6 ms·
California employers prohibited from relying on an applicant's salary history
- Thespian2 9y agoLink to google cache of document, as current .gov website down for maintenance.
- dsp1234 9y agoOregon also had this as of Oct 1st, 2017. [0] - http://www.oregon.gov/boli/TA/Pages/Equal%20Pay%20Law.aspx http://www.oregon.gov/boli/TA/Pages/Equal%20Pay%20Law.aspx "Effective October 6, 2017 employers are prohibited from seeking the pay history of an applicant or employee from the applicant or employee or a current or former employer of the applicant or employee before the employer makes an offer of employment to the prospective employee that includes an amount of compensation;"
- comicjk 9y agoNYC has it too: "Effective Oct. 31, 2017, it will be illegal for public and private employers of any size in New York City to ask about applicant's salary history..." https://www1.nyc.gov/site/cchr/media/salary-history.page https://www1.nyc.gov/site/cchr/media/salary-history.page
- alex_young 9y agoAlso required: potential employers have to supply a pay range for the position if requested.
- conanbatt 9y ago"1U$S-2U$S" If I were to abide by a policy that tries to force the situation, I would force all salaries and compensations to be public, and to hell with it. These policies have unmeasurable effects.
- chc 9y agoIf someone would throw a hissy fit and set a salary range at which they cannot legally hire anyone because now applicants have a little bit more negotiating power, it's hard to believe they're in a position to do that in the first place, because the new rules will not be anywhere near the biggest annoyance in the hiring process.
- conanbatt 9y ago> because the new rules will not be anywhere near the biggest annoyance in the hiring process. Its either ineffectual, or its easy to skirt. Its a meaningless idea that now will turn one more human behavior into a crime.
- SamReidHughes 9y agoThis means as an applicant, if you ask for a salary range, you're creating a legal compulsion on them to give you one. This is an act of aggression and immoral. First you should ask if they would have been willing to give a salary range if asked and if it wasn't legally required. Then, only if they say yes, is it moral to ask for the salary range.
- perl4ever 9y agoIf that's an act of aggression and thus immoral, what is it when an online job application form requires you to enter your salary expectation before submitting (outside California)?
- SamReidHughes 9y agoYou don't have to answer it. You're free to leave that field blank or not apply for the job.
- perl4ever 9y agoWell, I'm supposing that the form cannot be submitted with a blank field or textual comment, because it's programmed that way. Assuming that, is it then aggression/immoral?
- SamReidHughes 9y agoI already covered that case.
- perl4ever 9y agoI don't exactly see the relationship you may, between being free to disengage from a situation and being (or not being) aggressed against. It seems like you think they are related in a certain way you didn't make explicit. Are they mutually exclusive to you?
- Amorymeltzer 9y agoHere's an article from October: http://www.sfgate.com/business/networth/article/New-law-bans-California-employers-from-asking-12274431.php http://www.sfgate.com/business/networth/article/New-law-bans... AB168, signed Thursday by Gov. Jerry Brown, applies to all public- and private-sector California employers of any size. 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. Last year, the state passed a weaker law that said prior compensation, by itself, cannot justify any disparity in compensation. The new bill goes further by prohibiting employers, “orally or in writing, personally or through an agent,” from asking about an applicant’s previous pay. However, if the applicant “voluntarily and without prompting” provides this information, the employer may use it “in determining the salary for that applicant.” Delaware, Massachusetts and Oregon have passed similar laws that take effect later this year or next, said attorney Ben Ebbink of Fisher & Phillips in Sacramento. Philadelphia passed one that was supposed to take effect in May but is being challenged in court. New York City and San Francisco have similar ordinances that take effect Oct. 31 and July 1, respectively.
- kelukelugames 9y agoI wonder if this is the strongest deterrent the government can pass to prevent paying women differently.
- perl4ever 9y agoI would not be against all salaries being public, like with public employees or in some European country that I forget. I've been paid from the high $30s to the low $80s for the exact same responsibilities. It can be a bad thing, in my mind, to be overpaid as well, because someone who is willing to overpay is possibly (a) incompetent, (b) compensating for a bad environment, and/or (c) has unrealistic/impossible expectations. So even if you have been or expect to be overpaid, I think there could be benefits to transparency.
- amasad 9y agoI'm generally skeptical of regulations but in this case I think it's warranted because companies were basically "price fixing" by asking candidates about their previous salary and then matching or nudging up a bit. This piece of regulation will make the market more efficient, dynamic, and fair too. Companies already have information asymmetry working to their advantage. Asking about salary history only increased that. And that's why it's unfair.
- pkaye 9y agoI think thought this change will hurt those who are perform well but not good at negotiating a salary. Maybe they gained a high salary at their previous employer and it used to be a signal of their value. Should we also hide where they graduated from and the name of their previous employer too because a prestigious university or employer will definitely give an advantage.
- comicjk 9y agoFrom the article: "The bill would not prohibit an applicant from voluntarily and without prompting disclosing salary history information and would not prohibit an employer from considering or relying on that voluntarily disclosed salary history information in determining salary..."
- pkaye 9y agoOkay that is good to hear there is a way to negate this impact for those who it is beneficial.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- groby_b 9y agoIf you're not good at negotiating a salary, you never had a high salary in the first place. There isn't a single company out there that pays you well out of the good of their heart.
- 9y ago
- matte_black 9y agoWhat do you do if you are asked anyway?
- justicezyx 9y agoI doubt any reputable company would do that, if they ask, I suppose it's time to drop the interview process.
