3 ms·
> The goal is to narrow the gender wage gap. If a woman is paid less than a man doing the same job and a new employer bases her pay on her prior salary, gender
by benji-york 9y ago
> The goal is to narrow the gender wage gap. If a woman is paid less than a man doing the same job and a new employer bases her pay on her prior salary, gender discrimination can be perpetuated, the bill’s backers say.
Is it also banned for an applicant to inform the employer of their prior salary? If not, it would appear advantageous for non-below-average-salaried employees to being doing so, negating the effects of this intervention.(And for employers to silently discard applicants which do not voluntarily reveal salary history.)
- eridius 9y agoIf only above-average-salaried employees reveal salary, and companies discard applicants that don't voluntarily reveal salary history, then that just means that companies end up paying more because they'll only hire people that got paid more than average in the past. Which is to say, no, I don't think it'll work out that way.
- benji-york 9y agoThat's a good point as far as the employer's behavior goes. It still seems beneficial to the above-average applicant to reveal their salary. I guess that means employers will assume you're below average unless you reveal your salary. That would tend to lump all the below-average people into the same salary class as far as the potential employer is concerned.
- eridius 9y agoIt's still not really in the employee's interest to reveal their above-average salary history until they've gotten a salary range from the employer first. After they get that range, they can choose to reveal their salary history if they think it'll give them leverage in negotiations (e.g. if they want more than the high end of the range), but anyone who's happy with the offer they get won't have a reason to reveal their salary history even if it's above-average.