3 ms·

No one said anything about policies forcing people to keep their pay secret. We love our freedom of speech, so that wouldn't make much sense. It is true that a

No one said anything about policies forcing people to keep their pay secret. We love our freedom of speech, so that wouldn't make much sense. It is true that a small minority of states (under a quarter) have some requirement about salary range on job postings, but that doesn't tell you what people make. That tells you what the base salary range is, and the range can be quite large. It also doesn't tell you what anyone who wasn't just hired makes, since their salary could have increased in the time since they were hired in the applicable range. And of course, the many people who worked at a company since before these recent laws went into effect have no hint of their salary published anywhere. I guess some people don't find it creepy to have employers make termination decisions based on family structure, but I sure as hell do. I would think that European countries, where they like privacy so much that they invented cookie banners, wouldn't put employees in the awkward situation of having to disclose their family structure, spousal earnings, costs (medical bills? caring for a parent?) in order to hang onto their jobs. And this is before getting into the efficiency arguments of retaining employees based on productivity, not family structure. I can see why startups aren't flourishing as much in Europe, with policies like these!

bigyabai 8mo ago
> We love our freedom of speech We love the idea of it. Want to boycott, divest or sanction a specific state? That's illegal because you're using speech for the wrong purposes. As an American, I think you're huffing farts to win an unwinnable debate.
- apparent 8mo ago
  I guess it's easier to lob silly fart claims rather than engage with the fact that what you've described is very foreign to most Americans. As for sanctioning specific states, we do this plenty. There aren't many voices raised when it's done against countries that are our enemies. Sanctioning allies would obviously be a weird move, and countries in between, are in between. I'll end by saying that you characterize this as a debate, when it isn't one. You're free to think it's grand to terminate employees based on their home life. I think it's terrible and am glad I don't work at a company that would ever do such a thing. But I don't think it's something that should be illegal, as long as everyone who went to work for the company knew what they were getting into.
em-bee 8mo ago
No one said anything about policies forcing people to keep their pay secret. We love our freedom of speech, so that wouldn't make much sense. really? it has been a widespread policy in many companies across the US until the laws changed. some people don't find it creepy to have employers make termination decisions based on family structure, but I sure as hell do. why though? what's the big deal with someone knowing how many children you have? European countries, where they like privacy [...] wouldn't put employees in the awkward situation of having to disclose their family structure, spousal earnings, costs (medical bills? caring for a parent?) in order to hang onto their jobs. there are a few things you need to consider: for one earnings are much more average. there are not many high or low earners. if i know what your job is i can pretty much guess how much you make because most people in the same job get the same pay, and that is already public knowledge. unlike the US (you do have a point with the base salaries and the range there) the pay ranges in europe are much narrower. likewise costs are irrelevant because almost everyone has health insurance which covers anything worth of note. medical bills are not a thing for the average person in europe. i said it before: there is nothing to disclose that isn't already public. I can see why startups aren't flourishing as much in Europe, with policies like these! also not relevant because these laws don't apply to small companies. the minimum is 50 people i think.
- em-bee 8mo ago
  these laws don't apply to small companies. the minimum is 50 people i think. i just came across an article that stated that the law applies to companies with 10 or more people. so maybe it is relevant for startups.
tpm 8mo ago
> employers make termination decisions based on family structure There might be a misunderstanding. The employer usually does not know about your family structure; the only place that really has to know about that is the wage department to calculate your taxes etc. (even though in some countries you can do that yourself if you are a very private person, but in that case you are more likely to be self-employed anyway). Of course if you want to claim days out of work, paid or not, to care for the children or a parent, the employer might want to know if the children are real. > costs (medical bills? caring for a parent?) Medical bills?
- em-bee 8mo ago
  The employer usually does not know about your family structure when i need to let go people from my company because i need to downsize for whatever reason i need to choose those who would be least affected. that means i need to know who is single, married, or has children. because if i let go the one who is a parent instead of someone who is single, they might sue me because it would cause them undue hardship, if say finding a new job would force them to move which would affect the other parents job and also the kids school. and their whole social life. sometimes this can't be avoided. if all my employees have families and children then i am stuck. but if there is a choice, then the choice must be the person who is more likely to recover, or who has less dependents. the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. long story short, i have to know the family structure to make that choice.
  - apparent 8mo ago
    What country are you in? And when you say "I need to know" do you mean you want to know, or you are legally compelled to make decisions based on these criteria? Why do you fear lawsuits from parents as opposed to single people? Are there grounds for a lawsuit that involve whether someone is a parent?
    - em-bee 8mo ago
      i am talking about germany, but i believe this is true for many european companies. i am legally compelled to not dismiss people if that causes social/financial hardship for them, when i could dismiss other people who would face less hardship. basically i need to consider three factors: how long they already worked in my company, how old they are, and their family situation, whether they have dependents. failure to consider these risks a lawsuit making the dismissal invalid. this of course does not apply to dismissals that are related to bad behavior or lack of qualification. on the other side: unique qualifications that i need to keep my business running are also exempt even if that person otherwise would be the one facing the least hardship from a dismissal.