- paulcole 9y agoIf you need the job, answer and lie. If you really really need the job, answer honestly. If you don’t need the job, decline.
- matte_black 9y agoSo business as usual.
- jcrites 9y agoI've never disclosed this when interviewing with employers, prior to the law. Not past compensation nor desired/expected comp. I don't see how it would be in my interest to disclose. When recruiters ask, I say "I'd prefer not to disclose that information. Let's focus on figuring out whether there's a good fit, and if we decide that there is, then we can work out the compensation." It's never been an obstacle to the interviewing process, or getting offers at top-tier companies, though some recruiters were fairly insistent in trying to find out. See also: Patrick McKenzie on Salary Negotiation - http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/ http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/ > The First Rule Is What Everyone Tells You It Is: Never Give A Number First > Every handbook on negotiation and every blog post will tell you not to give a number first. This advice is almost always right. It is so right, you have to construct crazy hypotheticals to find edge cases where it would not be right. > When Does A Salary Negotiation Happen? > Only negotiate salary after you have agreement in principle from someone with hiring authority that, if a mutually acceptable compensation can be agreed upon, you will be hired. [...]
- AnimalMuppet 9y ago
- tengbretson 9y agoHow could this possibly be constitutional?
- jdavis703 9y agoBecause it's designed around a protected group. It's the same reason why asking someone's immigration status or country of birth is illegal. The equal protection clause of the Constitution can trump free speech when they conflict.
- SamReidHughes 9y agoAsking about those is legal. > The equal protection clause of the Constitution can trump free speech when they conflict. They never conflict.
- jdavis703 9y agoWell in anti-harrasment training they definitely tell you not to ask those questions. Search on Google for illegal interview questions and you'll get similar advice (0). Hell, I just saw an HR sign warning that asking for the name of someone's spouse is discouraged because it can be used to discover gender identity and sexual orientation. You can certainly ask these questions in an interview, but you run the risk of being sued. 0: https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/illegal-interview-questions https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/illegal-interv...
- SamReidHughes 9y agoThe points I'm making are, it's not actually illegal. And there's nothing involving the equal protection amendment here.
- tengbretson 9y agoWhat is the classification for this new protected group?
- deleted 9y ago
- danjoc 9y agoWe learned from the Equifax breach that salary is part of the information collected. "So, it's illegal to ask? Who cares, that guy's just going to lie anyway. Let's make him give us permission to check his credit report on the job application and get the exact number. Like we always did."
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- joshuamorton 9y agoThis law also forbids using third party agencies to get salary data of an applicant.
- jwilk 9y agoMost people are not familiar with US state codes. I, for one, assumed that this is about Canada.
- LoSboccacc 9y agoThat’d be CAN
- jwilk 9y agoIn ISO 3166-1, each territory is assigned 3 codes: a two-letter code, a three-letter code, and a three-digit code. Canada's codes are: CA, CAN, and 124. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1
- jwilk 9y agoI see someone has changed "CA" to "California" in the submission title. Thanks!
- godelski 9y agoIf you want to get rid of equality, shouldn't salaries of positions public? I'm not saying an exact number, but a range. This asymmetric information gives the employer a much larger edge in wage negotiation.
- LoSboccacc 9y agoThey are secret only to potential employers in the context of salary negotiation, you can still willingly divulge the information That said, the balance of leverage for a totally fair sistem would make salary range on job listing binding and prohibit public job offer without role and range
- godelski 9y agoI'm not talking about previous salaries. I'm saying that if you see a job posting, it should say "Pays $50-$60k/yr". Employee knows where to begin and end negotiation.
- tapatio 9y agoNow it'll just be based off of years of experience, which is probably better.
- ep103 9y agoHow does this apply to recruiters?
- teej 9y agoRecruiters are covered by this regulation and cannot ask. They are considered “agents” of the employer.
- yandrypozo 9y agoJust last month I had to search and present all my W-2s and last paychecks of my previous jobs in order to enter my new job. I cannot think on something more annoying and invasive than that. This regulation must be a national law.
- mmagin 9y agoWow, I didn't realize some people were not only asked salary history but expected to document it. A privileged bubble in which I live.
- jghn 9y agoThis was many years ago now but I had an acquaintance who fudged his current salary while interviewing and then was caught when his new employer asked for W-2s. Needless to say, he was looking for a new new employer right quick. Because of that I never lied about my salary history again.
- Domenic_S 9y agoIt is common practice in financial services industry, presumably because your commission proves how good you were at your job.
- coin 9y agoYou are free to not provide this info.
- perl4ever 9y agoYou aren't free not to provide your salary if the computerized system for applying requires it.
- lotsofpulp 9y agoIt might not have been for pay history, it might have been for employment history. People are considerably less likely to create fraudulent tax documents than faking other types of employment records. Plus it's super easy to check. Although in general, the goal should be to be valuable enough to tell any prospective employer none of your business when they ask you about prior pay.
- zaidf 9y agoAre they allowed to get salary history from data brokers like Experian?
- twostorytower 9y ago"What are your salary expectations?" is a much more useful question.
- dang 9y agoMajor discussions at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15502142 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15502142 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15846852 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15846852. It's good to look up such threads before reposting. You can do so like this: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=california%20salary&sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=story&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0 https://hn.algolia.com/?query=california%20salary&sort=byDat...
- Thespian2 9y agoThanks. Will try to do so in the future. Forgot to this time.