3 ms·
The experience range for that position is so wide that the pay range won't be very meaningful.
by dehrmann 5y ago
The experience range for that position is so wide that the pay range won't be very meaningful.
- lotsofpulp 5y agoMinimum and maximum pay is always useful information.
- missedthecue 5y agoEven when it's "$31,000 - $287,000"?
- lotsofpulp 5y agoYes. If an employer lists extremely low pay as the minimum, the labor market will know to avoid that market as apparently supply to demand ratio is too tilted in favor of the buyers of labor. If the market is competitive, then the employer listing a subpar minimum pay will either get subpar candidates or be forced to raise it to compete with their competitors.
- missedthecue 5y agoThis doesn't work if every firm lists jobs like that, which is happening in CO
- lotsofpulp 5y agoThen that means there is too much supply of labor relative to demand and laborers should be looking into other markets. These mechanisms are not expected to work over the course of months or even a year. It can take multiple years for the supply curves to move.
- Ericson2314 5y agoI mean the labor market has virtually always been pretty fucked. The market doesn't clear, and all the minimum wage empirical studies invaliding econ 101 demonstrate its flaws. (To be clear, that is saying it would be better if raising the minimum wage did increase unemployment, because that would likely indicate the labor market wasn't completely fucked in employees favor to begin with. We simply wouldn't have a minimum wage in that case because there would be enough organic worker power.) Still, I rather have the transparency. Wide bands for all jobs makes it plainly obvious who holds the power, and that is still useful. Do not want my coworkers to be blissfully ignorant.)
- ryanmercer 5y agoThe low end is always meaningful, it lets you know if you want to apply and potentially waste 3-5 interviews only to find out you'll be taking a pay cut.