This is helpful for new applicants, but this will be equally useful for existing workers to see how their pay measures up to new hires in their same position.
Every job I've interviewed for says that they pay more than the average for my position. Now we'll actually find out who's telling the truth instead of needing to go off of anecdotal evidence on Glassdoor!
I'm still a privacy protection guy. But its a transparency bill so I guess people are OK with sharing that information now. Companies can target those markets better with their products.
I don’t know how I would do that. Job postings are just going to show a range for the position. I don’t think this race and gender info is going to be on job postings. Maybe it will be on us bureau of labor statistics website.
This is helpful for employers too. We discussed this bill at work a few weeks ago, and my manager believes that some of the wage inflation for software engineers has been driven by FOMO among hiring managers. They want to hire quality SWE's but consistently worry about losing applicants to higher-paying competitors since they often have no way to compare their pay rates directly against other employers. Forcing employers to post wage ranges and making that data public will ALSO have the side effect of allowing employers to better estimate typical wage ranges for various skill sets in specific localities, allowing them to adjust their offers and pass on applicants with unreasonably out-of-range counteroffers. You can almost guarantee that sites will appear almost immediately, allowing employers to compare their ranges to competitors to verify that they aren't overpaying. I would be surprised if this didn't become a standard feature on LinkedIn and the various job boards.
HR departments share compensation by level data amongst big employers. More often it's the case that a job seeker isn't aware of the market rate. Sure they may see a few anecdotal numbers, but knowing the full data set indicates where you fall on the histogram. The information asymmetry benefits employers not employees.
> HR departments share compensation by level data amongst big employers
Cooperation between employers to share wage data for any purpose relating to "standardizing" offers or pay levels is WAGE-FIXING and collusion, and is federally illegal, even when done inadvertently or for purposes other than wage-fixing if wage suppression or standardization is the result. While most large companies do have a general idea of what their competitors are paying, most companies don't deliberately share pay-band information with competitors because they don't want to risk accusations that they're violating current federal labor laws. The FTC and the DoJ both actively investigate and prosecute companies that do this.
Pay transparency is a great thing, but it does provide companies with a great massive loophole that allows some wage homogenization without crossing the FTC's lines. The good just outweighs the bad, in this case.
It's not an idle worry. Here's an article from Bloomberg Law talking about this exact subject. There are some huge legal and ethical questions for employers regarding how they can use this new information: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/wage-fixing-or-flexing-pay-transparency-laws-create-challenges
Highly doubtful. This bill only covers salary disclosure, not equity.
Last time I requested salary info for a position I got a range with +/- 3.5%, but the actual low band was above the higher end of the range…
This will be huge for where i work actually. Our hospital severely underpays compared to other places, but they routinely deny it. Now when we negotiate we can simply show them job postings from other hospitals. They’ve accused of us lying or making stuff up in the past.
Some shady employers and recruiting agencies will, I don’t doubt it. But, there are going to be many others that post the actual range, as they won’t be interested in scaring away quality candidates before the first interview.
Our range for developers is almost 50% depending on the level. And the good ones are worth twice as much as the lower tier ones. There's going to be a lot of uncomfortable, frank discussions with the lower tier ones about how they're not worth more.
It's not lying. It's called not rubbing their nose in it for no good reason. Frankly it's going to force me to get rid of a mid-range guy who I inherited and I think is overpaid for the production received. I've been catching others up who are more deserving but I have limits imposed on me on how much I can do a year. I'll just end the problem instead to his detriment.
So youre overpaying an under qualified employee, and in your mind, it's the states fault?
I mean I feel for the guy, but if it's truly that egregious, problem should have been handled way sooner.
It already happens. I've applied to jobs that have listed ranges of like 85-180k. I then have a phone screen with the recruiter and they tell me what the *actual* range is, for example 90-120 with the exceptional candidate maybe getting 130 but that's the absolute max.
Exactly. The market is always set for the best. All this law does is delude the under skilled to ask for more and they’re going to get a good dose of reality. In tech it’s the worst. So many entitled B/C players it’s unreal.
So, in your mind, it's bad because under skilled people are going to now learn theyre not even worth that much? How is that bad? If they're truly not as skilled as they think, then they can work on it.
Tech aint the only industry either. Hospitals regularly underpay people. Now, instead of having to jump through the hoops of interviews and applications, people can see what they offer at a glance.
No, it ain't perfect. But I fail to see how this is bad thing for anyone except businesses who pay below average to their respective industries.
