New York City bans employers from asking potential workers about past salary • Hacker News Board

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

#511

Post by seanp2k2 » Sat, Apr 08, 2017, 5:07 PM UTC

chongli wrote: post #470

davemel37 wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might just be me and my own immaturity, but in my experience, employees often count their eggs before they hatch, and once I start negotiating them down, I create a scenario where I can't get them fully aligned with my goals. They become a simple exchange of cash for labor and not someone who grows loyal or feels a sense of fairness, ownership and excitement about the role. Maybe I am naive, but I feel like this…

They become a simple exchange of cash for labor and not someone who grows loyal or feels a sense of fairness, ownership and excitement about the role. You've hit upon a fundamental tenet of Marxism: alienation [0]. You haven't said whether or not you offer equity as part of your compensation. If not, then it is somewhat unreasonable to expect that sort of loyalty from your employees. If so, then you have a challengin…

at-will employment basically guarantees a lack of loyalty. You have no loyalty to me, so why should I have any to you? Everyone is a mercenary out to maximize their personal gain at the expense of everyone else. Not a world I particularly want to live in, but it wasn't my choice and it's a hard thing to change.

Luckily, most people out there aren't purely capitalistic, do-whatever-it-takes-to-make-a-buck sociopaths, but they're definitely out there, will play you like a pawn, and it might be a while after (or never) until you realize what happened and what role you played in their twisted little game.

To me, it's sad that we have humans literally dying because they can't afford better health insurance in this country while others play pricing games having ships full of oil sail around to manipulate the market into paying them more, or toiling to shave off a tenth of a millisecond for their high-speed quote stuffing system. The idea of money has become so remote and intangible in some cases that I hate how it's also used for things people actually need.

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

#512

Post by MR4D » Sat, Apr 08, 2017, 5:22 PM UTC

jnwatson wrote: post #124

louisswiss wrote: post #82

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…

Anchoring only works if the potential employer is ready to buy. Many, many organizations will simply use the number as yet another filter, and you won't even begin discussions. By giving a number first, you're either too high and you won't have an opportunity to sell yourself, you're too low and you've literally already negotiated against yourself, or you're lucky and right at their expectation, which you could have…

A couple thoughts on that..

First, do you really want to work for the lowest bidder? I have before, and it was a complete waste of my time.

Second, Name a number that you can be happy with. If they meet it, then you should be happy.

Third, many companies use banding for salary range, and if you're below the median, then you're raises will be bigger than if you're at the top of the range. In effect, naming too small of a number is often nullified within 2-3 years.

I do agree that it's a psychological game, but don't play it. Name a number you want. If they are reasonable and they like you, they'll negotiate.

In one case, I was too high for the position, and they created a new position (title, really) to put me in. I thought that was good faith.

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

#513

Post by user5994461 » Sat, Apr 08, 2017, 6:04 PM UTC

lloydde wrote: post #510

user5994461 wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a perfect binary search. Not all companies have the same top number and you're not equally valuable everywhere.

It doesn't seem to be a binary search in any sense of the computer science term. There is no half interval mechanics nor would that be appropriate. It seems like traditional bargaining. In an otherwise excellent article, the missing negotiation calibration and example is glaring. The rest of the article would seem to suggest just as you will get your next big promotion from another company, if you find yourself consi…

Companies have a range they are willing to pay. Surprisingly, most companies in an area (and domain) usually have very similar ranges. Finding the top has a lot in common with binary searches.

I am not sure I understand your second paragraph.

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

#514

Post by dkrich » Sat, Apr 08, 2017, 7:02 PM UTC

s73ver wrote: post #454

dkrich wrote: post #326

This is the #1 rule I always tell people who are interviewing for a new job. Never tell a potential employer your past job salary, especially so if you are unhappy with that salary. When my girlfriend was interviewing for a new job two years ago we talked about this because the recruiter was very demanding about knowing what her current salary was and I told her to stay firm on it because the salary in her current jo…

Why should you be at an advantage? Why should the negotiations have anything to do with your current salary?

The same reason somebody who sells a house or a car or anything that involves negotiating should be at an advantage if they are a better negotiator. It's a fundamental part of a free market. Should the government make sure you don't sell your house for less than you could possibly get or should that be left to be decided between yourself and the potential buyer? Why should a salary negotiation be any different?

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

#515

Post by peripitea » Sat, Apr 08, 2017, 10:22 PM UTC

nunez wrote: post #509

peripitea wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found it easier to just lie in these situations by giving a number that's significantly higher than what I'm currently making, and more in line with the top end of what I think they're willing to pay me/what I would be willing to work for. It has worked quite well for me. Obviously this only works if you are comfortable lying in this scenario. I don't normally like to lie, but I see no moral issue with it in a s…

There is no need to lie. Also, it can set you up for failure if that info comes back during a background check. Just say how much you want up front.

Saying how much you want is different from saying how much you currently make. It may be numerically the same, but there are big differences in how that information is treated. One of several examples: A recruiter who has been told to offer you up to 100k will probably not go back to the hiring manager if you just say "I want 120k"; they will tell you that's outside of the range for that position. But if you say "I make 120k and would need to earn at least that to consider leaving", that is much easier for them to escalate. This is something I've seen happen at two different companies, on the hiree and hiring manager side.

The background check thing feels mostly like a boogie man to me. It's convenient for recruiters that engineers believe that, but I've never seen it happen in practice. And if it did (how does this even manifest? they require you to send them a paystub? they can't compel your previous employer to divulge this info), you should be outraged! It's none of their business what your paycheck at your previous employer looked like or contained. I would respectfully decline to provide this information, and if they insisted I would edit or photoshop it, and give serious thought about whether this is the type of employer you want to work for. You should be indignant about the fact that an entity you are planning to devote the majority of your waking life to for the next few years is comfortable with systematically fucking you over like this.

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

#516

Post by peripitea » Sat, Apr 08, 2017, 10:28 PM UTC

brianwawok wrote: post #428

peripitea wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found it easier to just lie in these situations by giving a number that's significantly higher than what I'm currently making, and more in line with the top end of what I think they're willing to pay me/what I would be willing to work for. It has worked quite well for me. Obviously this only works if you are comfortable lying in this scenario. I don't normally like to lie, but I see no moral issue with it in a s…

I have seen places as a final step of an offer ask for proof of previous wage. Not super common in software, I know people in law and a few other fields that always have to do it...

Answered more in depth in response to sibling comment, but fuck those places! Politely decline their request (they have no right to that info), or if you're comfortable doing so, continue the lie by forging your paystub or whatever ridiculous form of proof they ask for. This is a ridiculous request and should be treated as such.

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

#517

Post by lloydde » Sun, Apr 09, 2017, 12:50 AM UTC

user5994461 wrote: post #513

lloydde wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't seem to be a binary search in any sense of the computer science term. There is no half interval mechanics nor would that be appropriate. It seems like traditional bargaining. In an otherwise excellent article, the missing negotiation calibration and example is glaring. The rest of the article would seem to suggest just as you will get your next big promotion from another company, if you find yourself consi…

Companies have a range they are willing to pay. Surprisingly, most companies in an area (and domain) usually have very similar ranges. Finding the top has a lot in common with binary searches. I am not sure I understand your second paragraph.

Could your provide a specific example of how to use a binary search to find a salary? A binary search is dependent on boundaries. I don't see how it could be used effectively to find the boundary for a specific employer. Also, the flow chart shown in the article has no similarities to a binary search. The article describes the more reasonable approach: using networking to find out what a domain in an area pays.

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

#518

Post by clavalle » Sun, Apr 09, 2017, 1:44 AM UTC

morgante wrote: post #468

clavalle wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bit strange. It's like buying milk. I couldn't tell you exactly how much I could buy a gallon of milk for right now (without looking it up). But I could tell you that it is for around five or six dollars. I could also tell you that organic milk is a bit more and the store brand is a bit less. I could also tell you it is likely to be a bit more in a small, boutique store than a large chain store and cost a bi…

You'd be amazed by how vast the range for developer salaries is. I've had employers think that $80k was a reasonable offer for me (when I was making $200k).

It definitely depends on the sector and situation. If someone told me that a dev that some would offer $80K was making $200K I'd say 'Oh. In the financial sector?'

Otherwise, what I'm talking about is the fat part of the salary curve...there are always going to be interesting situations at the edge.

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

#519

Post by brianwawok » Sun, Apr 09, 2017, 2:28 AM UTC

dpark wrote: post #137

X86BSD wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 rea…

> Most employers only confirm employment as a courtesy to their former employees.

Lie. It's to cover their arse from lawsuits.

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

#520

Post by dpark » Sun, Apr 09, 2017, 3:45 AM UTC

brianwawok wrote: post #519

dpark wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 rea…

> Most employers only confirm employment as a courtesy to their former employees. Lie. It's to cover their arse from lawsuits.

Not sure what you mean. Employers would prefer to give no information about previous employees, specifically "to cover their arse from lawsuits". They confirm employment dates as a courtesy because it can be difficult to get a job without confirmation of previous employment.

Tangentially, it's really abrasive and generally unnecessary to start a comment by calling someone a liar. You can disagree with me here, and that's totally fine. To call me a liar for holding a different opinion than you makes you seem really petty. Arguing about the reason companies will disclose employment history doesn't seem to be the time to break out this sort of accusation.