4 ms·

The law doesn't appear to prevent negotiating a range higher than advertised. Nor does it prevent the employer from posting a large range. This should force em

The law doesn't appear to prevent negotiating a range higher than advertised. Nor does it prevent the employer from posting a large range. This should force employers to do a better job assessing what value a position provides and advertising the salary range appropriately. Currently, they know the value, but will attempt to low-ball applicants to the extent possible.

WalterBright 4y ago
> they know the value, but will attempt to low-ball applicants to the extent possible. When you buy a car or a house, do you bid the value, or do you try to low-ball and see if the seller will bite?
- raisin_churn 4y ago
  When I bought my house in a major US metro, any attempt to low-ball the seller simply meant your offer would go immediately in the trash in favor of one of the dozens of asking-plus bids, and continued attempts to do it was a surefire way to extend the unpleasantness of house hunting. And house prices in my city are up 20% since 2020, so I don't think the situation has become more amenable to low-ballers. And that's all beside the point, because the information asymmetries in real estate markets are totally different from labor markets. This law reduces the information asymmetry to actually make labor markets more like real estate markets, in which all historical prices are public information and (in civilized jurisdictions, at least) all known relevant factors that might affect price are legally required to be disclosed.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    What about the information asymmetry inherent about you knowing what your abilities are, and the company does not know? If you've ever hired someone, you'll find out about this asymmetry.
    - raisin_churn 4y ago
      Indeed, I've hired many people. The nice thing is that as an employer in most of the US, you can just fire them for any reason or none at all. I don't think the possibility of doing multiple interviews only to discover that the candidate you've had ample opportunity to question is actually a complete incompetent justifies underpaying/attempting to underpay the rest of your, presumably competent, employees. I promise you, if you stop structuring compensation with the assumption that your employees are worthless, you'll stop getting so many incompetent or recalcitrant employees.
- croon 4y ago
  The difference being that in those cases both parties know you're lowballing. Which this bill introduces in this market too.
lsaferite 4y ago
I'm fairly certain the CO law prevents just listing a massive pay range. If the CA law doesn't have some similar protection then it's highly likely to be used as a loophole.

WalterBright 4y ago

> they know the value, but will attempt to low-ball applicants to the extent possible. When you buy a car or a house, do you bid the value, or do you try to low-ball and see if the seller will bite?

raisin_churn 4y ago
When I bought my house in a major US metro, any attempt to low-ball the seller simply meant your offer would go immediately in the trash in favor of one of the dozens of asking-plus bids, and continued attempts to do it was a surefire way to extend the unpleasantness of house hunting. And house prices in my city are up 20% since 2020, so I don't think the situation has become more amenable to low-ballers. And that's all beside the point, because the information asymmetries in real estate markets are totally different from labor markets. This law reduces the information asymmetry to actually make labor markets more like real estate markets, in which all historical prices are public information and (in civilized jurisdictions, at least) all known relevant factors that might affect price are legally required to be disclosed.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  What about the information asymmetry inherent about you knowing what your abilities are, and the company does not know? If you've ever hired someone, you'll find out about this asymmetry.
  - raisin_churn 4y ago
    Indeed, I've hired many people. The nice thing is that as an employer in most of the US, you can just fire them for any reason or none at all. I don't think the possibility of doing multiple interviews only to discover that the candidate you've had ample opportunity to question is actually a complete incompetent justifies underpaying/attempting to underpay the rest of your, presumably competent, employees. I promise you, if you stop structuring compensation with the assumption that your employees are worthless, you'll stop getting so many incompetent or recalcitrant employees.
croon 4y ago
The difference being that in those cases both parties know you're lowballing. Which this bill introduces in this market too.

lsaferite 4y ago

I'm fairly certain the CO law prevents just listing a massive pay range. If the CA law doesn't have some similar protection then it's highly likely to be used as a loophole.