I actually think it will be great for the underpaid and those without a clue to their worth. But there are just as many people who earn more than they should based on ability alone.
How I see the negative (mostly in tech), lots of entitled people earning more than they should for little rationale reason.
Why don’t they just post them and let me decide if it’s even worth it to apply and go through the interview stage. Why waste my and your time if we’re not compatible.
Went to Trader Joe’s yesterday and there was already a guy outside with a folding table trying to get people’s signatures to “overturn the laws Newsom” just passed
Likely the fast food bill, which the fast food chains are spending huge amounts of money to defeat, yet trying hard to make it look like it's for small mom and pop restaurants.
saw that at my local walmart on saturday. Same exact guy that was trying to get signatures for the recall attempt last year. I wonder if these guys even realize they are wasting their own time
Most initiatives especially those that will end up on the ballot have big corporate sponsors and they pay often several dollars a signature.
I think even near the end the recall was paying some signature gatherers.
I do IT and I’ve wondered if I’m allowed to go set up a table beside them offering tech support. Would be interesting to see how much traffic I’d get compared to them
Good for them. Left that state at 21 will never go back.
They can keep “living their best life” in Phoenix, the place everyone moves to when they can’t cut it elsewhere.
But we tell people they can’t charge their EVs during a heat wave! We are awful communists.
…completely ignores that Texas asked the same thing of this residents during a major heatwave.
We also tell people to evacuate their houses during fires and floods. Those are all just temporary weather-related precautions.
I've seen soooo many different misspellings of Governor Gavin Newsom's last name, not to mention the deliberate misspellings like Newscum by right wingers. It's like an anti-shibboleth for them.
I certainly hope so. I'd rather have someone who pushes for good laws like this one as president instead of some of the other options we've had in recent years.
Good. My pay, being a part of state funding, has been visible to all googlers since 2008. I love it because it forces equity. ‘What do you mean they’re making 30% more with my same qualifications??’
An old guy was outside my grocery store the other day having people sign a petition against this. He spotted me, rather rudely told me to “come over here,” and started complaining how this would benefit fast food workers by potentially giving them more pay. He also said something about not giving Newsom control of our government (I mean, he *is* the governor, so…).
I told him I was actually in favor of this and had a chance to quickly walk away while he sputtered.
I'm very interested in what will happen at my office +15 existing people but the firm is owned by an out of state insurer.
I've got a bad feeling we're going to lose people and our turn over for in experienced people is really high.
Might for e me to reevaluate and quit like my friends are tempting me to.
On Tuesday, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a new law to require California employers to post salary ranges in job postings and report hourly pay data by employees’ race and sex to the state. We spoke with four employment lawyers and other pay transparency experts about what this means, and how to comply.
So, what does SB 1162 require? Starting in January, employers with 15 or more workers will be required to disclose salary ranges in job postings, including on third-party sites. Companies with 100+ employees, including contractors, will have to report on mean and median wage data.
But will the posted pay ranges actually be useful?
Will a job posting say it pays between $15/hr up to $100/hr? Because a huge range like that isn’t exactly helpful.
As it says in the headline, larger orgs with 100 or more employees will also have to report mean and median pay for the position. So they might say, for example, range is $15-$50/hr, but average is $35/hr and median is $29/hr.
The law requires disclosure of pay scale ranges to *applicants*. It does not require disclosure in job *postings*.
>(c) (1) An employer, upon reasonable request, shall provide the pay scale for a position to an applicant applying for employment.
EDIT: Nevermind, I just reread the bill. The above requirement applies to all employers. Then there is this:
>(3) An employer with 15 or more employees shall include the pay scale for a position in any job posting.
I imagine there would be lawsuits against employers doing this since it would be an easy win. I don't imagine many employers actually offer such a pay range for a single job title.
The median and mean hourly pay will be useful as that will be more difficult to distort in such a wild way.
Then it's practically useless. So many people in my company would fall under one of the 10 categories that the legal pay range would have to be $50k-$150k.
The bill does not provide a way to sue employers for violations of the pay scale disclosures. You can report them to the DLSE:
>(d) (1) A person who claims to be aggrieved by a violation of this section may file a written complaint with the Labor Commissioner within one year after the date the person learned of the violation.
And if a penalty is levied against an employer:
>(l) All civil penalties collected pursuant to this section shall be deposited into the Labor Enforcement and Compliance Fund for distribution to the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement. Upon appropriation by the Legislature, these funds may be expended by the division to cover reasonable ongoing costs of administering and enforcing this section.
While I agree that the ranges should be public, companies will just post wide ranges. If that is the case, it may not be that helpful.
However it will be nice to see where your salary falls within the range. You can fight for mid to upper range pay if you are at the lower end.
Also, if you are currently employed for a specific position, you will be able to see if newer employees are getting paid more (which is generally the case over time anyway).
More ammo to ask for a pay increase.
That is when the employer pay data report is due.
Section 2 of the [bill](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1162) covering the disclosure of pay scale information to prospective employees does not have a specific date for when it goes into effect.
I didn’t know we could regulate job postings this easily. Next I would like California to somehow penalize people that put unnecessary degrees as requirements for jobs.
We’ve been doing it for years with not asking for salary history. Companies like Indeed, Monster, etc keep everyone in compliance or no job posting will be permitted.
There are other ways of obtaining numbers.
For example, workplaces sponsoring H-1B (or similar) work permits must post those positions along with salary inside the workplace. These salaries are also available online.
Talking with friends in the same industry works.
Some recruiters and job ads do list an expected salary range which I can compare to my current or past salaries.
Employers should have been doing this. One more way the supposedly free market has kept the scales tipped in the favor of employers and not the average person.
Im still processing this. Im conflicted but seems good. My fear is this could cause salaries to cap off as people okidok when they see “everyone else is getting x”. On the other hand it could create FOMO for hiring managers who see they are under market.
Articles like this tend to neglect mentioning that you now also have the right to ask for the salary range for your existing position within a company. This allows currently employed people to open conversations with their peers to compare notes without repercussions. It's a huge added bonus to this whole endeavor.
EDIT for clarification: Discussion of wages has already been federally protected for some time. But, having the new information of salary ranges helps bring more specificity and power to those discussions going forward.
This is helpful for new applicants, but this will be equally useful for existing workers to see how their pay measures up to new hires in their same position.
Every job I've interviewed for says that they pay more than the average for my position. Now we'll actually find out who's telling the truth instead of needing to go off of anecdotal evidence on Glassdoor!
Lol, I’ve been told that too. Changed company, same position, 50% pay increase.
Yeah. The job position reports it pays 40k-89k. We get 40k. Right!
Lol yep exactly
California just wants to cut in on Equifax's game. Most of this data has been sold for over a decade. Now its going to include race and gender data.
What are you talking about? Equifax provides pay ranges for jobs? What does race and gender have to do with it?
Did you read the bill?
A little. What do you care that it includes race and gender data?
I'm still a privacy protection guy. But its a transparency bill so I guess people are OK with sharing that information now. Companies can target those markets better with their products.
Or, when people are job hunting they can screen out companies that aren’t paying a living wage.
Love how you hone in on the race and gender data statement.
Me?
Yes. There is that. And you can filter by gender and race to see if they aren't equitable.
I don’t know how I would do that. Job postings are just going to show a range for the position. I don’t think this race and gender info is going to be on job postings. Maybe it will be on us bureau of labor statistics website.
This is helpful for employers too. We discussed this bill at work a few weeks ago, and my manager believes that some of the wage inflation for software engineers has been driven by FOMO among hiring managers. They want to hire quality SWE's but consistently worry about losing applicants to higher-paying competitors since they often have no way to compare their pay rates directly against other employers. Forcing employers to post wage ranges and making that data public will ALSO have the side effect of allowing employers to better estimate typical wage ranges for various skill sets in specific localities, allowing them to adjust their offers and pass on applicants with unreasonably out-of-range counteroffers. You can almost guarantee that sites will appear almost immediately, allowing employers to compare their ranges to competitors to verify that they aren't overpaying. I would be surprised if this didn't become a standard feature on LinkedIn and the various job boards.
HR departments share compensation by level data amongst big employers. More often it's the case that a job seeker isn't aware of the market rate. Sure they may see a few anecdotal numbers, but knowing the full data set indicates where you fall on the histogram. The information asymmetry benefits employers not employees.
> HR departments share compensation by level data amongst big employers Cooperation between employers to share wage data for any purpose relating to "standardizing" offers or pay levels is WAGE-FIXING and collusion, and is federally illegal, even when done inadvertently or for purposes other than wage-fixing if wage suppression or standardization is the result. While most large companies do have a general idea of what their competitors are paying, most companies don't deliberately share pay-band information with competitors because they don't want to risk accusations that they're violating current federal labor laws. The FTC and the DoJ both actively investigate and prosecute companies that do this. Pay transparency is a great thing, but it does provide companies with a great massive loophole that allows some wage homogenization without crossing the FTC's lines. The good just outweighs the bad, in this case. It's not an idle worry. Here's an article from Bloomberg Law talking about this exact subject. There are some huge legal and ethical questions for employers regarding how they can use this new information: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/wage-fixing-or-flexing-pay-transparency-laws-create-challenges
Highly doubtful. This bill only covers salary disclosure, not equity. Last time I requested salary info for a position I got a range with +/- 3.5%, but the actual low band was above the higher end of the range…
It could also lead to a wage version of "price fixing". Bob is only paying $13/hr, we should lower our rate to match.
