6 ms·

I've previously commented [0] on how broken this implementation is. It's frustrating politicians don't see how easy it is to circumvent what the law seeks to ac

I've previously commented [0] on how broken this implementation is. It's frustrating politicians don't see how easy it is to circumvent what the law seeks to achieve. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37440358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37440358

delfinom 3y ago
Eh, NYS DoL is codifying regulation on top of the law. https://dol.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/09/text-salary-transparency-8.28.23-for-website.pdf https://dol.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/09/text-salar... They specifically declare the terminology "good faith" and that posted ranges must be made in good faith and accurate to reality. Any individual that feels they are harmed by said range not being in good faith can file a department of labor complaint. The NYS DoL is actually quite aggressive once you give them ammo (complaints, tips, etc) to go after companies.
paulgb 3y ago
The incentive against posting a huge range like $50-500k is that it anchors the range a candidate expects. If you post that range and then offer $100k to a qualified candidate, they will probably balk, so if that’s closer to the desired salary band you have an incentive just to say so.
- matwood 3y ago
  Posting a large, unreal range will also cause headaches internally with your existing employees. Skip all the hassle and just use a valid range. Because of the laws getting passed in other states, many postings already have ranges and they have looked reasonable to me.
  - pc86 3y ago
    I think the largest range I've seen that wasn't very obviously from some resume harvester or z-tier recruiting firm was $30-40k between the lowest and highest, and it didn't seem to grow all that much as the upper band number increased (e.g. I distinctly remember one that said $180-200k). These $50-500k ranges simply don't happen in reality.
    - doublespanner 3y ago
      I've seen plenty that go $100-350k, especially when it looks like a company is hiring a few people... Useless to a candidate, but not dodgy or malicious.
      - lotsofpulp 3y ago
        Not useless to a candidate, since they know they will earn at least $100k. This is a very useful signal to the labor market as a whole.
      - matwood 3y ago
        Not useless at all. Every candidate will start with the expectation that it will be explained why they did not hit the maximum of the range. They also know the minimum.
    - dg246 3y ago
      Take a look at Netflix, here's one at random but I believe they're all like this: https://jobs.netflix.com/jobs/294103648 https://jobs.netflix.com/jobs/294103648 "The overall market range for roles in this area of Netflix is typically $180,000 - $900,000."
- smeagull 3y ago
  It's even easier than that. Just post multiple ads. Give them different titles if you want.
miki123211 3y ago
IMO a much better idea that circumvents all these problems is requiring companies to disclose how much they're already paying their employees, the Scandinavian way. This wouldn't even necessarily need to be broken down by individual employees, per position would work too, with statistics like number of employees covered, min, max, average and median.
- brtkdotse 3y ago
  > the Scandinavian way They… do no such thing?
  - meindnoch 3y ago
    Taxeringskalender
  - nfriedly 3y ago
    I believe Sweeden, Finland, and Norway each publish the income/tax returns of all citizens.
    - magicalhippo 3y ago
      Except at least in Norway it's total taxable income, so it's after various adjustments. However for most people it should be representative and you should be able to get a good estimate of how much they're paid.
      - nfriedly 3y ago
        I think you're right. Edited for clarity.
    - jimbokun 3y ago
      That's brilliant. Some blue states (I would be shocked to see Republicans support this, despite the fact more information is very pro-market) institute this and maybe someday at the federal level as voters warm up to the idea.
altdataseller 3y ago
While some engineers definitely get compensated in stock more, is it really the majority of engineers? I feel like it’s over represented because we’re in HN but the vast majority of software engineers in this world don’t get stock at all, it’s just mostly base salary
- pc86 3y ago
  Absolutely not, it's a VC ecosystem oddity just like people saying they make $400k when most of that is stock and sometimes there isn't even a liquid market for it. The median software engineer salary in the US is something like $110k. Still about twice the average individual income in the US[0], but the vast majority are going to be making 99% of their income in cash compensation including bonuses. I've worked for about a dozen companies based across the US in a variety of industries, and never have I or any of my coworkers had access to stock as part of compensation. [0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N
  - shortrounddev2 3y ago
    I believe that a lot of companies offer stock options for two reasons: 1. Software engineers have come to expect it 2. It provides a very cheap incentive for the engineer to remain at the company for the N number of years required to vest And in the end, they may still end up being worthless
    - pc86 3y ago
      If you want to use "software engineers" to describe everyone in the US who writes code, I don't think #1 is accurate at all. Half of the developers in the US make less than $100k/yr. Most of these people work for banks, small mom-and-pop companies that have 1-3 developers. Public companies with bigger teams who don't give stock to anyone below the VP level. If your entire exposure to software development has been startup fantasy land where profitability doesn't matter yeah most of those companies are giving everyone stock down to the person at the front desk answering phones. That's the minority by every metric - number of companies, number of developers, total revenue, everything. I don't think anyone expects stock compensation unless they're artificially limiting their search to that type of company.
shortrounddev2 3y ago
In your original comment > Also, it only forces companies to list the base salary, but especially in tech, that's just a portion of one's total comp. "Total compensation" is, to me, a way to inflate one's own value. 1. In companies with no market for stock options (privately owned, startups, companies that are just absolutely worthless), equity is hypothetical money which may never be worth anything. I worked for a company which gave me 250,000 options but the company lost 18mil a year and they ended up cancelling all stock options. Some people worked there for 15 years hoping the options would be worth something and eventually saw them cancelled outright. Unless I'm working for a publicly traded company, I don't put much value in stock options. With a startup, you're basically asking to be paid in poker chips. 2. Health insurance is something I expect to be there, regardless of the monetary value. 3. I've worked for plenty of companies that include a 10% performance-based bonus as part of the compensation only to never get that bonus (or get nowhere near 10%) regardless of my own performance because the company itself didn't profit last quarter, or they did profit and just chose not to pay out bonuses. 4. The perks that you get (free breakfast burritos, free barrista, gym membership) are tokens that can (and will) be taken away as soon as the federal reserve decides to jack up rates on your company lays off 25% of the workforce in order to pay their CEO his 300mil compensation package "Total compensation" means "base salary plus hypothetical money in a perfect universe"
- HumblyTossed 3y ago
  > 2. Health insurance is something I expect to be there, regardless of the monetary value. I hear what you're saying, but man, I really wish employers would be banned from offering healthcare benefits. They have zero business offering healthcare benefits.
  - altdataseller 3y ago
    Why? Isn't someone paying 70%+ and me paying 30% of my healthcare premiums better than me paying 100%?
    - HumblyTossed 3y ago
sdfghswe 3y ago
In that link > Hire a TC negotiation consultant with access to comp data. They can get you 20-40% more. What does TC mean here?
- robin_reala 3y ago
  Total Compensation.

delfinom 3y ago

Eh, NYS DoL is codifying regulation on top of the law. https://dol.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/09/text-salary-transparency-8.28.23-for-website.pdf https://dol.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2023/09/text-salar... They specifically declare the terminology "good faith" and that posted ranges must be made in good faith and accurate to reality. Any individual that feels they are harmed by said range not being in good faith can file a department of labor complaint. The NYS DoL is actually quite aggressive once you give them ammo (complaints, tips, etc) to go after companies.

paulgb 3y ago

The incentive against posting a huge range like $50-500k is that it anchors the range a candidate expects. If you post that range and then offer $100k to a qualified candidate, they will probably balk, so if that’s closer to the desired salary band you have an incentive just to say so.

matwood 3y ago
Posting a large, unreal range will also cause headaches internally with your existing employees. Skip all the hassle and just use a valid range. Because of the laws getting passed in other states, many postings already have ranges and they have looked reasonable to me.
- pc86 3y ago
  I think the largest range I've seen that wasn't very obviously from some resume harvester or z-tier recruiting firm was $30-40k between the lowest and highest, and it didn't seem to grow all that much as the upper band number increased (e.g. I distinctly remember one that said $180-200k). These $50-500k ranges simply don't happen in reality.
  - doublespanner 3y ago
    I've seen plenty that go $100-350k, especially when it looks like a company is hiring a few people... Useless to a candidate, but not dodgy or malicious.
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      Not useless to a candidate, since they know they will earn at least $100k. This is a very useful signal to the labor market as a whole.
    - matwood 3y ago
      Not useless at all. Every candidate will start with the expectation that it will be explained why they did not hit the maximum of the range. They also know the minimum.
  - dg246 3y ago
    Take a look at Netflix, here's one at random but I believe they're all like this: https://jobs.netflix.com/jobs/294103648 https://jobs.netflix.com/jobs/294103648 "The overall market range for roles in this area of Netflix is typically $180,000 - $900,000."
smeagull 3y ago
It's even easier than that. Just post multiple ads. Give them different titles if you want.

miki123211 3y ago

IMO a much better idea that circumvents all these problems is requiring companies to disclose how much they're already paying their employees, the Scandinavian way. This wouldn't even necessarily need to be broken down by individual employees, per position would work too, with statistics like number of employees covered, min, max, average and median.

brtkdotse 3y ago
> the Scandinavian way They… do no such thing?
- meindnoch 3y ago
  Taxeringskalender
- nfriedly 3y ago
  I believe Sweeden, Finland, and Norway each publish the income/tax returns of all citizens.
  - magicalhippo 3y ago
    Except at least in Norway it's total taxable income, so it's after various adjustments. However for most people it should be representative and you should be able to get a good estimate of how much they're paid.
    - nfriedly 3y ago
      I think you're right. Edited for clarity.
  - jimbokun 3y ago
    That's brilliant. Some blue states (I would be shocked to see Republicans support this, despite the fact more information is very pro-market) institute this and maybe someday at the federal level as voters warm up to the idea.

altdataseller 3y ago

While some engineers definitely get compensated in stock more, is it really the majority of engineers? I feel like it’s over represented because we’re in HN but the vast majority of software engineers in this world don’t get stock at all, it’s just mostly base salary

pc86 3y ago
Absolutely not, it's a VC ecosystem oddity just like people saying they make $400k when most of that is stock and sometimes there isn't even a liquid market for it. The median software engineer salary in the US is something like $110k. Still about twice the average individual income in the US[0], but the vast majority are going to be making 99% of their income in cash compensation including bonuses. I've worked for about a dozen companies based across the US in a variety of industries, and never have I or any of my coworkers had access to stock as part of compensation. [0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N
- shortrounddev2 3y ago
  I believe that a lot of companies offer stock options for two reasons: 1. Software engineers have come to expect it 2. It provides a very cheap incentive for the engineer to remain at the company for the N number of years required to vest And in the end, they may still end up being worthless
  - pc86 3y ago
    If you want to use "software engineers" to describe everyone in the US who writes code, I don't think #1 is accurate at all. Half of the developers in the US make less than $100k/yr. Most of these people work for banks, small mom-and-pop companies that have 1-3 developers. Public companies with bigger teams who don't give stock to anyone below the VP level. If your entire exposure to software development has been startup fantasy land where profitability doesn't matter yeah most of those companies are giving everyone stock down to the person at the front desk answering phones. That's the minority by every metric - number of companies, number of developers, total revenue, everything. I don't think anyone expects stock compensation unless they're artificially limiting their search to that type of company.

shortrounddev2 3y ago

In your original comment > Also, it only forces companies to list the base salary, but especially in tech, that's just a portion of one's total comp. "Total compensation" is, to me, a way to inflate one's own value. 1. In companies with no market for stock options (privately owned, startups, companies that are just absolutely worthless), equity is hypothetical money which may never be worth anything. I worked for a company which gave me 250,000 options but the company lost 18mil a year and they ended up cancelling all stock options. Some people worked there for 15 years hoping the options would be worth something and eventually saw them cancelled outright. Unless I'm working for a publicly traded company, I don't put much value in stock options. With a startup, you're basically asking to be paid in poker chips. 2. Health insurance is something I expect to be there, regardless of the monetary value. 3. I've worked for plenty of companies that include a 10% performance-based bonus as part of the compensation only to never get that bonus (or get nowhere near 10%) regardless of my own performance because the company itself didn't profit last quarter, or they did profit and just chose not to pay out bonuses. 4. The perks that you get (free breakfast burritos, free barrista, gym membership) are tokens that can (and will) be taken away as soon as the federal reserve decides to jack up rates on your company lays off 25% of the workforce in order to pay their CEO his 300mil compensation package "Total compensation" means "base salary plus hypothetical money in a perfect universe"

HumblyTossed 3y ago
> 2. Health insurance is something I expect to be there, regardless of the monetary value. I hear what you're saying, but man, I really wish employers would be banned from offering healthcare benefits. They have zero business offering healthcare benefits.
- altdataseller 3y ago
  Why? Isn't someone paying 70%+ and me paying 30% of my healthcare premiums better than me paying 100%?
  - HumblyTossed 3y ago

sdfghswe 3y ago

In that link > Hire a TC negotiation consultant with access to comp data. They can get you 20-40% more. What does TC mean here?

robin_reala 3y ago
Total Compensation.