1131
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Help-wanted advertisements in New York will have to disclose proposed pay rates after a statewide salary transparency law goes into effect on Sunday, part of growing state and city efforts to give women and people of color a tool to advocate for equal pay for equal work.

Employers with at least four workers will be required to disclose salary ranges for any job advertised externally to the public or internally to workers interested in a promotion or transfer.

Pay transparency, supporters say, will prevent employers from offering some job candidates less or more money based on age, gender, race or other factors not related to their skills.

Advocates believe the change also could help underpaid workers realize they make less than people doing the same job.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] 2Xtreme21@lemmy.world 111 points 1 year ago

Guaranteed employers will post ridiculous, not-at-all-helpful salary ranges to get around the law.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 110 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's what they did in Colorado, but it backfired because every applicant expected the high end of the range. Now they just advertise jobs that aren't available in Colorado.

Pay transparency helps both employers and employees, but at the expense of employers who are trying to underpay their workers.

[-] JungleJim@sh.itjust.works 51 points 1 year ago

Well good. Those companies deserve to fail if their business model can't support itself without abusing people.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

I agree. But many companies are operating under the presumption that this will hurt them, even though they pay a fair wage. If your pay is competitive, you want transparency. If it isn't, you're running an unsustainable business.

[-] jballs@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago

Yeah we really need more states - or better yet the federal government - to pass these laws. For now, you're just going to see job postings say "no applicants from New York or Colorado."

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

And Washington and California.

So they just excluded 50mil americans or so, many of them in high demand fields.

Im not sure that's going to work out for them.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

At least you can quickly identify the employers with the shitty hiring practices. There are a lot of jobs out there.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

And now you know who not to work for. No one fucking around with your salary before the first interview is going to be a better person come later.

[-] thelastknowngod@lemm.ee 38 points 1 year ago

I interviewed at a place a few weeks ago. I asked the recruiter what the salary band was. I told her I expected to be in the top 10-15% of that range.

"Well we don't really like to hire someone at that high of a rate."

Thanks for waving the red flag. Good luck to you. Talk to you never.

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Then people will avoid applying, and instead apply to the similair job without a bullshit range. The problem is self correcting.

This law is already in effect in Colorado/Washington/etc. Pull up an advert for seattle jobs on indeed and you'll see that they list a large band, but then a "likely salary" point. Its clear, easy and sets expectations well.

[-] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Then people will avoid applying, and instead apply to the similair job without a bullshit range. The problem is self correcting.

I doubt it. People still applied to jobs that didn't list a salary range. It didn't self correct.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago

But now there's competition. The companies that post more realistic bands will get better people.

It's like how minimum wage increases also help people who earn above minimum wage. The minimum standard increasing encourages better companies to do more than the minimum, because now it doesn't put them at a disadvantage.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

It's funny how pretty much every single economist in history (well not haha funny more like they are bank shills and less accurate than horoscopes) has argued that no one benefits from minimum wages and yet real world data shows the opposite. As you pointed out all salaries go up except the very highest.

The bottom employeers pay out more. The bottom employees have more money to spend. The people slightly above the bottom have to be paid more. In turn they have more to spend. The tiny increases in labor costs only impact the people who have the most labor working for them, i.e. the super rich.

If you owned a MacDonalds and had to pay out a 50 cents an hour more for 4 people on a shift that means you lose 2 dollars an hour more per shift hour. That's freaken nothing. To your employee that is 4 dollars a day, which works out to a grand a year assuming 250 days of employment. So here we can see even a tiny increase in the minimum wage leads to real money entering into the system for the one group that consistently demonstrates that they spend money as fast as they get it. If you want to increase economic activity pay a poor person more.

[-] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

There was competition before though too, between jobs that didn't list ranges and those that did. You could view a job that didn't list a range as having an implicit range of something like 0-1000000. That competition didn't drive companies to specifically list salary ranges.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

This increases competition by increasing the minimum standard. It's not complicated.

[-] Foggyfroggy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

And some jobs will now show a maximum that is below a potential employee’s minimum even if the job sounded like a good fit at first.

There is good faith that the company will post estimated ranges from 25% to 75% of their true range so it’s not like it’s forcing them to give away the farm, but there also isn’t a hard rule about how close the estimate has to be.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

I definitely reject jobs based on the range offered. I am not going to negotiate hard to get something at my current wage. They can deal with the worse people who accept that range.

When you apply for a job and they like you, you have the most negotiating power you will have for 2 years. A low range just shows you up front that they don't value you and will not give you raises.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

I'm a manager in California, where this law has been in effect for a while. I've had prospective candidates reach out because of concerns about the salary ranges, some of whom didn't end up applying or who bowed out afterwards. It makes my job a little tougher, but I think the transparency is good.

[-] cole@lemdro.id 11 points 1 year ago

I'm currently applying for jobs and I don't even bother with unreasonable ranges. I have a target salary so I won't play games if the low end of your range is half that.

