3 ms·

Couldn't companies just post a low minimum and high maximum salary to comply? (Apologies for the naive question, I assume the law isn't this easily sidestepped)

Couldn't companies just post a low minimum and high maximum salary to comply? (Apologies for the naive question, I assume the law isn't this easily sidestepped).

gnicholas 5y ago
From the second linked article above: > In providing the salary range, an employer must use good faith to determine, at the time of the posting, what it believes it would pay for the advertised job, promotion, or transfer opportunity. As a former lawyer, I would say the phrase "good faith" is the operative one here. Companies will want to stay far enough from the line so that they don't get sued.
- kryogen1c 5y ago
  > Companies will want to stay far enough from the line so that they don't get sued. idk what legal precedent is, but if i was hiring i could make a large good faith salary range. job candidates are different. post a large but meaningful skills list youre looking for and be willing to hire the right person that doesnt meet all your bullet points. a college grad with 0 experience or a no-college with 4 years of experience or a college grad+4 years exp all might be the right person, but deserve significantly different salaries.
  - eganist 5y ago
    > idk what legal precedent is, but if i was hiring i could make a large good faith salary range. What'd be interesting would be how often a company offers near the top of that range, or potentially beyond it. I'd think the frequency of offers (either far below the maximum or actually above the maximum) would make a potential case against a company for not listing ranges in good faith. (ianal)
    - notahacker 5y ago
      I think you'd make a very hard time making that stick (and a field like software development, where the 10x more productive programmer is generally believed to be a real thing, would be particularly hard). There is no reason why a company operating in good faith should want to deter exceptional candidates from applying to a position, and exceptional candidates are both much rarer than "slightly-above average" or "underqualified but trainable" candidates and able to command much higher salaries. But the possibility otherwise satisfied employees being paid a market wage commensurate with their experience might see ads for jobs similar to theirs and conclude they're being systematically underpaid and motivated to take legal action is definitely a negative second order effect of the law...
HWR_14 5y ago
They'd probably need to demonstrate that they have (of have had recently) people working at the min and max to demonstrate good faith. And they cannot just get rid of titles, because it's really based on job description.

Couldn't companies just post a low minimum and high maximum salary to comply? (Apologies for the naive question, I assume the law isn't this easily sidestepped).

gnicholas 5y ago

From the second linked article above: > In providing the salary range, an employer must use good faith to determine, at the time of the posting, what it believes it would pay for the advertised job, promotion, or transfer opportunity. As a former lawyer, I would say the phrase "good faith" is the operative one here. Companies will want to stay far enough from the line so that they don't get sued.

kryogen1c 5y ago
> Companies will want to stay far enough from the line so that they don't get sued. idk what legal precedent is, but if i was hiring i could make a large good faith salary range. job candidates are different. post a large but meaningful skills list youre looking for and be willing to hire the right person that doesnt meet all your bullet points. a college grad with 0 experience or a no-college with 4 years of experience or a college grad+4 years exp all might be the right person, but deserve significantly different salaries.
- eganist 5y ago
  > idk what legal precedent is, but if i was hiring i could make a large good faith salary range. What'd be interesting would be how often a company offers near the top of that range, or potentially beyond it. I'd think the frequency of offers (either far below the maximum or actually above the maximum) would make a potential case against a company for not listing ranges in good faith. (ianal)
  - notahacker 5y ago
    I think you'd make a very hard time making that stick (and a field like software development, where the 10x more productive programmer is generally believed to be a real thing, would be particularly hard). There is no reason why a company operating in good faith should want to deter exceptional candidates from applying to a position, and exceptional candidates are both much rarer than "slightly-above average" or "underqualified but trainable" candidates and able to command much higher salaries. But the possibility otherwise satisfied employees being paid a market wage commensurate with their experience might see ads for jobs similar to theirs and conclude they're being systematically underpaid and motivated to take legal action is definitely a negative second order effect of the law...

HWR_14 5y ago

They'd probably need to demonstrate that they have (of have had recently) people working at the min and max to demonstrate good faith. And they cannot just get rid of titles, because it's really based on job description.