Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

english.elpais.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 228 posts

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#71

Post by the_gipsy »

ta8645 wrote: post #20
the_gipsy wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they hire employees that reside in NY they have to make ranges public in the offer.

That seems unlikely, since they do not have legal jurisdiction over say a company in Belgium who is advertising worldwide for employees.

Just like anything else: if the belgian company doesn't comply but does any business with the US, then the US can interfere. Now this example is quite irrelevant, the interesting and usual case is a company from any other state hiring a worker remotely and residing in NY. This is straightforward.

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#72

Post by sokoloff »

mschuster91 wrote: post #66
blfr wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no such thing as "same work" outside of a production line and the like. You learn this in the initial weeks of your career. In every tech company there are programmers, project managers, and sales people who have the same titles but deliver vastly different quality of outcomes. And everyone knows this because they instantly pick the good ones whenever they have the slightest optionality. You have a new proje…

So what, you can use a well defined bonus structure. At least that is transparent and related to one's own work skill.

Let’s imagine that msc91 is the person we always turn to when the chips are down and they always deliver great results in the clutch situations while maintaining all of their regular duties as well.

How long until we rationally decide to pay msc91 a monthly “in case the chips are down” bonus/retainer? Msc91 is made better off; the company and its customers are made better off and thereby, msc91’s colleagues are made better off.

If we decide on principle that we won’t do that, how long until a better-funded or better product-market fit company comes along and hears through the grapevine of ex-msc91 colleagues that they should pay their overall higher wages to msc91 and get them to join? Now, all of the good things that could have happened in the prior paragraph are lost.

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#73

Post by magicalhippo »

nfriedly wrote: post #48
brtkdotse wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Scandinavian way They… do no such thing?

I believe Sweeden, Finland, and Norway each publish the income/tax returns of all citizens.

Except at least in Norway it's total taxable income, so it's after various adjustments.

However for most people it should be representative and you should be able to get a good estimate of how much they're paid.

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#74

Post by pc86 »

sarchertech wrote: post #60
version_five wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big ranges is a logical consequence of such stupid rules. People are not commodities, and only in the most trivial of work can you a priori know what an individual brings to it. It's typical government thinking that makes no sense in the real world. So employers are stuck publishing an absurdly wide band that reflects the difference in what different people might bring to the position. This is effectively populis…

In the vast majority of cases, you’re not going to know what an individual brings to the job for 6 months to a year at the minimum. The majority of the pay difference between 2 people with the same job title (assuming standard bigco leveling) comes down to negotiating ability. Published pay ranges aren’t going to solve anything, but they do reduce the information asymmetry a little bit. They give you and idea of what…

> The majority of the pay difference between 2 people with the same job title (assuming standard bigco leveling) comes down to negotiating ability.

No, it comes down to about 1/3 negotiating ability and about 2/3 prior experience, impressions you give at the interview, and leverage (e.g. other offers real or perceived). The first one you can get from the resume and the other two happen over the course of the interview(s).

If your resume shows you as a perfect fit for a position with a ton of relevant hyper-specific experience, you will naturally get an offer higher in the pay band than someone with half the amount of pseudo-relevant experience. Pay bands even $40-50k will help because most people actually do have a decent idea how qualified they are for a given job. I've applied for things where I'd be happy getting an offer toward the bottom of the pay band due to no relevant experience, and applied for things where I knew I should be at the very top.

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#75

Post by KoftaBob »

pizzafeelsright wrote: post #22

I prefer inequality when it comes to pay because I will work harder than the majority.

The purpose of this law is salary transparency, not necessarily on salary equality across positions in the company.

It makes it so that applicants can see what all employers are offering up front, which incentivizes the employers to be more competitive on salary offer if they want applicants to choose to apply there.

Salary equality for equivalent positions within the company, as you're describing it, would require companies to publicly list what each of their existing employees are making, which is a completely different thing than what this law is requiring.

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#76

Post by pc86 »

matwood wrote: post #29
paulgb wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The incentive against posting a huge range like $50-500k is that it anchors the range a candidate expects. If you post that range and then offer $100k to a qualified candidate, they will probably balk, so if that’s closer to the desired salary band you have an incentive just to say so.

Posting a large, unreal range will also cause headaches internally with your existing employees. Skip all the hassle and just use a valid range. Because of the laws getting passed in other states, many postings already have ranges and they have looked reasonable to me.

I think the largest range I've seen that wasn't very obviously from some resume harvester or z-tier recruiting firm was $30-40k between the lowest and highest, and it didn't seem to grow all that much as the upper band number increased (e.g. I distinctly remember one that said $180-200k). These $50-500k ranges simply don't happen in reality.

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#77

Post by KoftaBob »

ta8645 wrote: post #20
the_gipsy wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they hire employees that reside in NY they have to make ranges public in the offer.

That seems unlikely, since they do not have legal jurisdiction over say a company in Belgium who is advertising worldwide for employees.

They do if the job is listed as being based in NY, which is what this law pertains to.

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#78

Post by Spooky23 »

carlob wrote: post #68
altdataseller wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have asked some HR people this question about ranges, and most of them tell me they expect to pay the midpoint of the range. That is, if you meet the qualifications, they’ll offer you the midpoint. However if you blow them away or got some competing offers, they will offer you the high end. And if you got very little experience, the low end. That’s the rule of thumb. It doesn’t matter if the range is as wide as 80k…

If the range spans an order of magnitude, should I consider the logarithmic or linear midpoint? That is geometric or arithmetic mean between the ends?

They’re HR people - a log is a thing that used to be a tree.

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#79

Post by KoftaBob »

the_gipsy wrote: post #12
robertlagrant wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's for New York employers only, is it not? Or do you need a presence in NY to employ people there?

If they hire employees that reside in NY they have to make ranges public in the offer.

Nope, it pertains to where the job itself is listed as being based. If the company is HQ'd in NYC, but the listing is for a job based out of their Miami office, then the law doesn't apply.

Re: New York employers must include pay rates in job ads under new state law

#80

Post by pc86 »

altdataseller wrote: post #61
elromulous wrote: post #2

I've previously commented [0] on how broken this implementation is. It's frustrating politicians don't see how easy it is to circumvent what the law seeks to achieve. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37440358

While some engineers definitely get compensated in stock more, is it really the majority of engineers? I feel like it’s over represented because we’re in HN but the vast majority of software engineers in this world don’t get stock at all, it’s just mostly base salary

Absolutely not, it's a VC ecosystem oddity just like people saying they make $400k when most of that is stock and sometimes there isn't even a liquid market for it.

The median software engineer salary in the US is something like $110k. Still about twice the average individual income in the US[0], but the vast majority are going to be making 99% of their income in cash compensation including bonuses. I've worked for about a dozen companies based across the US in a variety of industries, and never have I or any of my coworkers had access to stock as part of compensation.

[0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N

Post reply on HN