[-] Wakmrow@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I live in Colorado and I straight up tell recruiters the rate is far too low to open a conversation.

[-] frickineh@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

They have been doing that, but it's in the law (at least in CO) that that's still a violation, so we can report companies that say shit like $30k-$500k. If they can't demonstrate that someone in that position could feasibly make the high end, that range is still illegal.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Which is fine since it tells you so much already. If they say nothing at least it is possible it is an oversight. Someone forgot to click the right box. If they post a crazy range you know that they actively went out of their way to lie to you.

[-] imgonnatrythis@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

No the ranges help, you just are supposed to assume the low end if minority or woman. 🙄

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 60 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Earn up to $17 an hour. Saw that on a sign outside Qdoba. Note this was one of the first places that started hitting me up for tips on their credit card machines.

Asked a worker, "Your shift supervisors really make $17 an hour? Or is that supposed to be with tips."

He laughed and said, "No one here is getting paid that much."

[-] rynzcycle@kbin.social 38 points 1 year ago

$17 for managers with an MBA, PhD in Economics, and 47 years experience.

[-] toxicbubble@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

must be available 24/7 & own a car i reckon

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

Sorry sir, but you're overqualified.

[-] negativenull@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

Just like ads for retail stores: "Up to 70% off OR MORE"
Which really means fuckall.

[-] v_krishna@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

Dang minimum wage in my city is $18/h

[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

We're still chilling at $7.25

[-] Fapper_McFapper@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago

My company would rather uproot it’s corporate office from New York to New Jersey to avoid any kind of salary disclosure.

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

That's going to be pretty funny when pretty liberal Jersey passes the same law.

Yall better get used to the south if they want to keep dodgeing this.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago

Crazy that this isn't the law nationwide.

[-] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago

Agreed but I think in time the rest will follow, certainly for remote jobs.

[-] londos@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Three things I've seen:

  • Employees getting "title changes" with no formal promotions.

  • Finding candidates through employee referrals or word-of-mouth, therefore no formal job posting.

  • "Expression of Interest" job postings, where no role is technically open or being sought to fill, but candidates can still submit resumes.

[-] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 year ago

Last company I was at would bring people in on referrals, then offer them a different job and never pay out the referral because they didn't accept the job there were initially referred for.

Magically the well dried up in a couple months and they were looking at 80% turnover in a matter of weeks. Never seen so many people quit en masse.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I don't get the third. There is a company pretty close to my home that has had the same job post up for years. It is fairly specific as well. Is it some kinda weird tax or immigration scam? Like they have to pretend to be trying to find someone for a role.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] drathvedro@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago

Great news and congrats, New Yorkers! But really, this should just be a normal thing without a law requirement. It is in my home country and it's one of the things I'm really missing after moving abroad. It helped me dodge the bullet, twice, when I got an offer but saw the market ranges, including ones from those companies that I applied to, be 2x+ more than what I was offered. Could've got those companies banned from job posting sites but didn't bother.

[-] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Employers with at least four workers will be required to disclose salary ranges

I wonder why four, not three, or five? I wonder how they actually decide this number when they make these kind of laws?

[-] psud@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Usually it's 50, I suspect 4 is because more than 4 means 5 or more, and 5 is a commonly liked number

My country's goods and services tax was allegedly set by one of the cabinet members reading the percentage off their wine bottle

I'm disappointed they weren't drinking beer, glad they weren't drinking spirits, and moderately happy it was a female cabinet member, drinking a sweet white

We ended up with 10%

#moreWomenInPolitics

[-] Jah348@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago

They should be required to list lowest possible pay rate.

[-] rynzcycle@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago

They have to provide a range. Knowing the highest is also very helpful when you're negotiating a starting salary.

[-] uis@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Pay transparency, supporters say, will prevent employers from offering some job candidates less or more money based on age, gender, race or other factors not related to their skills.

I think bigger problem is pay lottery itself. And empolyer don't want old(as in longer employed in same company) employees to know they are paid less than newly-hired.

[-] PickTheStick@ttrpg.network 5 points 1 year ago

This is why everyone needs to talk about their salary. Shatter that idiotic notion about pay rate discussions being bad, because it only benefits the assholes at the top sucking every penny they can.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

Help wanted: widget twister. Pay range $4/hr - $12,000,000/hr

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 14 points 1 year ago

This is literally what my job is doing now... "Machinists: $16-$30/hr"

... so you're saying it's $16/hr.

[-] hackitfast@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

That's when you just see through their bullshit and don't apply.

When you have other companies that aren't bullshitting, and they're also paying a higher minimum wage, the other companies pulling that shit don't stand a chance.

[-] TyrionsNose@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

I think this works for some job positions, and probably most.

I’m looking for an engineer right now. I’ll take a young one to train up, but I’ll also take an experienced engineer that I don’t have to do anything.

That pay range is pretty broad.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2023
1131 points (100.0% liked)

News

23376 readers
1638 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS