure that your ability to not answer the question is not related to the strength of your bargaining position.
retube 10y ago
This will be tricky for banks and hedge funds etc. These firms typically, in London at any rate: - never quote a salary (or even a range) for a job opening - following many interviews any offer is always based on prior "comp", of which you will have to provide 3 years of info (base, bonus, deferred awards, retention awards, benefits etc) plus, of course, documentary evidence to support. HR departments start squealing if uptick is a greater than 20% increase, although some people do manage higher (anything over 30% is almost unheard of, except for a handful of big producers) - they go through your background with a fine toothcomb and check EVERYTHING you supplied on your CV and in the screening questionaires you have to complete. They employ specialist third party agencies to do the research on you. If you do not comply with this you simply won't get hired. It is universal and practiced everywhere in finance, I've never heard of anyone not being subjected to this.
- TheCoelacanth 10y ago
  Not sure how it's tricky for them. They just have to stop doing it or never hire anyone.
somethingwitty1 10y ago
I'm a bit skeptical that this will have a real impact. It may stop employers from asking, but it does not stop them from low-balling someone based on race/gender, etc. HR departments calculate this in to their offers already. Don't get me wrong, I think this will help some folks and is a great step forward. People who know their value and what the employer pays will surely benefit (or great negotiators). But for the people this is touted to help, they can still very easily be kept in the lower-end of the pay scale. It seems to me that the only way to close the pay gap is to have employers release what they pay. That in itself is a tough thing to write legislation for. In my mind, it would need to take into account experience, actual role/leveling, etc. A lot of it is subjective and easy to manipulate to help the employer. And of course, if we just release a straight list of all employees' salaries (with the details needed to calculate where you fall), you may run into privacy concerns.
lend000 10y ago
There's a case to be made for an employee protection preventing an employer from firing an employee for refusing to produce pay stubs from a past employer. However, I've said it before -- preventing a question from being asked is state overreach and constitutes a violation of the first amendment, in my opinion.
- teej 10y ago
  There are already loads of questions that employers aren't allowed to ask. Are you married? Are you pregnant? How many kids do you have? Is your significant other black? When was the last time you went to church? So, you're about 50, is that right?
  - TulliusCicero 10y ago
    Technically they can ask those things, they're just not allowed to discriminate based on the answers, so asking them is a bad idea.
  - pc86 10y ago
    A) They can legally ask all of these. B) All of these are in reference to one or more protected classes, which is why it's not legal to discriminate based on one's answer(s) or refusal to answer. C) Last I checked, "previously made {less,more} than a certain salary" is not a protected class.
    - marcosdumay 10y ago
      About (C), it has just become one.
- fuzzybeard 10y ago
  While it's a smart move not to disclose your prior salary during negotiations, I really don't want there to be legal implications for the back and forth during this process. It's great in theory, but micromanaging businesses like this is over reach, though typical for NYC.
showmethemoney 10y ago
Once upon a time I interviewed for a role in NYC. An employee that I spoke to said they paid pretty well, and I could expect about 120. The HR person wanted my previous salary, and I refused. Eventually they said their range was 130-150. I said it wasn't gonna work cause I was looking for something more like 220. They said okay we can do that no problem. My previous salary was 110.
- catshirt 10y ago
  care to share your position and some discreet information about the company (size, industry?)
  - dingdongding 10y ago
    This account was created an hour ago. I doubt he is telling the truth
    - run4yourlives2 10y ago
      I don't connect the two really. The account is clearly a throwaway, but that doesn't really bare on whether the story is accurate or not. It very well might be.
    - catshirt 10y ago
      i'm not saying it has to be true, but there is more incentive to create a fresh account to post that information than there is incentive to lie about it.
    - benji-york 10y ago
      I think the age of the account increases the likelihood of the story being true: the person was so compelled to tell their story that they created an anonymous account just to do so.
      - komali2 10y ago
        Probably the information should be used as an allegorical example, rather than a "huh I can make 220 in NY" example. It is very easy to lie on the internet. I try to hedge my bets on this website by essentially doxxing myself on my profile, but not everyone is willing to do that (nor should they necessarily be expected to).
rodionos 10y ago
Don't have to ask. The data is open: https://gist.github.com/rodionos/b77080e028e3b680b2c1b5091ba61911 https://gist.github.com/rodionos/b77080e028e3b680b2c1b5091ba... Source: https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/civil-list-2014 https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/civil-list-2014 > The Civil List reports the agency code (DPT), first initial and last name (NAME), agency name (ADDRESS), title code (TTL #), pay class (PC), and salary (SAL-RATE) of individuals who were employed by the City of New York at any given time during the indicated year.
- hn_throwaway_99 10y ago
  The vast majority of employees in NYC do not work for the city.
- cortesoft 10y ago
  That is only for employees of the city. This law is for all COMPANIES operating in the city.
- burkaman 10y ago
  This bill applies to private companies too. In cases where a company discovers your past salary without asking, the bill makes it illegal to rely on that to determine an offer.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - mdb333 10y ago
    good to know, I was wondering if this would include information from previous employers on background checks... which it sounds like it does.
losteverything 10y ago
For me it's not the salary (been out of tech and would not expect much nego. power), but how do I quantitfy primo health insurance, 31+ days off a year, 5 months sick leave and a 1/2 mile commute. I really don't know how to assign a number to all that.
rdiddly 10y ago
Wow, this is yuge. Sure I can refuse to answer the question, but nothing beats a law that makes the question futile and unlikely to be asked in the first place. Granted employers will just scrounge around on the internet for your salary info instead, which is slightly creepier, but at least they have to work for it. Can't wait for other states to follow suit.
aglavine 10y ago
I advocate for all salary data being public. To get a better salary and better work conditions cannot depend of hiding a figure. It is a weak position, to say the least.
pm24601 10y ago
> Underlying the bill is the notion that employers “anchor” the salaries they offer to potential employees based on their current or previous salary — if an employee had faced pay discrimination at a previous job, in other words, the employer’s subsequent lower than market value offer would effectively perpetuate the discrimination. > “Being underpaid once should not condemn one to a lifetime of inequity,” said New York City Public Advocate Letitia James ... Or if a person does not know how to negotiate.
garethsprice 10y ago
Lots of people here talking from their own experience as highly skilled, in-demand professionals. However, helping friends apply to jobs in other industries - specifically medical - I saw that most of the applications involved filling out an automated form that required prior salary information to complete. There's no advantage to an employee from being forced to disclose this information and it perpetuates compensation discrepancies by gender/race/guts to ask. Very glad to see this made illegal. Now, if they were really serious about fixing pay discrepancies, they'd make it mandatory to post salary ranges with job listings.
tinythrowaway 10y ago
throwaway for obv reasons. This is fantastic news. But for those of you wondering what to do if you are asked this - it's pretty simple: you lie. This is a negotiation. If you ask a car salesman how much the dealership paid for a car, you think they're going to tell you the truth? "What if they find out?" They won't. How could they? There ARE laws, very clear and absolute ones, about what a past employer can share about you. Your salary history is most certainly protected by them. "What if they ask for a paystub?" Ask yourself if you know what you're getting into here. This is not a company that is going to treat its employees well.
dkrich 10y ago
This is the #1 rule I always tell people who are interviewing for a new job. Never tell a potential employer your past job salary, especially so if you are unhappy with that salary. When my girlfriend was interviewing for a new job two years ago we talked about this because the recruiter was very demanding about knowing what her current salary was and I told her to stay firm on it because the salary in her current job was, frankly, shit. In the end she got a 50% pay increase over her previous job and then six months later got promoted with a pay increase that effectively doubled her salary from her previous job. Which brings me to another point- a lot of people will justify disclosing the amount by reasoning that they can always ask for a raise after they get hired and the important thing is to get a foot in the door. The problem is that anchoring is a very real thing. If you start at $50k instead of a $75k, every raise you get at that company for the rest of your career will be based off that first salary. If you stay at a company for 10-15 years, that is an enormous difference that could be well into the six figures. Bottom line, don't disclose salary history to employers. You'll seldom find an employer who will tell you what your colleagues in the same job make. Why do you want to show your hand? As for this law, I'm actually mildly opposed to it. I don't think that the government should have a hand in determining salary beyond minimum wage, because that is an agreement made between two consenting parties in private industry. If you are a more experienced negotiator and are willing to ask for more money than your counterparts, why shouldn't you be at an advantage? There's no law that says you have to disclose it and the rest is up to you.
- s73ver 10y ago
  Why should you be at an advantage? Why should the negotiations have anything to do with your current salary?
  - downrightmike 10y ago
    They need to be at the advantage, their life and time is being bought. And because if the pay is shit, they'll only end up doing shitty work. Possibly leaving much not finished the next chance they get somewhere that is willing to compensate appropriately.
riskable 10y ago
Whenever I'm asked for my current or former salary I tell the recruiter/HR person to first tell me the salary of all the peers I'll be working with. If it's a contracting company I also ask how much they'll be paid for my position. If they don't provide those money details why should I?
riskable 10y ago
Whenever I'm asked for my current or former salary I tell the recruiter/HR person to first tell me the salary of all the peers I'll be working with. If it's a contracting company I also ask how much they'll be paid for my position. If they don't provide those money details why should I?
