Live data from Hacker News

New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

nytlive.nytimes.com

131–140 of 539 posts

Re: New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

#131
As far as I know, there's nothing to stop employers from exchanging salary information directly with previous employers under quid-pro-quo agreements.

And there's nothing to stop employers from buying/renting this information from third parties, such as recruitment agencies or brokers in personal data.

All of these are arguably more reliable sources of salary information than asking the candidate directly.

Re: New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The obvious consequence of a company publicly posting salaries (or even having clear salary ranges that nearly all the employees at the level of experience fall into) is that a thorough recruiter doesn't even need to ask your previous salary to be able to use it as a benchmark to work with though.

I don't think I've ever seen public salaries at places that pay on the lower-end. Usually I've seen it with startups that pay fairly well, but I could be wrong.

Gitlab is an interesting case: they publish their compensation formula, which yields different pay for the same work depending on the employee's geographic location.

Re: New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree with you in principle (your previous deal with company A is absolutely none of company B's business) but I would like to challenge you on one point: > I'm placed at a disadvantage in negotiations if I name a number first. ... This is unlikely to be true. Generally, in price negotiations it is advantageous to name a number first. This is known as anchoring and basically the theory is that the end result is bette…

I never consider interviewing and negotiations a waste of time. It's very valuable practice, no matter what the outcome. Practice is how I get better at both. The more interviews I go on and the more times I negotiate salary, the better I get. Also, even if a company can't hire me at the moment due to real budget constraints, they might be able to do so in the future, or perhaps one of the people I interviewed and im…

> I never consider interviewing and negotiations a waste of time. It's very valuable practice, no matter what the outcome. Practice is how I get better at both. The more interviews I go on and the more times I negotiate salary, the better I get.

This. I get the impression that most software devs don't make an effort to learn this incredibly valuable skill. It doesn't even have to be haggling, per se. Just asking for a higher salary is often going to increase it by thousands of dollars. It just boggles my mind at how so many people will leave so much money at the table...

Re: New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree with you in principle (your previous deal with company A is absolutely none of company B's business) but I would like to challenge you on one point: > I'm placed at a disadvantage in negotiations if I name a number first. ... This is unlikely to be true. Generally, in price negotiations it is advantageous to name a number first. This is known as anchoring and basically the theory is that the end result is bette…

I never consider interviewing and negotiations a waste of time. It's very valuable practice, no matter what the outcome. Practice is how I get better at both. The more interviews I go on and the more times I negotiate salary, the better I get. Also, even if a company can't hire me at the moment due to real budget constraints, they might be able to do so in the future, or perhaps one of the people I interviewed and im…

I agree with you regarding interview and negotiation practice being valuable (albeit to a certain extent - sometimes negotiating with certain tech companies/recruiters is like wrestling a pig in a muddy field... after a while, you realise the pig is enjoying itself).

I also don't think salary is everything - far from it! Yet I've never had a problem saying "I believe my market value is $XYZk, however if the culture, team and product is a good fit for me then I'm sure we'll be able to find a salary level that works for both of us."

Normally I say this right off the bat and have not yet had bad feedback about it. I don't see anchoring as a psychological trick, rather an opportunity to save both you and your potential employer a lot of time.

Re: New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

#136

Have a google for: "can i lie to a employer about past salary" - it really really messes with people - people feel super uncertain about how to approach this situation. Throwing any confidence they have during the negotiation out the window. Even now I hesitate to write this as a million people will come out and say never lie - what if they found out. More than banning. There needs to be acceptance that if someone as…

Interesting. An additional argument for lying is that you're probably already lying in other parts of the interview.

Why do you want to work here? (money, and the desire to pay the bills and feed my children)

Where do you see yourself in 5 years? (probably not at this company)

What is your biggest weakness? (not like I would actually tell a stranger a real answer)

Re: New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

#137
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do any employers actually provide that information? The most I've ever had any previous employer ever say about my time there is, "Eric worked here from $start_date to $end_date." I understand there to be liability involved if they say anything more.

Yeah that has always been my understanding as well. Past employers are only allowed to say yes or no to you working there if asked. Where this comes from I don't know. I'm sure there is a law that this common belief comes from.

Past employers can say whatever they want. They open themselves up to legal liability in doing so, though, with basically no value to themselves. Theoretically as long as they're telling the truth, there is no legal liability. In reality it's more nuanced. e.g. An employer who reveals that a former employee was absent a lot might be sued successfully if the absence was within the company's sick day policy, or the reason was a disability.

Saying nothing is the safest choice. Most employers only confirm employment as a courtesy to their former employees.

Re: New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful!! There's quite a few ways to verify past salary. Specially some employers report employment information to private databases and your potential employer runs a "employment report," like banks run a credit report, as part of a mandatory background check. To see if you lied. Of course, they can't do that without your permission but agreeing to a background check is a condition of employment. The database i am…

My preferred technique is to mentally baseline my current total comp, then shoot for that as my base at my next position. You really shouldn't compare salaries, since benefits can vary so much. So if I'm making $100k in base now, but have a good bonus structure, a good vacation package, health, retirement, etc., could make that total comp closer to $150. So that's what I say is my current compensation -- most people…

in tech companies, bonus + equity is usually multiples of the base salary.

Re: New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

#139

I never answer questions about my past or expected salary, not to employers and not to recruiters. Most employers don't ask, and the few that have (perhaps by having a part of an employment form ask for previous salary) have never made my leaving that information out an issue. Most recruiters, if they even ask, respect my decision not to talk about it, but I've been pressed hard on this by a handful of recruiters, an…

I've never gotten a lot of grief about disclosing past salary. I generally try to set the anchor and conversation around what I want to be making to join their company. I have (very fortunately) never been in the position where I _had_ to leave or accept an offer on anything but my own terms, I feel that when you're negotiating from that position, the complete lack of pressure to accept a lower number becomes pretty apparent to the people on the other side of the conversation from you. Or I'm dense enough to not realize they were trying to wheedle me down and just flat didn't entertain the notion.

I've got a business partner (came from high on up in the land of the big four) that during a salary negotiation of our own he floated the idea of asking for our candidate's current salary, AND PROOF. Apparently over 'there', especially as you get higher up, it's completely commonplace. Having spent his whole career over there, it didn't occur to him that maybe people would rather just walk away from your company simply for asking than to answer the question.

Luckily, he's a great guy and after my half hour soap box tirade he came around to realizing that in an environment where people are _actually_ practicing a craft and have what would resemble real skills[0], they don't put up with it.

- [0] Not to say people working for the big megacorp accounting firms don't have real skills, but no, yeah, that's actually what I meant. I kid, I kid.

Re: New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree with you in principle (your previous deal with company A is absolutely none of company B's business) but I would like to challenge you on one point: > I'm placed at a disadvantage in negotiations if I name a number first. ... This is unlikely to be true. Generally, in price negotiations it is advantageous to name a number first. This is known as anchoring and basically the theory is that the end result is bette…

>Generally, in price negotiations it is advantageous to name a number first. This is absolutely 100% wrong. In price negotiations you will almost always fair better if you force the other party to bring up a number first.

Source?

There is a large body of research which disagrees with you...

Oechssler, Jörg; Roider, Andreas; Schmitz, Patrick W. (2009). "Cognitive abilities and behavioral biases". Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 72 (1): 147–152. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2009.04.018. Jump up ^ Orr, D. & Guthrie, C. (2005). "Anchoring, information, expertise, and negotiation: New insights from meta-analysis". Ohio St. J. Disp. Resol., 597, 21. SSRN 900152 Jump up ^ Kristensen, Henrik; Gärling, Tommy (1997). "The Effects of Anchor Points and Reference Points on Negotiation Process and Outcome". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 71 (1): 85–94. doi:10.1006/obhd.1997.2713.

(edit as I can't reply to the child comment: Yes, you're right of course. Put it down to a mix of multitasking, iphone browser and university-instilled fear of using Wikipedia as a source)

Post reply on HN