bigyabai 8mo ago

> We love our freedom of speech We love the idea of it. Want to boycott, divest or sanction a specific state? That's illegal because you're using speech for the wrong purposes. As an American, I think you're huffing farts to win an unwinnable debate.

apparent 8mo ago
I guess it's easier to lob silly fart claims rather than engage with the fact that what you've described is very foreign to most Americans. As for sanctioning specific states, we do this plenty. There aren't many voices raised when it's done against countries that are our enemies. Sanctioning allies would obviously be a weird move, and countries in between, are in between. I'll end by saying that you characterize this as a debate, when it isn't one. You're free to think it's grand to terminate employees based on their home life. I think it's terrible and am glad I don't work at a company that would ever do such a thing. But I don't think it's something that should be illegal, as long as everyone who went to work for the company knew what they were getting into.

em-bee 8mo ago

No one said anything about policies forcing people to keep their pay secret. We love our freedom of speech, so that wouldn't make much sense. really? it has been a widespread policy in many companies across the US until the laws changed. some people don't find it creepy to have employers make termination decisions based on family structure, but I sure as hell do. why though? what's the big deal with someone knowing how many children you have? European countries, where they like privacy [...] wouldn't put employees in the awkward situation of having to disclose their family structure, spousal earnings, costs (medical bills? caring for a parent?) in order to hang onto their jobs. there are a few things you need to consider: for one earnings are much more average. there are not many high or low earners. if i know what your job is i can pretty much guess how much you make because most people in the same job get the same pay, and that is already public knowledge. unlike the US (you do have a point with the base salaries and the range there) the pay ranges in europe are much narrower. likewise costs are irrelevant because almost everyone has health insurance which covers anything worth of note. medical bills are not a thing for the average person in europe. i said it before: there is nothing to disclose that isn't already public. I can see why startups aren't flourishing as much in Europe, with policies like these! also not relevant because these laws don't apply to small companies. the minimum is 50 people i think.

em-bee 8mo ago
these laws don't apply to small companies. the minimum is 50 people i think. i just came across an article that stated that the law applies to companies with 10 or more people. so maybe it is relevant for startups.

tpm 8mo ago

> employers make termination decisions based on family structure There might be a misunderstanding. The employer usually does not know about your family structure; the only place that really has to know about that is the wage department to calculate your taxes etc. (even though in some countries you can do that yourself if you are a very private person, but in that case you are more likely to be self-employed anyway). Of course if you want to claim days out of work, paid or not, to care for the children or a parent, the employer might want to know if the children are real. > costs (medical bills? caring for a parent?) Medical bills?

em-bee 8mo ago
The employer usually does not know about your family structure when i need to let go people from my company because i need to downsize for whatever reason i need to choose those who would be least affected. that means i need to know who is single, married, or has children. because if i let go the one who is a parent instead of someone who is single, they might sue me because it would cause them undue hardship, if say finding a new job would force them to move which would affect the other parents job and also the kids school. and their whole social life. sometimes this can't be avoided. if all my employees have families and children then i am stuck. but if there is a choice, then the choice must be the person who is more likely to recover, or who has less dependents. the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. long story short, i have to know the family structure to make that choice.
- apparent 8mo ago
  What country are you in? And when you say "I need to know" do you mean you want to know, or you are legally compelled to make decisions based on these criteria? Why do you fear lawsuits from parents as opposed to single people? Are there grounds for a lawsuit that involve whether someone is a parent?
  - em-bee 8mo ago
    i am talking about germany, but i believe this is true for many european companies. i am legally compelled to not dismiss people if that causes social/financial hardship for them, when i could dismiss other people who would face less hardship. basically i need to consider three factors: how long they already worked in my company, how old they are, and their family situation, whether they have dependents. failure to consider these risks a lawsuit making the dismissal invalid. this of course does not apply to dismissals that are related to bad behavior or lack of qualification. on the other side: unique qualifications that i need to keep my business running are also exempt even if that person otherwise would be the one facing the least hardship from a dismissal.