dingdongding 10y ago
So I should not be divulging my current salary to recruiters? Interesting.
nfriedly 10y ago
When IBM hired me, the only question I was asked about salary was "how much would you like?" I picked a number and he said "I think I can do that, let me check" followed the next day by "yes". Maybe I left money on the table, but I'm happy, and I've gotten good raises since.
- adrr 10y ago
  More than likely you left money on table. I found asking people what salary they would like, they always low balled themselves with a 10% increase of current salary. Minimum i give is 15% because that is average for people changing jobs. Devops engineer i just hired was well under priced for the market so i gave him 45% raise. He didn't even ask for increase in pay. Not every company/hiring manger is trying to rip off their employees. Paying people industry/local a bit above averages for the job duties makes for happier employees that are less likely to leave or have moral issues.
bingomad123 10y ago
Personally I have found disclosing salary to be far more beneficial in negotiations. I guess who wish to disclose their salary still can right ? Or has the law banned employees from disclosing it ?
user5994461 10y ago
"It will take $xxx k base salary to leave my current company" -- The ultimate answer to life and the universe and everything.
taternuts 10y ago
Personally I think it's good when they ask. I no longer answer that question with the truth, but as if they asked "what do you think you're actually worth?" - and you can find out pretty quick by their response/reaction whether or not they are going to try and lowball you.
Overtonwindow 10y ago
I once worked for a large trade association in Georgia. The Director had a general policy that anyone who refused to provide expected salary was not even considered, at all, no exceptions.
- city41 10y ago
  Did you find other things that Director did made the company less effective or unpleasant to work at? In other words, if that's the company's policy, is it possibly a sign the company is not the best place to go?
mdb333 10y ago
It will be interesting to see how this affects the hiring markets. Out in SF/etc it came up in just about every discussion I had last time I was looking for work usually as part of the first phase. No point interviewing candidates that wouldn't accept the job. It's pretty much a risk mgmt exercise from the hiring side. Similarly, I always asked what the compensation range they're targeting is as I don't want to waste my time either. I wonder if this ban addresses background checks covering the same information, because some companies do ask for this data from previous employers although not all provide it. Without protection there this ban seems fairly limited. Anyhow, I don't agree with all advice to never disclose current/previous salary. In some scenarios certainly it makes sense, but in others it is the opposite. You want to justify a higher market value and set the expectation that you're unlikely to be interested unless they're willing to compensate at $X or higher. Of course it's different in terms of leverage if you're employed currently or not. Recruiters and interviewers will waste tons of your time if you don't get on the same page quickly. Lack of transparency around your compensation expectations will exacerbate this issue. Whether that means you tell them what you're making or what you'd like to make doesn't really matter, but you better do at least one of the two.
- komali2 10y ago
  In my experience (external contract recruitment) the background check usually happens after an offer has been negotiated and accepted. I've also never seen a background check request for actual salary information. I'm not even sure how that would work... we would just send the candidates' information to this company that churns through court docs to see if they have a criminal history, send them to Quest to get drug tested, donesies bananas. Maybe in the employment verification stage? Even then though, I highly doubt a previous employer would offer that information up - oftentimes they weren't even allowed to comment on the quality of the candidates' work. Nightmare for reference checks to the big EPCs and operators like BP or Jacobs.
  - vonmoltke 10y ago
    I was asked in my last background check, and the proof (of that and employment) was my tax forms.
gesman 10y ago
Instead of salary it may worth disclosing ballpark of total compensation including shares/options vesting, bonuses, etc, without breaking it down. After all "desired salary" question is answered sooner or later but in reality - the total compensation is more important.
csneeky 10y ago
I know one employer this will impact: Goldman Sachs. Not only do they demand you tell them what your current salary is during the interview process, they force you during a rigorous background check before your first day to prove it.
crazy1van 10y ago
Laws like this one that restrict businesses from asking questions that individuals could ask strikes me as very strange. I could ask my buddy how much he made at his last job. I couldn't ask my buddy how much he made at his last job if I'm considering hiring him to work at my company. Why is this information legal to acquire when I'm wearing my business hat vs when I'm wearing my friend hat?
- dikdik 10y ago
  Do you plan to have children in the near future? Are you currently pregnant? Do you prefer men or women as romantic/sexual partners? How old are you? What religion were you raised with? Do you currently attend a church? >Why is this information legal to acquire when I'm wearing my business hat vs when I'm wearing my friend hat? You tell me....
- s73ver 10y ago
  It's like context is an actual thing.
pbasista 10y ago
My past salary is an irrelevant information for my potential future employer. If they ask about it, my response would be: "Why would you like to know it?" Any answer to this question is bad. If they do not bail out and stop asking at this point, then I bail out. The point is that if I want, I can completely change my way of life by switching to a job which pays 50 % of my current salary. Or 400 % of my current salary. It does not matter. What matters is that it is solely my decision and none of my potential future employer's business. If they want to know my current salary, it is a red flag. I do not care about them knowing it, but there is a high risk that they will use that information to try to make an offer which they think that I ought to consider good. They can offer e.g. my current salary + their negotiating margin and think "hey, we have offered you more than you have now, so you ought to be happy". While in reality, the only person who can responsibly decide whether I am happy about it or not is me. Note that I am not criticizing companies which want to hire for cheap. This is all right. But they need to do it transparently, from the beginning. They should say it clearly and upfront: for this position, our budget is somewhere in this range ... are you interested or not? This is a fair way to go.
- socalnate1 10y ago
  "But they need to do it transparently, from the beginning. They should say it clearly and upfront: for this position, our budget is somewhere in this range" This goes both ways I think: For this position, I am looking for something in this range, are you interested or not?
  - downrightmike 10y ago
    I'll have to look it up, but there are few large groups that basically track and record a number of industries including tech. I'll have to look it up Monday. They use this info to help companies to pay in a range of +- 20% for any position. At least that's what I've learned from the management training part of this gig.
highdesertmuse 10y ago
Mandating that employers are forbidden to ask about previous salary seems like a pathway to more government intrusion into a complex process. Part of job seeking involves learning how to negotiate with a potential employer. I've side-stepped many an inappropriate or premature question about salary with "Are you making an offer," followed by agreement to disclose the "details" if and when such offer is forthcoming at which point I know far more about what the position involves, am in a much better negotiating position and can explain, if necessary, why the pay scale was lower. If that doesnt satisfy a recruiter or potential employer, I tend to think they're not very serious about me as a candidate and I havent disclosed personal information that might limit my future job search.
- s73ver 10y ago
  No. Why should the negotiation have anything to do with the prospective employee's current salary? Not to mention, you're saying that prospective employees shouldn't answer the question anyway. However, that only protects those who feel they're in a strong bargaining position. It does absolutely nothing to help those who aren't, and those are generally the ones that need the most help.
highdesertmuse 10y ago
Mandating that employers are forbidden to ask about previous salary seems like a pathway to more government intrusion into a complex process. Part of job seeking involves learning how to negotiate with a potential employer. I've side-stepped many an inappropriate or premature question about salary with "Are you making an offer," followed by agreement to disclose the "details" if and when such offer is forthcoming at which point I know far more about what the position involves, and am in a much better negotiating position.
pklausler 10y ago
It's a sellers' market. If you're looking, just state your requirements and negotiate from there (or not). If you're not looking, then your current compensation is your current job's best offer, and you might as well share that information in case somebody wants to beat it.
georgeecollins 10y ago
I have gotten out of discussing past salary by saying that I believe salary history perpetuates wage discrimination. I am a white man, so I think this only makes me seem idealistic rather than disgruntled. But I do honestly believe this to be true. Smart people who negotiate your salary do not want to get anywhere near a conversation that has the phrase "wage discrimination" in it for any reason, even hypothetical. They do not want to argue about what is or isn't wage discrimination, even if they disagree. So it can end the discussion with both parties feeling they are being high minded by avoiding the topic.
donovanm 10y ago
In the interviews I've had so far the 'how much are you making' question comes up at the beginning of the process almost everywhere. It's an obvious lowball play, anywhere that is super aggressive about asking for this is a giant red flag to me.
fmsf 10y ago
My experience with this was in London, a twitter.com recruiter contacted me a couple of years ago. At the time I was searching for a job so I replied that I was interested. We had the usual HR/Recruiter call. It ended with them asking how muh my previous employer was paying me. I said that was confidential and would not share. Their reply was "this information is mandatory and we cannot continue the process if you will not provide it." I said I wouldn't and it ended there... two months later their recruiter contacted me again saying it was ok for me not to share and provide expectations instead.
funkyy 10y ago
I was asked this before. When I refused, they said it was mandatory. I put my number as 30% more. There is no way for them to confirm, I think this is an unfair practice, so if they are forcing you to play the game, why you would be fair? I have got the job, as a junior, I was making same money as senior minus the benefits.
parasight 10y ago
Is it legal to lie about the past salary in the US?

718 points by mendelk 10y ago

umm... laws like this don't last very long. employers quickly develop work arounds. I will be interested to see what hiring managers try (or fail).

thinkmilitant 10y ago
This can't be true 100% of the time or the hiring/working condition would be roughly the same regardless of legal environment. This, at least to me, does not seem to be the case.

droopyEyelids 10y ago

This is a beautiful worker protection, and it makes me feel optimistic about our country's future.

mrcactu5 10y ago
keep telling yourself that... this law is bullshit
- MichaelApproved 10y ago
  How so?
  - mrcactu5 10y ago
    you will see...
    - lovich 10y ago
      so no answer? If you have a reason I'd like to hear it. I cant think of a problem with this cause it makes the information disparity between employees and employers more equal, but Id like to hear any counterargument
      - mrcactu5 10y ago
        i don't think the law will improve the information disparity. I think employers will quickly find ways around it as they always have and it will promptly be business as usual.
        droopyEyelids 10y ago
        I see perspectives like yours very frequently in many topics of discussion. The point I'd like you to consider: The ease with which something can be done can affect the probability and frequency of an action without affecting the possibility of the action.

paulcole 10y ago

Good. Not enough people realize the best way to answer this question is with a straight-up lie.

tlrobinson 10y ago
Could that be considered fraud?
- paulcole 10y ago
  If lying during a job interview is fraud then lock me up.
- maxxxxx 10y ago
  Employers lie about salaries all the time. I Know plenty of people who were told their salary was one of the highest of their coworkers where in reality they made less than most. Is that fraud?
- wbl 10y ago
  No more than "my wife thinks we need to take the children out of school, so I'll need the money to make that possible" is.
- sidlls 10y ago
  No more than: * We hire only the best * We value your career progress * We are transparent about the company's strategies and financials * We value taking the time to think through the design of features and products And so on. Most of which are, to be charitable, only very loosely applicable when they aren't outright lies.
  - antisthenes 10y ago
    * We think of you as family!
Arizhel 10y ago
Yep, take the true answer and inflate it 20% or more. Make them think they're getting a bargain.

xyzzy4 10y ago

This is bad for the free market and freedom of speech. I hope it gets challenged on First Amendment grounds.

davexunit 10y ago
The free market is trash. Employers must be regulated.
- Double_a_92 10y ago
  Worker Unions should do that, not the state.
  - ydt 10y ago
    Why?
    - splawn 10y ago
      My guess is that political ideology demands it.
  - davexunit 10y ago
    Unions are part of the solution, but so is the state. Unfortunately, the state has been destroying union power for years with things like "right to work" laws. I happen to think that all workers should have protections, not just those in unions.
  - literallycancer 10y ago
    Just think of the state as a more inclusive union.
maxxxxx 10y ago
I see my past salaries as trade secret of my business. So it's good that I can protect this secret.

