4 ms·

> the employer in good faith believes So unless you can read minds, it'd be hard to prove that the employer doesn't believe this is the salary range. And besi

> the employer in good faith believes So unless you can read minds, it'd be hard to prove that the employer doesn't believe this is the salary range. And besides, 10K to 1M is a pedantically large range to illustrate this dynamic. Realistically a lot of companies could provide a range from $60K to $300K for software developers - both of these are salaries I can attest to firsthand. This isn't as stark as a 100:1 range, but a range of 5:1 is still a wide enough range such that expected salaries are still effectively unknown.

rahimnathwani 5y ago
For software engineering compensation, wide salary range isn't the biggest issue. It's that much of the compensation (often 25% to 60%) isn't salary: it's stock and discretionary bonus. I haven't read the background for this law, but I guess it's meant to help people earning less than $100k, and people with less power to negotiate an initial offer.
- DarylZero 5y ago
  It's meant to help people applying for jobs, the vast majority of whom don't get the job, so it's not really about the people who get hired.
distribot 5y ago
Can't the company be compelled to provide salary data for the role? I assume there is some kind of enforcement mechanism. So then it's a matter of explaining why your lowest paid senior engineer makes 150k, the median makes 200k and you've listed a floor of 10k? The judge/jury don't have to accept a smarmy response about how the hypothetical candidate might conceivably make 10k. And on the subject of the window, most places have much narrower bands than that for a role. It might be that wide for all engineers, but not for senior engineers for example.
- Manuel_D 5y ago
  An 60k is easily an entry level salary. And 300k is easily a principal engineer's salary. Put the two under the same job title and then you can say to the jury, "it's not just credible that this salary range could exist, this range actually already exist right now."
  - dwaltrip 5y ago
    Good luck convincing your principal engineers to take the same job title as the entry level engineers.
    - Manuel_D 5y ago
      They do at my company. Everyone is just "Software Developer". I don't see anything wrong with it, I find that titles are largely meaningless anyways. At some companies "principal engineer" is handed out after 3-4 years of experience, and at others principal engineer is the highest title with only 1-2% of devs holding it.
DarylZero 5y ago
> unless you can read minds, it'd be hard to prove That's not how it works. There is going to be an evidentiary standard (such as "preponderance of the evidence" -- it won't be "beyond a reasonable doubt") applied by an administrative law judge. The judge can very well decide he CAN read minds -- unless YOU can read minds, or he decides to tell you, you won't know.
- Manuel_D 5y ago
  It'd still be easy to meet that evidentiary standard: point to an entry level software developer making ~$60k and point to a much more experienced one making north of a quarter million. Such a spread is not hard to find
  - DarylZero 5y ago
    The job ads for their positions will have different experience and education requirements. Even judges understand there is a difference between "entry level" and "senior."

rahimnathwani 5y ago

For software engineering compensation, wide salary range isn't the biggest issue. It's that much of the compensation (often 25% to 60%) isn't salary: it's stock and discretionary bonus. I haven't read the background for this law, but I guess it's meant to help people earning less than $100k, and people with less power to negotiate an initial offer.

DarylZero 5y ago
It's meant to help people applying for jobs, the vast majority of whom don't get the job, so it's not really about the people who get hired.

distribot 5y ago

Can't the company be compelled to provide salary data for the role? I assume there is some kind of enforcement mechanism. So then it's a matter of explaining why your lowest paid senior engineer makes 150k, the median makes 200k and you've listed a floor of 10k? The judge/jury don't have to accept a smarmy response about how the hypothetical candidate might conceivably make 10k. And on the subject of the window, most places have much narrower bands than that for a role. It might be that wide for all engineers, but not for senior engineers for example.

Manuel_D 5y ago
An 60k is easily an entry level salary. And 300k is easily a principal engineer's salary. Put the two under the same job title and then you can say to the jury, "it's not just credible that this salary range could exist, this range actually already exist right now."
- dwaltrip 5y ago
  Good luck convincing your principal engineers to take the same job title as the entry level engineers.
  - Manuel_D 5y ago
    They do at my company. Everyone is just "Software Developer". I don't see anything wrong with it, I find that titles are largely meaningless anyways. At some companies "principal engineer" is handed out after 3-4 years of experience, and at others principal engineer is the highest title with only 1-2% of devs holding it.

DarylZero 5y ago

> unless you can read minds, it'd be hard to prove That's not how it works. There is going to be an evidentiary standard (such as "preponderance of the evidence" -- it won't be "beyond a reasonable doubt") applied by an administrative law judge. The judge can very well decide he CAN read minds -- unless YOU can read minds, or he decides to tell you, you won't know.

Manuel_D 5y ago
It'd still be easy to meet that evidentiary standard: point to an entry level software developer making ~$60k and point to a much more experienced one making north of a quarter million. Such a spread is not hard to find
- DarylZero 5y ago
  The job ads for their positions will have different experience and education requirements. Even judges understand there is a difference between "entry level" and "senior."