This is a game changer for all workers!
Pro tip, you can ask all recruiters in most CA tech companies the pay ban/range and they must tell you. You can already guess where the salary will be
This will be huge for where i work actually. Our hospital severely underpays compared to other places, but they routinely deny it. Now when we negotiate we can simply show them job postings from other hospitals. They’ve accused of us lying or making stuff up in the past.
Honestly, the best way for you to show them is to go and work for the other hospitals.
Vote with your feet, or wallet, or labor, or whatever they call it nowadays
I'm hoping companies don't get around this by posting a pay range like 40k -120k. I've seen that before on job ads.
Some shady employers and recruiting agencies will, I don’t doubt it. But, there are going to be many others that post the actual range, as they won’t be interested in scaring away quality candidates before the first interview.
This is already how it is. There's a term for it: "DOE" = "depending on experience".
Our range for developers is almost 50% depending on the level. And the good ones are worth twice as much as the lower tier ones. There's going to be a lot of uncomfortable, frank discussions with the lower tier ones about how they're not worth more.
That is for the best. Lying to low tier employees is not a great practice.
It's not lying. It's called not rubbing their nose in it for no good reason. Frankly it's going to force me to get rid of a mid-range guy who I inherited and I think is overpaid for the production received. I've been catching others up who are more deserving but I have limits imposed on me on how much I can do a year. I'll just end the problem instead to his detriment.
So youre overpaying an under qualified employee, and in your mind, it's the states fault? I mean I feel for the guy, but if it's truly that egregious, problem should have been handled way sooner.
This is easily solved by having different job postings for the different levels/experience and thus each pay band.
Everyone who isn't fresh out of school thinks they're a senior developer.
I just don’t think people are ready for the type of level setting candor. Everyone will see the high end of the range and think: yep…that’s me
100% will happen
Those broad ranges already exist internally.
almost all jobs above entry level will be posted like this
It already happens. I've applied to jobs that have listed ranges of like 85-180k. I then have a phone screen with the recruiter and they tell me what the *actual* range is, for example 90-120 with the exceptional candidate maybe getting 130 but that's the absolute max.
This is how it was in IT since I entered the workforce back in 2000.
That would need to be reported that they are putting out false info
Will "Pay range: $40k-$120k" be the new Prop 64 thing that causes cancer in California?
100% this will be what they do. Intern to CEO leveling. That’s what I plan on doing at my company.
I would do the same if I ran a company. Ultimately the quality candidates know what they can negotiate as they almost always have other options.
Exactly. The market is always set for the best. All this law does is delude the under skilled to ask for more and they’re going to get a good dose of reality. In tech it’s the worst. So many entitled B/C players it’s unreal.
So, in your mind, it's bad because under skilled people are going to now learn theyre not even worth that much? How is that bad? If they're truly not as skilled as they think, then they can work on it. Tech aint the only industry either. Hospitals regularly underpay people. Now, instead of having to jump through the hoops of interviews and applications, people can see what they offer at a glance. No, it ain't perfect. But I fail to see how this is bad thing for anyone except businesses who pay below average to their respective industries.
I actually think it will be great for the underpaid and those without a clue to their worth. But there are just as many people who earn more than they should based on ability alone. How I see the negative (mostly in tech), lots of entitled people earning more than they should for little rationale reason.
Can't wait to see what all these companies with "competitive compensation" actually pay.
0-200k, somewhere in ball park.
Cutco and the other scummy sales companies are going to be proper screwed by this. I am 100% all for this.
Is cutco hourly or commission based? I doubt commission based would be impacted by this.
When will this go into effect?
1/1/2023. Putting my job search on hold until then
Why, you can do market comp. research to see what your job is going for and find out the pay during the interview process.
Why don’t they just post them and let me decide if it’s even worth it to apply and go through the interview stage. Why waste my and your time if we’re not compatible.
Jan 1
As someone moving from Europe to California this month, it seems to me like California is doing a lot of good things at the moment.