Ultramax 10y ago

Seems like an ethics test. Will you tell the truth about your previous low salary or lie to make sure you don't get lowballed? Then for the employer, will you decrease the salary to match previous low rates or wages? Or will you pay him/her the market rate regardless? Personally, I have always been asked how much I made at previous places. I prefer to give a range than specify individually.

Arizhel 10y ago
Some ethics test. The employer is already failing at ethics by asking this in the first place, so I have no problem lying to them. This is no different than them asking if you have kids, if you're married, etc.
cjbprime 10y ago
> I prefer to give a range than specify individually. FWIW, this is likely almost as bad for you in the negotiation as giving the number. You will simply always get offers towards the bottom of your range. It is better to refuse to answer, and just say you're looking for a market rate salary for this role.
- eru 10y ago
  Giving the number doesn't have to be bad for you. (But it can be.) But yeah, never give any range. Not when talking about previous compensation, and not when talking about what you want. Just give them straight up numbers, if you give anything at all. And you should definitely give them a number about how much you want to be paid. You want to set the first reference point. And yes, that means you will have to do your own due diligence about how much the market can currently bear for your (interviewing) skills. But you need to know these numbers anyway.
dpark 10y ago
> I prefer to give a range I've never understood this tactic. Specifying a range seems like a good way to underprice yourself. If you give a range, the recruiter will simply assume that your current salary is very close to the bottom of the range. Now, if you mean that you give a range of previous salaries, the recruiter will know your best previous salary anyway. And they'll probably knock a fair bit off the top assuming you're padding.

thoreauway 10y ago

When does this take effect?

ballenf 10y ago

Would have rather seen a bill also legitimize complete and total lying in response to the question. Answers or claims regarding past salary may not be verified or used as the basis of any employment action.

comicjk 10y ago
A bill to legitimize lying would help people who know about it. But the people who most need the help are those who have never heard about this controversy or don't think they have the power in the negotiation to consider lying. The way NYC did it, the law protects the most vulnerable.
- ballenf 10y ago
  True. I edited my response to say "also" thinking about your point. I like my proposal less and less, honestly. I'm personally not a very good liar, so it wouldn't help much. Also, there's just something that feels wrong about normalizing lying instead of fixing the root problem.

jimparkins 10y ago

Have a google for: "can i lie to a employer about past salary" - it really really messes with people - people feel super uncertain about how to approach this situation. Throwing any confidence they have during the negotiation out the window. Even now I hesitate to write this as a million people will come out and say never lie - what if they found out. More than banning. There needs to be acceptance that if someone asks you. You are totally free to make any damn number up that you like. Seriously. Its a sales situation. It should not be like your under oath on the stand. Which is how most people view it.

tarr11 10y ago
That's not how (good) sales works.
- aswanson 10y ago
  Tell us how good sales works.
  - tarr11 10y ago
    Sales people doing relationship/long-term sales can build trust with customers. If you are purely transactional about it (and willing to say anything to get maximum salary) then it may work, but it also may backfire. If your hiring manager is the one you are lying to, they will also be responsible for your raises, promotions and bonuses. It's a long term relationship, one which can last beyond the current company you are at. It's a small world in technology, and beyond hard skills, your reputation is all you've really got.
    - aswanson 10y ago
      Thanks for the quality response.
- devmunchies 10y ago
  haha. yeah ok. My company has sales guys closing 6 to 8 figure deals every quarter and they "stretch the truth" all the time. Its part of sales. Thats why I only did sales for 2 years... the pay is the best but its an emotional roller coaster.

gdulli 10y ago

I'll have to find some way to bring it up myself. A higher than usual salary history is a good tangible signal to future employers and I'm not going to give it up.

mbillie1 10y ago
Way to see the bigger picture for employee rights here.
- gdulli 10y ago
  I didn't say I'd fight against the existence of the law. I said people who are hurt by the law should retain the same negotiating power they had before rather than lose their right.
  - ballenf 10y ago
    You won't lose any negotiating power. Just because they can't ask doesn't mean you can't counter an offer and ask for a higher salary. If they want you and think you're worth it, you'll get it. Just don't see them not being able to ask really shifting the negotiating power much if any for you.
    - gdulli 10y ago
      Likewise, just because an employer offers a lower salary than you want based on your salary history doesn't mean you can't counter with the salary you want. If they want you and think you're worth it, you'll get it. The benefit of telling a prospective employer that a previous employer decided you were worth an above-average salary vs. simply requesting an above-average salary without context is obvious.
nommm-nommm 10y ago
Nothing wrong with saying just that.

southphillyman 10y ago

They are trying to pass this in Philadelphia in May. Comcast and the local Chamber of Commerce are suing to stop it citing that it's a Freedom of Speech violation. Besides being able to freely low ball candidates who started behind the 8 ball (women/minorities/people who didn't go to elite schools), is there a real argument for companies HAVING to know your previous salary?

snarf21 10y ago
This is a very contentious subject. There has to be a negotiation at some point and employees have to share what they are willing to accept and the employer has to share what they are willing to pay. There is some validity to the idea that an employee is worth whatever they can get an employer to pay them, so their previous salary is an indication or ballpark of what that amount might be. I think a less infringing question is for the employer to ask for the salary the employee is expecting. Then there is no lying and the employee can try for a 20% jump or more and see what happens. They can also just ask for the employer's offer but in practice the employer is going to go up slowly and find the lowest salary they would take anyway.
specialp 10y ago
There really isn't. In a negotiation knowing the price paid for a product previously, or in this case a person, is a distinct advantage to the person paying. And will do nothing else but perpetuate low pay for underpaid people. Think of the scenarios: 1. I made X at my last job where X is far less than what you are paying your current employees. Well as a business owner and negotiator if I offer them X + a small bump I can probably get away with paying less. 2. I made X at my last job where X is far more than you are paying your current employees. You either are going to stretch the budget, or negotiate. So it is always a negotiation unless the person says they made less. A true negotiation is "How much are you asking for?" A person selling products isn't going to tell someone what they are selling their products for to a competitor. They are both going to negotiate a price or decide not to do business.
metaphorm 10y ago
> Comcast and the local Chamber of Commerce are suing to stop it citing that it's a Freedom of Speech violation. that's gonna be a hard case to make. freedom of speech is typically your right to say something that you want to say which is not at all the same as compelling someone else to say something they would rather not.

