Employers in NYC and California will soon have to post salary ranges on job postings

I have always been in favor of more information for everyone.

 

I am ok with this. Saves people from completing a 10 page application where they ask for references and a 10 year job history only to find out during the interview that you are about to be offered a lower than expected wage

 

In a nutshell, there are the 2 new laws:

On November 1, New York City will require employers that have four or more people on the payroll – with at least one of them working in the city – to provide a “good faith” pay range listing the minimum and maximum base salary or hourly wage in all job advertisements.

Then come January 1, 2023, a similar law goes into effect in California for employers with at least 15 employees. Organizations will be required to include the salary or hourly wage range for what they “reasonably expect” to pay for a position.

For New York City, any company with at least 4 people on the payroll, with at least one working within the city limits has to provide a pay range in their job postings. Seems fair to me because it still says pay range so final pay depends on skill and experience.

For California, it's a company with at least 15 employees and again they must provide a pay range in the position.

In both cases, I see no issue. I've been using positions with pay ranges for the last 20 years. I can't remember the last time in Alabama that I saw a software engineering position without a pay range. Now had both laws stated that the employer must pay the same wage regardless of experience, then I would have my popcorn ready to watch the carnage as the economies in both New York and California fell apart.

 

Great example using RNs. These nurses already know their salary range, and they know they can increase compensation package with adding to their certifications/experience. There is no gotcha for hospitals salary ranges. And it all works out because nurse managers all fall in the next salary range, the director level, sr manager and so on. This is not the exciting news you want it to be. Govt is just getting in the way and claiming to be helping when they are only growing and consequently, increasing taxes.
Sigh.

 

Yes, employers are screwing over their best resource by low-balling their employees. Lol. You couldn’t be more wrong.
Turnover for most businesses is a killer and transparency is the key to locating and maintaining the better people. Rehiring and retraining people to save a couple bucks is a colossal waste of time.
You just love you some bureaucracy.

 

Transparency is good for everybody, except the companies who are engaging in the dishonest behavior.

 

Its in the interest of anyone hiring labor to pay as little as possible for it, what the hell are you talking about lol

 

You are confusing a “minimum wage rate” (a single rate) with mandated wage rates (multiple wage rates ostensibly set based upon some set of factors). They are quite different animals.

For example, there will be a state require wage for an RN and another rate for an APRN and another for a PA.

 

Yeah they are different, one is a thing that exists right now and the other is something that doesn't even make sense.

 

You are a lost cause. Again, not a surprise. Labor jobs are hourly jobs. These guys all talk and know what they’re worth. And, I know for a fact labor workers will leave a job to find a higher paying job once they learn they might be underpaid. You are way off on this one pal. Better sit this one out. Your book smarts aren’t any match for real world experience. It should be embarrassing for you.

 

I have always been in favor of more govt for everyone.
That’s what you meant to say.

 

I’m sure you’ve got a link for this. Right?

 

Times have changed my friend.
Everyone asks about pay from the first interview. Even with us posting ours publicly we get questions about increases and bonus structure from day one. Why shouldnt we?

But its all online now and everyone places ehat amount to sales pitches on Indeed, LinkedIn etc. It is 100% free market marketing.

Just ask the pay if it isn't listed. Don't require a company to market themselves the way the government wants them to.

Some companies literally sell culture over pay. So what? Let them if they wish. It will detract some and attract others.

I took a little less for culture. I never work more than 40 hours. Never work a weekend. Get 5 weeks of vacation plus 12 paid holidays. Then we have some non job oriented "enrichment days" I basically average a 4 day work week. I work in a very rewarding field where we matter in our community.,

That is what sold me. The income was of course important and more than met our needs, but I took less for that opportunity.

Some would miss out if they are filtering by pay and dont take the time to realize what we are about.

Let us market that first and foremost if we want. Why on earth not?

 

Five years ago, there was no link to any evidence these states would “force” private employers to disclose wage rates/ranges in their employment advertising ……. was there?

Just give them a little time, especially California.

 

This sounds a bit like you imposing your values on others, and you want the law to reflect that (giving the so-called intangible favor over the tangible).

Who is to say if the range is appropriately listed, that intangible factors like culture/hours/stress couldn’t still be considered? It doesn’t deprive anyone of those considerations, it simply ensures some tangible context/information to go along with it. It should ALL be part of the equation. As RealGatorFan correctly notes, the requirements only call for a “realistic” range… but the key is that it’s a range which gives flexibility for rewarding experience/talent appropriately.

You want people to be deprived of information, which if it’s as easy as you suggest to ask for should make this a 100% a non issue. Essentially your take is we should cater to those offering intangible benefits who may be coming up short on tangibles, and make it so the “tangibles” aren’t even considered until the end. My take is put it all up front, more information leads to greater efficiency of outcome.

 

So no, there is no link and this is not even something actually proposed.

I’m shocked.

 

Not sure I see a prob with posting the range. Seems efficient, could save the employer and interviewee a lot of time. When exert quite a bit of effort for interviews. Including a panel of 3 for the interview.

 

You keep saying it, but it isn't true. No one is saying wait until the end. The applicant can ask from the start. The company should answer the question then and there... but the Ad/Marketing that gets that first conversation/email etc rolling, should be up to the company (providing they are not being dishonest).

I prefer to promote our pay in writing, up front. I dont however think the government should force me to.

 

Yeah, my company/org has every right to promote IT'S values. It's up to those coming on board to except those, not the other way around.

I mean, I dont ask my applicants what values we can change to help them want to work for us. I choose people who share our already existing values

So yeah. I want the law to protect that by allowing organizations to market values over pay if it wants to.