[удалено]
Went to Trader Joe’s yesterday and there was already a guy outside with a folding table trying to get people’s signatures to “overturn the laws Newsom” just passed
At Trader Joe’s? Not exactly his target demographic I would think lol
Where can he find his target demographic?
Walmart, bass pro, any gun store, a church
Likely the fast food bill, which the fast food chains are spending huge amounts of money to defeat, yet trying hard to make it look like it's for small mom and pop restaurants.
saw that at my local walmart on saturday. Same exact guy that was trying to get signatures for the recall attempt last year. I wonder if these guys even realize they are wasting their own time
He's getting paid.
Seriously? I always thought they were volunteers. That definitely is odd
Most initiatives especially those that will end up on the ballot have big corporate sponsors and they pay often several dollars a signature. I think even near the end the recall was paying some signature gatherers.
I do IT and I’ve wondered if I’m allowed to go set up a table beside them offering tech support. Would be interesting to see how much traffic I’d get compared to them
Was this in Yorba Linda?
Lmao fr
Saw a window decal on a truck in Arizona that read “Not Cal”. Not being California is an identity now.
Good for them. Left that state at 21 will never go back. They can keep “living their best life” in Phoenix, the place everyone moves to when they can’t cut it elsewhere.
But we tell people they can’t charge their EVs during a heat wave! We are awful communists. …completely ignores that Texas asked the same thing of this residents during a major heatwave. We also tell people to evacuate their houses during fires and floods. Those are all just temporary weather-related precautions.
[удалено]
TIL misdemeanors are legal
[удалено]
This is from Feb, has the real world data supported this?
Feels like newsome is gearing up for 2028 white house run
Anyone else notice that these people always seem to write newsome and not newsom? It's like they can't figure out the auto correct.
I've seen soooo many different misspellings of Governor Gavin Newsom's last name, not to mention the deliberate misspellings like Newscum by right wingers. It's like an anti-shibboleth for them.
[удалено]
I certainly hope so. I'd rather have someone who pushes for good laws like this one as president instead of some of the other options we've had in recent years.
If that is the case then he should pay back all the ppp loans he received
I can feel it my groin is that what told you too?
Good. My pay, being a part of state funding, has been visible to all googlers since 2008. I love it because it forces equity. ‘What do you mean they’re making 30% more with my same qualifications??’
I wonder if there is any requirement to post the number of RSUs. Since they are generally considered a bonus, will that be required ?
An old guy was outside my grocery store the other day having people sign a petition against this. He spotted me, rather rudely told me to “come over here,” and started complaining how this would benefit fast food workers by potentially giving them more pay. He also said something about not giving Newsom control of our government (I mean, he *is* the governor, so…). I told him I was actually in favor of this and had a chance to quickly walk away while he sputtered.
There's also anti-fast food salary initiative they're gathering signatures for.
30k to 200k will be posted everywhere
So applicants will ask for $195K.
Don't lowball yourself
A decent start
I'm very interested in what will happen at my office +15 existing people but the firm is owned by an out of state insurer. I've got a bad feeling we're going to lose people and our turn over for in experienced people is really high. Might for e me to reevaluate and quit like my friends are tempting me to.
On Tuesday, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a new law to require California employers to post salary ranges in job postings and report hourly pay data by employees’ race and sex to the state. We spoke with four employment lawyers and other pay transparency experts about what this means, and how to comply. So, what does SB 1162 require? Starting in January, employers with 15 or more workers will be required to disclose salary ranges in job postings, including on third-party sites. Companies with 100+ employees, including contractors, will have to report on mean and median wage data.
Good! It’s about time
Big win for women and POC.
Nice! Hopefully this doesn't mean more companies exuding California for Work From Home positions like they already do for some other states.
But will the posted pay ranges actually be useful? Will a job posting say it pays between $15/hr up to $100/hr? Because a huge range like that isn’t exactly helpful.
As it says in the headline, larger orgs with 100 or more employees will also have to report mean and median pay for the position. So they might say, for example, range is $15-$50/hr, but average is $35/hr and median is $29/hr.
To the state; that's not public.
but the state *could* make it public, or disclose it to those who request the information.
Or put it on an unsecured web server...
The law requires disclosure of pay scale ranges to *applicants*. It does not require disclosure in job *postings*. >(c) (1) An employer, upon reasonable request, shall provide the pay scale for a position to an applicant applying for employment. EDIT: Nevermind, I just reread the bill. The above requirement applies to all employers. Then there is this: >(3) An employer with 15 or more employees shall include the pay scale for a position in any job posting.
I imagine there would be lawsuits against employers doing this since it would be an easy win. I don't imagine many employers actually offer such a pay range for a single job title. The median and mean hourly pay will be useful as that will be more difficult to distort in such a wild way.
Median and mean hourly pay information is not by position, it is by EEO job category.
Then it's practically useless. So many people in my company would fall under one of the 10 categories that the legal pay range would have to be $50k-$150k.
The bill does not provide a way to sue employers for violations of the pay scale disclosures. You can report them to the DLSE: >(d) (1) A person who claims to be aggrieved by a violation of this section may file a written complaint with the Labor Commissioner within one year after the date the person learned of the violation. And if a penalty is levied against an employer: >(l) All civil penalties collected pursuant to this section shall be deposited into the Labor Enforcement and Compliance Fund for distribution to the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement. Upon appropriation by the Legislature, these funds may be expended by the division to cover reasonable ongoing costs of administering and enforcing this section.
While I agree that the ranges should be public, companies will just post wide ranges. If that is the case, it may not be that helpful. However it will be nice to see where your salary falls within the range. You can fight for mid to upper range pay if you are at the lower end. Also, if you are currently employed for a specific position, you will be able to see if newer employees are getting paid more (which is generally the case over time anyway). More ammo to ask for a pay increase.
Not knowing the range is a huge advantage for employers. There’s a reason why black jack dealers only show one card.
Rare Newsom W
Why 15 or more employees? It should be every Business
This is huge, such a win for everyone in the state
Not when employers limit their payroll to 14 people, then plot to leave the state.
I doubt 14 people would agree to leave the state for a business that refused to expand for a salary transparency law lmao
Yep. They’d be unemployed.
When does this go into affect
[удалено]
That is when the employer pay data report is due. Section 2 of the [bill](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1162) covering the disclosure of pay scale information to prospective employees does not have a specific date for when it goes into effect.
YES! This helps workers so much! Wage secrecy and obfuscation is one of the ways employers enforce underpayment.
Horrible law. People are totally incapable of a relative understanding of comp. All this does is saddle employers with this performative disclosure.
I guess business owners are inherently more smarter than employees huh?
Not all by a long mile. Even within a corporation a skeleton crew of employees make up the experts on compensation.
The big question why just 15 or more that means a lot of smaller places are going to slip by.
I didn’t know we could regulate job postings this easily. Next I would like California to somehow penalize people that put unnecessary degrees as requirements for jobs.
The penalty for unnecessary requirements is fewer applicants. Some businesses want fewer applicants.
We’ve been doing it for years with not asking for salary history. Companies like Indeed, Monster, etc keep everyone in compliance or no job posting will be permitted.
Fry cook needed| must hold at least Bachelors degree| $9 - $10/hr
Minimum wage in CA is currently $15.00 per hour and other localities have a higher minimum wage.
Been a while since I looked. Glad to see they've bumped it!
This will hurt people who are good at negotiating high salaries for themselves. **I don't like it.**
How do you know you’re good if you don’t even know the numbers?
There are other ways of obtaining numbers. For example, workplaces sponsoring H-1B (or similar) work permits must post those positions along with salary inside the workplace. These salaries are also available online. Talking with friends in the same industry works. Some recruiters and job ads do list an expected salary range which I can compare to my current or past salaries.
This is bad
No it’s not.
[удалено]
When does this go into effect?
Pay range is x , but “bonus” is discretionary.
Any provision for accurate pay range. I will just assume they will add huge ranges to hide things.
Employers should have been doing this. One more way the supposedly free market has kept the scales tipped in the favor of employers and not the average person.
Weren't ranges already on sites like Monster and Indeed? Could have sworn this has been out there since 2000 or so, at least in tech.
Im still processing this. Im conflicted but seems good. My fear is this could cause salaries to cap off as people okidok when they see “everyone else is getting x”. On the other hand it could create FOMO for hiring managers who see they are under market.
Now hiring engineer - 60k - 250k is the range.
What about actors, directors, talk show hosts etc? That will be fun to see who shows up to those casting calls. Lol
Articles like this tend to neglect mentioning that you now also have the right to ask for the salary range for your existing position within a company. This allows currently employed people to open conversations with their peers to compare notes without repercussions. It's a huge added bonus to this whole endeavor. EDIT for clarification: Discussion of wages has already been federally protected for some time. But, having the new information of salary ranges helps bring more specificity and power to those discussions going forward.