pmoriarty 10y ago

I never answer questions about my past or expected salary, not to employers and not to recruiters. Most employers don't ask, and the few that have (perhaps by having a part of an employment form ask for previous salary) have never made my leaving that information out an issue. Most recruiters, if they even ask, respect my decision not to talk about it, but I've been pressed hard on this by a handful of recruiters, and have had this be a deal breaker for a couple of them. One recruiting firm admitted that they were paid by the employers to get this information. I wasn't getting paid to give this information out, however, and it's worth more to me to keep it private as I'm placed at a disadvantage in negotiations if I name a number first. It's still a seller's market for IT talent, and there are plenty of other fish in the sea, so if some recruiters can't accept that I won't name a number, it's their loss. It's great that NYC is taking the lead on this, and I really hope the rest of the US follows suit.

louisswiss 10y ago
Agree with you in principle (your previous deal with company A is absolutely none of company B's business) but I would like to challenge you on one point: > I'm placed at a disadvantage in negotiations if I name a number first. ... This is unlikely to be true. Generally, in price negotiations it is advantageous to name a number first. This is known as anchoring and basically the theory is that the end result is better for you if the company has to wheedle you down from 170k than if they anchor the price at 100k and you have to argue them up from there. Plus, it saves a lot of wasted negotiation time on both sides if your price is just way too high for the company and this is clear from the beginning. (edit: I'm talking about expected salary in general, not disclosing your current salary level)
- vidarh 10y ago
  Note that this assumes your information about your market value is at least roughly in line with their information about your market value. If there's a big discrepancy in what you believe you're worth, then the benefit can easily flip the other way.
- alistairSH 10y ago

ajeet_dhaliwal 10y ago

Well done New York City! London needs this desperately, most recruiters here won't let you proceed without it, unless you apply directly.

inputjoker 10y ago

It should also ban potential employee disclosing the pay of previous employment. Otherwise it would become a norm soon that the companies specifically won't ask about it, but will hire only the candidates who disclose it by themselves, which makes the candidate to disclose the previous income by themselves for having a better shot at getting hired.

aphextron 10y ago

I never understood this one. I have always told recruiters straight up that I'm not going to disclose that information. Nobody involved with making the hiring decision is going to be asking you how much you made at your last job.

mbroshi 10y ago

The analogy is not perfect, but all the time people like to know how much a house or car sold for in the past, or how much a stock traded for the in past, etc. Seems like useful data. Now, I'm not advocating for or against this particular question, but I sure do hope there is data collected and studied on the effect this has in NY before anyone jumps to conclusions. I feel it's too easy to have a knee-jerk reaction on this one. There is no way to know whether this helps/hurts/is neutral for any particular class of people without studying its effects.

CJefferson 10y ago
The problem is the one way communication. I would personally have no problem giving out my past salary, in return for the current salaries if all comparable current employees at the company.
- mbroshi 10y ago
  You can refuse to answer their question. You can also ask them how much others are making at your position (and they can refuse to answer that, too). I don't see where the asymmetry is.
  - ryandrake 10y ago
    It's often more a power asymmetry. You need the job, they have a line of candidates out the door.
- burkaman 10y ago
  It doesn't go that far, but this bill does specify that asking about salary history is allowed if at the same time you communicate a proposed salary range.
z0r 10y ago
The analogy is completely broken. People aren't houses, cars, or stock certificates. The information that is pertinent might be references from former coworkers - can they do the job you are hiring them for? Asking for the previous value of the person as if they were any other commodity is nonsensical. There's not an inherent price to the person, and a higher or lower salary says more about where they have worked (which you can see on the resume or ask about) than how well they have worked (very generally).

loufe 10y ago

"Closing the gender pay gay is important" Come on NYT....

lr4444lr 10y ago
Freudian slip, perhaps? https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/01/gay-couples-more-educated-higher-income-than-heterosexual-couples https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/01/gay-couples-...

ransom1538 10y ago

So people on HN are pro employers posting their employee salaries publicly but against previous companies asking what their salaries are. WTF. I must be missing something here. I personally believe your salary is your business. Period. Getting salary information bad, forcing employees to divulge salaries from a position of power is disgusting. Here is me being publicly quartered on HN for pushing back on forcing employees publicly posting salaries: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12805814 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12805814

jerf 10y ago
"So [some] people on HN are pro employers posting their employee salaries publicly but [some people on HN are] against previous companies asking what their salaries are. WTF. I must be missing something here." I added some words to your quote in the square brackets that should resolve the confusion for you.
jakob223 10y ago
I'm confused by why these things are so connected for you; I think it benefits potential employees to both not have to talk about past salaries and to be able to know what other employees are being paid.
kesselvon 10y ago
Companies asking for your previous salary means theyre going to try to pay you with your past salary being a benchmark to work with, not necessarily what the position is worth. Companies posting employee salaries publicly aims for employees at said company to be paid at the same level (with similar experience). There's a subtle difference. Every time I've been asked about salary its been an obvious ploy to lowball my salary due to previous experience of working in a lower cost area. Employees literally have zero incentive not to lie, since employers can't verify
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  It's also worth recognizing that things are very different if this becomes universal. If one company asks for your salary at another, they get a chance to underpay. But if every company publishes salaries, they don't get to low-ball no matter what you were getting before.

paul7986 10y ago

Totally avoid this question Being asked by setting the salary you seek in stone before going to the interview. Especially if your working with a recruiter! If they suddenly ask this question then they are trying to renege on their promise and for me it's time to go.

Taylor_OD 10y ago

I'm not sure how effective this will be. When I was recruiting It got to the point where I would never ask salary's I would just say, "I'm assume your currently making between XXk and XXk?" and 9 times out of 10 I was in the right range. 1 time out of 10 they would say no and correct me. I just took a educated guess based on knowing the market. Any good recruiter should be able to do the same.

burkaman 10y ago
The bill also makes it illegal to "rely on the salary history of an applicant in determining the salary, benefits or other compensation for such applicant during the hiring process, including the negotiation of a contract" even if you find out without asking.

kelukelugames 10y ago

I dislike employers who take advantage of employees. I dislike New York City's solution too. There are other ways to empower employees and not asking about past salaries won't eliminate the pay gap. But I'm not an expert so maybe this is a step in the right direction and can result in lasting changes.

arunitc 10y ago

Here in India, you are not only asked your previous salary, you have to provide your last (sometimes three) payslip while joining. Some companies have a policy of NOT giving more than a 30% hike from your previous salary - you need top management approval for such a hike.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
anupshinde 10y ago
At the time of joining - is usually for background verification. Most companies don't even care what your last pay was. Even if you are paid higher, they are going to play in their range. However, during negotiation, if you lied about your previous pay just to get a better hike - you would get flagged, may get fired and get yourself listed into an unofficial blacklist. Its more of an ethics issue than just a pay mismatch. > Some companies have a policy of NOT giving more than a 30% hike from your previous salary These companies are telling you "loud and clear" - "we don't care about talent". There are other companies that would pay "fairly" as per their bands - even if that means a 100-200% hike
- thammudu 10y ago
  I have been through job searching recently in India and I have applied for 10s of companies most of them are statups. > At the time of joining - is usually for background verification. Not just during joining, many companies asked my previous salary and expected salary during the first talk. Some companies did not even contact back when I refused to disclose my previous salary. Salary discrimination is everywhere in startups, not just by gender also by number of years of experience, University, Degree, previous company... My opinion is "every employee doing the same job should be paid the same."

lr4444lr 10y ago

A lot of the analogies and reasoning I'm reading here is faulty. Nothing stops HR depts. from sharing information which to a first degree of approximation would give them an idea of the market rate for the positions they're filling. Companies are already free to rescind offers if they find out that you've lied about aspects of your past work history. It's part of what at-will employment is. This is about interfering with the negotiation of the individual job seeker. If I can't ask for your salary history, then I might miss out on the competitive advantage you as a candidate have in that you're willing to work for less over potentially more qualified people as you build your skill-set and expertise. The right way to help those who are taken advantage of is education about how to bargain and what information they need and need not share, not legislation.

infodroid 10y ago

As far as I know, there's nothing to stop employers from exchanging salary information directly with previous employers under quid-pro-quo agreements. And there's nothing to stop employers from buying/renting this information from third parties, such as recruitment agencies or brokers in personal data. All of these are arguably more reliable sources of salary information than asking the candidate directly.

rodionos 10y ago

What effect is this going to have if the state agency wages are already online: https://catalog.data.gov/dataset?tags=salary https://catalog.data.gov/dataset?tags=salary

awinter-py 10y ago

we should make it illegal to ask about college degree. That would erode the signaling value of a degree and bring down the price / paper value of a diploma.

ElijahLynn 10y ago

That is fantastic news! I recently interviewed with a prominent Drupal company, Forum One, and was shocked that they not only asked for my previous salary, but previous 3 salaries and also wanted me to verify them with pay stubs! I told them no and the interview stalled after that. That was a sad day, I really wanted to work with them but what they asked for was unacceptable. They were not in New York but I welcome this law everywhere.

pixl97 10y ago
>I told them no and the interview stalled after that. That was a sad day, I really wanted to work with them You assumed you wanted to work with them based on a false idea of what that company was. It sounds like you lucked out.

dudul 10y ago

I interviewed at a big phone/ISP company a few months ago in MA. They would not make me an offer unless I shared my past W2 with them for them to make sure my past salary was what I claimed it was. Needless to say, I laughed at them and walked away.

jondubois 10y ago

I think this law is silly. If you don't like this question, then you can either choose not to answer it or use it to your advantage by 'rounding up' your numbers - This should actually help you with your negotiations as an employee. In the unlikely event that they ask for proof, you can always tell them that your personal finances are a private matter between you and your accountant.

s73ver 10y ago
Not really. Someone who is not in a strong bargaining position is not going to be able to push back and say no. The company will say, "Answer or we don't hire you." And while you might say "You don't want to work there anyway," I know I like being able to buy food and pay rent much more than I like not being hired. By banning the question outright, they make sure that your ability to not answer the question is not related to the strength of your bargaining position.

retube 10y ago

This will be tricky for banks and hedge funds etc. These firms typically, in London at any rate: - never quote a salary (or even a range) for a job opening - following many interviews any offer is always based on prior "comp", of which you will have to provide 3 years of info (base, bonus, deferred awards, retention awards, benefits etc) plus, of course, documentary evidence to support. HR departments start squealing if uptick is a greater than 20% increase, although some people do manage higher (anything over 30% is almost unheard of, except for a handful of big producers) - they go through your background with a fine toothcomb and check EVERYTHING you supplied on your CV and in the screening questionaires you have to complete. They employ specialist third party agencies to do the research on you. If you do not comply with this you simply won't get hired. It is universal and practiced everywhere in finance, I've never heard of anyone not being subjected to this.

TheCoelacanth 10y ago
Not sure how it's tricky for them. They just have to stop doing it or never hire anyone.

somethingwitty1 10y ago

I'm a bit skeptical that this will have a real impact. It may stop employers from asking, but it does not stop them from low-balling someone based on race/gender, etc. HR departments calculate this in to their offers already. Don't get me wrong, I think this will help some folks and is a great step forward. People who know their value and what the employer pays will surely benefit (or great negotiators). But for the people this is touted to help, they can still very easily be kept in the lower-end of the pay scale. It seems to me that the only way to close the pay gap is to have employers release what they pay. That in itself is a tough thing to write legislation for. In my mind, it would need to take into account experience, actual role/leveling, etc. A lot of it is subjective and easy to manipulate to help the employer. And of course, if we just release a straight list of all employees' salaries (with the details needed to calculate where you fall), you may run into privacy concerns.

lend000 10y ago

There's a case to be made for an employee protection preventing an employer from firing an employee for refusing to produce pay stubs from a past employer. However, I've said it before -- preventing a question from being asked is state overreach and constitutes a violation of the first amendment, in my opinion.

teej 10y ago
There are already loads of questions that employers aren't allowed to ask. Are you married? Are you pregnant? How many kids do you have? Is your significant other black? When was the last time you went to church? So, you're about 50, is that right?
- TulliusCicero 10y ago
  Technically they can ask those things, they're just not allowed to discriminate based on the answers, so asking them is a bad idea.
- pc86 10y ago
  A) They can legally ask all of these. B) All of these are in reference to one or more protected classes, which is why it's not legal to discriminate based on one's answer(s) or refusal to answer. C) Last I checked, "previously made {less,more} than a certain salary" is not a protected class.
  - marcosdumay 10y ago
    About (C), it has just become one.
fuzzybeard 10y ago
While it's a smart move not to disclose your prior salary during negotiations, I really don't want there to be legal implications for the back and forth during this process. It's great in theory, but micromanaging businesses like this is over reach, though typical for NYC.

showmethemoney 10y ago

Once upon a time I interviewed for a role in NYC. An employee that I spoke to said they paid pretty well, and I could expect about 120. The HR person wanted my previous salary, and I refused. Eventually they said their range was 130-150. I said it wasn't gonna work cause I was looking for something more like 220. They said okay we can do that no problem. My previous salary was 110.

catshirt 10y ago
care to share your position and some discreet information about the company (size, industry?)
- dingdongding 10y ago
  This account was created an hour ago. I doubt he is telling the truth
  - run4yourlives2 10y ago
    I don't connect the two really. The account is clearly a throwaway, but that doesn't really bare on whether the story is accurate or not. It very well might be.
  - catshirt 10y ago
    i'm not saying it has to be true, but there is more incentive to create a fresh account to post that information than there is incentive to lie about it.
  - benji-york 10y ago
    I think the age of the account increases the likelihood of the story being true: the person was so compelled to tell their story that they created an anonymous account just to do so.
    - komali2 10y ago
      Probably the information should be used as an allegorical example, rather than a "huh I can make 220 in NY" example. It is very easy to lie on the internet. I try to hedge my bets on this website by essentially doxxing myself on my profile, but not everyone is willing to do that (nor should they necessarily be expected to).

rodionos 10y ago

Don't have to ask. The data is open: https://gist.github.com/rodionos/b77080e028e3b680b2c1b5091ba61911 https://gist.github.com/rodionos/b77080e028e3b680b2c1b5091ba... Source: https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/civil-list-2014 https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/civil-list-2014 > The Civil List reports the agency code (DPT), first initial and last name (NAME), agency name (ADDRESS), title code (TTL #), pay class (PC), and salary (SAL-RATE) of individuals who were employed by the City of New York at any given time during the indicated year.

hn_throwaway_99 10y ago
The vast majority of employees in NYC do not work for the city.
cortesoft 10y ago
That is only for employees of the city. This law is for all COMPANIES operating in the city.
burkaman 10y ago
This bill applies to private companies too. In cases where a company discovers your past salary without asking, the bill makes it illegal to rely on that to determine an offer.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- mdb333 10y ago
  good to know, I was wondering if this would include information from previous employers on background checks... which it sounds like it does.

losteverything 10y ago

For me it's not the salary (been out of tech and would not expect much nego. power), but how do I quantitfy primo health insurance, 31+ days off a year, 5 months sick leave and a 1/2 mile commute. I really don't know how to assign a number to all that.

rdiddly 10y ago

Wow, this is yuge. Sure I can refuse to answer the question, but nothing beats a law that makes the question futile and unlikely to be asked in the first place. Granted employers will just scrounge around on the internet for your salary info instead, which is slightly creepier, but at least they have to work for it. Can't wait for other states to follow suit.

aglavine 10y ago

I advocate for all salary data being public. To get a better salary and better work conditions cannot depend of hiding a figure. It is a weak position, to say the least.

pm24601 10y ago

> Underlying the bill is the notion that employers “anchor” the salaries they offer to potential employees based on their current or previous salary — if an employee had faced pay discrimination at a previous job, in other words, the employer’s subsequent lower than market value offer would effectively perpetuate the discrimination. > “Being underpaid once should not condemn one to a lifetime of inequity,” said New York City Public Advocate Letitia James ... Or if a person does not know how to negotiate.

garethsprice 10y ago

Lots of people here talking from their own experience as highly skilled, in-demand professionals. However, helping friends apply to jobs in other industries - specifically medical - I saw that most of the applications involved filling out an automated form that required prior salary information to complete. There's no advantage to an employee from being forced to disclose this information and it perpetuates compensation discrepancies by gender/race/guts to ask. Very glad to see this made illegal. Now, if they were really serious about fixing pay discrepancies, they'd make it mandatory to post salary ranges with job listings.

tinythrowaway 10y ago

throwaway for obv reasons. This is fantastic news. But for those of you wondering what to do if you are asked this - it's pretty simple: you lie. This is a negotiation. If you ask a car salesman how much the dealership paid for a car, you think they're going to tell you the truth? "What if they find out?" They won't. How could they? There ARE laws, very clear and absolute ones, about what a past employer can share about you. Your salary history is most certainly protected by them. "What if they ask for a paystub?" Ask yourself if you know what you're getting into here. This is not a company that is going to treat its employees well.

dkrich 10y ago

This is the #1 rule I always tell people who are interviewing for a new job. Never tell a potential employer your past job salary, especially so if you are unhappy with that salary. When my girlfriend was interviewing for a new job two years ago we talked about this because the recruiter was very demanding about knowing what her current salary was and I told her to stay firm on it because the salary in her current job was, frankly, shit. In the end she got a 50% pay increase over her previous job and then six months later got promoted with a pay increase that effectively doubled her salary from her previous job. Which brings me to another point- a lot of people will justify disclosing the amount by reasoning that they can always ask for a raise after they get hired and the important thing is to get a foot in the door. The problem is that anchoring is a very real thing. If you start at $50k instead of a $75k, every raise you get at that company for the rest of your career will be based off that first salary. If you stay at a company for 10-15 years, that is an enormous difference that could be well into the six figures. Bottom line, don't disclose salary history to employers. You'll seldom find an employer who will tell you what your colleagues in the same job make. Why do you want to show your hand? As for this law, I'm actually mildly opposed to it. I don't think that the government should have a hand in determining salary beyond minimum wage, because that is an agreement made between two consenting parties in private industry. If you are a more experienced negotiator and are willing to ask for more money than your counterparts, why shouldn't you be at an advantage? There's no law that says you have to disclose it and the rest is up to you.

s73ver 10y ago
Why should you be at an advantage? Why should the negotiations have anything to do with your current salary?
- downrightmike 10y ago
  They need to be at the advantage, their life and time is being bought. And because if the pay is shit, they'll only end up doing shitty work. Possibly leaving much not finished the next chance they get somewhere that is willing to compensate appropriately.

riskable 10y ago

Whenever I'm asked for my current or former salary I tell the recruiter/HR person to first tell me the salary of all the peers I'll be working with. If it's a contracting company I also ask how much they'll be paid for my position. If they don't provide those money details why should I?

riskable 10y ago

dingdongding 10y ago

So I should not be divulging my current salary to recruiters? Interesting.

nfriedly 10y ago

When IBM hired me, the only question I was asked about salary was "how much would you like?" I picked a number and he said "I think I can do that, let me check" followed the next day by "yes". Maybe I left money on the table, but I'm happy, and I've gotten good raises since.

adrr 10y ago
More than likely you left money on table. I found asking people what salary they would like, they always low balled themselves with a 10% increase of current salary. Minimum i give is 15% because that is average for people changing jobs. Devops engineer i just hired was well under priced for the market so i gave him 45% raise. He didn't even ask for increase in pay. Not every company/hiring manger is trying to rip off their employees. Paying people industry/local a bit above averages for the job duties makes for happier employees that are less likely to leave or have moral issues.

bingomad123 10y ago

Personally I have found disclosing salary to be far more beneficial in negotiations. I guess who wish to disclose their salary still can right ? Or has the law banned employees from disclosing it ?

user5994461 10y ago

"It will take $xxx k base salary to leave my current company" -- The ultimate answer to life and the universe and everything.

taternuts 10y ago

Personally I think it's good when they ask. I no longer answer that question with the truth, but as if they asked "what do you think you're actually worth?" - and you can find out pretty quick by their response/reaction whether or not they are going to try and lowball you.

Overtonwindow 10y ago

I once worked for a large trade association in Georgia. The Director had a general policy that anyone who refused to provide expected salary was not even considered, at all, no exceptions.

city41 10y ago
Did you find other things that Director did made the company less effective or unpleasant to work at? In other words, if that's the company's policy, is it possibly a sign the company is not the best place to go?

mdb333 10y ago

It will be interesting to see how this affects the hiring markets. Out in SF/etc it came up in just about every discussion I had last time I was looking for work usually as part of the first phase. No point interviewing candidates that wouldn't accept the job. It's pretty much a risk mgmt exercise from the hiring side. Similarly, I always asked what the compensation range they're targeting is as I don't want to waste my time either. I wonder if this ban addresses background checks covering the same information, because some companies do ask for this data from previous employers although not all provide it. Without protection there this ban seems fairly limited. Anyhow, I don't agree with all advice to never disclose current/previous salary. In some scenarios certainly it makes sense, but in others it is the opposite. You want to justify a higher market value and set the expectation that you're unlikely to be interested unless they're willing to compensate at $X or higher. Of course it's different in terms of leverage if you're employed currently or not. Recruiters and interviewers will waste tons of your time if you don't get on the same page quickly. Lack of transparency around your compensation expectations will exacerbate this issue. Whether that means you tell them what you're making or what you'd like to make doesn't really matter, but you better do at least one of the two.

komali2 10y ago
In my experience (external contract recruitment) the background check usually happens after an offer has been negotiated and accepted. I've also never seen a background check request for actual salary information. I'm not even sure how that would work... we would just send the candidates' information to this company that churns through court docs to see if they have a criminal history, send them to Quest to get drug tested, donesies bananas. Maybe in the employment verification stage? Even then though, I highly doubt a previous employer would offer that information up - oftentimes they weren't even allowed to comment on the quality of the candidates' work. Nightmare for reference checks to the big EPCs and operators like BP or Jacobs.
- vonmoltke 10y ago
  I was asked in my last background check, and the proof (of that and employment) was my tax forms.

gesman 10y ago

Instead of salary it may worth disclosing ballpark of total compensation including shares/options vesting, bonuses, etc, without breaking it down. After all "desired salary" question is answered sooner or later but in reality - the total compensation is more important.

csneeky 10y ago

I know one employer this will impact: Goldman Sachs. Not only do they demand you tell them what your current salary is during the interview process, they force you during a rigorous background check before your first day to prove it.

crazy1van 10y ago

Laws like this one that restrict businesses from asking questions that individuals could ask strikes me as very strange. I could ask my buddy how much he made at his last job. I couldn't ask my buddy how much he made at his last job if I'm considering hiring him to work at my company. Why is this information legal to acquire when I'm wearing my business hat vs when I'm wearing my friend hat?

dikdik 10y ago
Do you plan to have children in the near future? Are you currently pregnant? Do you prefer men or women as romantic/sexual partners? How old are you? What religion were you raised with? Do you currently attend a church? >Why is this information legal to acquire when I'm wearing my business hat vs when I'm wearing my friend hat? You tell me....
s73ver 10y ago
It's like context is an actual thing.

pbasista 10y ago

My past salary is an irrelevant information for my potential future employer. If they ask about it, my response would be: "Why would you like to know it?" Any answer to this question is bad. If they do not bail out and stop asking at this point, then I bail out. The point is that if I want, I can completely change my way of life by switching to a job which pays 50 % of my current salary. Or 400 % of my current salary. It does not matter. What matters is that it is solely my decision and none of my potential future employer's business. If they want to know my current salary, it is a red flag. I do not care about them knowing it, but there is a high risk that they will use that information to try to make an offer which they think that I ought to consider good. They can offer e.g. my current salary + their negotiating margin and think "hey, we have offered you more than you have now, so you ought to be happy". While in reality, the only person who can responsibly decide whether I am happy about it or not is me. Note that I am not criticizing companies which want to hire for cheap. This is all right. But they need to do it transparently, from the beginning. They should say it clearly and upfront: for this position, our budget is somewhere in this range ... are you interested or not? This is a fair way to go.

socalnate1 10y ago
"But they need to do it transparently, from the beginning. They should say it clearly and upfront: for this position, our budget is somewhere in this range" This goes both ways I think: For this position, I am looking for something in this range, are you interested or not?
- downrightmike 10y ago
  I'll have to look it up, but there are few large groups that basically track and record a number of industries including tech. I'll have to look it up Monday. They use this info to help companies to pay in a range of +- 20% for any position. At least that's what I've learned from the management training part of this gig.

highdesertmuse 10y ago

Mandating that employers are forbidden to ask about previous salary seems like a pathway to more government intrusion into a complex process. Part of job seeking involves learning how to negotiate with a potential employer. I've side-stepped many an inappropriate or premature question about salary with "Are you making an offer," followed by agreement to disclose the "details" if and when such offer is forthcoming at which point I know far more about what the position involves, am in a much better negotiating position and can explain, if necessary, why the pay scale was lower. If that doesnt satisfy a recruiter or potential employer, I tend to think they're not very serious about me as a candidate and I havent disclosed personal information that might limit my future job search.

s73ver 10y ago
No. Why should the negotiation have anything to do with the prospective employee's current salary? Not to mention, you're saying that prospective employees shouldn't answer the question anyway. However, that only protects those who feel they're in a strong bargaining position. It does absolutely nothing to help those who aren't, and those are generally the ones that need the most help.

highdesertmuse 10y ago

pklausler 10y ago

It's a sellers' market. If you're looking, just state your requirements and negotiate from there (or not). If you're not looking, then your current compensation is your current job's best offer, and you might as well share that information in case somebody wants to beat it.

georgeecollins 10y ago

I have gotten out of discussing past salary by saying that I believe salary history perpetuates wage discrimination. I am a white man, so I think this only makes me seem idealistic rather than disgruntled. But I do honestly believe this to be true. Smart people who negotiate your salary do not want to get anywhere near a conversation that has the phrase "wage discrimination" in it for any reason, even hypothetical. They do not want to argue about what is or isn't wage discrimination, even if they disagree. So it can end the discussion with both parties feeling they are being high minded by avoiding the topic.

donovanm 10y ago

In the interviews I've had so far the 'how much are you making' question comes up at the beginning of the process almost everywhere. It's an obvious lowball play, anywhere that is super aggressive about asking for this is a giant red flag to me.

fmsf 10y ago

My experience with this was in London, a twitter.com recruiter contacted me a couple of years ago. At the time I was searching for a job so I replied that I was interested. We had the usual HR/Recruiter call. It ended with them asking how muh my previous employer was paying me. I said that was confidential and would not share. Their reply was "this information is mandatory and we cannot continue the process if you will not provide it." I said I wouldn't and it ended there... two months later their recruiter contacted me again saying it was ok for me not to share and provide expectations instead.

funkyy 10y ago

I was asked this before. When I refused, they said it was mandatory. I put my number as 30% more. There is no way for them to confirm, I think this is an unfair practice, so if they are forcing you to play the game, why you would be fair? I have got the job, as a junior, I was making same money as senior minus the benefits.

parasight 10y ago

Is it legal to lie about the past salary in the US?