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

Microsoft will include pay ranges in all U.S. job postings

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 329 posts

Re: Microsoft will include pay ranges in all U.S. job postings

#111

Post by avgDev »

wonderwonder wrote: post #77
avgDev wrote: post #3

This is the way. We need more of this. I'm at a point where if a recruiter messages me "about an exciting opportunity" without any salary information, he/she will not get a response. While there are some jobs that maybe I would consider a pay cut for, I generally want to make more money because that allows me to invest more so I can be free one day.

I get ~4 recruiter emails a day and I don't think I have ever seen the salary in the initial job description. If the job looks interesting I will just reply asking what the salary is. Usually they immediately call me rather than respond via email which is pretty annoying.

Pretty common sales tactic. They want you to invest as much time as possible because generally the more time you invest the more likely they are going to make a "sale".

I'm not sure if this even works for devs as there is so many opportunities.

Re: Microsoft will include pay ranges in all U.S. job postings

#112

Post by kimbernator »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #104
athorax wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is explicitly called out as not being allowed: "An employer cannot post a $70,000-$100,000 range for a junior accountant position just because it pays senior accountants at the high end of that range. But it can post $70,000-$100,000 for an accountant if it does not limit the posting to junior or senior accountants, and genuinely might offer as low as $70,000 for a junior accountant, or as much as $100,000 for a…

Seems impossible to enforce in practice

Due to my recent job search for remote positions in the US, I've seen a lot of postings in CO which include the salary ranges. While some do use stupidly wide ranges, most companies post more reasonable ones. I'm able to filter out those in the former group because this law they have has effectively exposed their dishonest hiring practices, and the companies that aren't trying to obfuscate their pay have also been exposed.

Re: Microsoft will include pay ranges in all U.S. job postings

#113

Post by llbeansandrice »

mywittyname wrote: post #71

Does anyone know if popular job platforms out there use your location to determine whether or not to show the salary information for a job posting? Or is it usually something that have to request once you can establish that you're a resident of Colorado?

Colorado's law is written so that it would apply to any job that can reasonably be done by someone residing in the state. So if you're hiring for a remote position, under CO law you have to provide a salary range. It doesn't technically matter where _you_ are located.

As a result, some companies have started explicitly excluding CO from their job postings. I'm not a lawyer, but I think there's probably latent lawsuits there. Especially if they employ anyone in CO already.

Re: Microsoft will include pay ranges in all U.S. job postings

#114

Post by oneoff786 »

willcipriano wrote: post #72
oneoff786 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think that’s true?

"Conspiracy to commit drug trafficking" would probably fit the bill. I think they could just call in the feds because from the state and federal perspective you are running a drug empire from that office.

But it’s not trafficking if you don’t move it across state lines?

Re: Microsoft will include pay ranges in all U.S. job postings

#115

Post by coding123 »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #87
ekianjo wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

anything preventing them from doing very large ranges like that?

Yes, it would discourage some candidates from applying if they see the average within that range is lower than the average they could get anywhere else. Dirty tricks are also a red flag for candidates. However, while that range is an exaggeration, the truth is that salary ranges for positions are actually much wider than candidates may expect. There's a misconception that open positions have a single "correct" salary…

If someone is a III and applied for a II, the company would likely hire them as a II.

Re: Microsoft will include pay ranges in all U.S. job postings

#117

Post by llbeansandrice »

bombcar wrote: post #5
potamic wrote: post #2

I wonder why only the US. If they believe pay transparency is the right way forward, they should do it globally. Surely there's no legal hurdles in posting pay ranges for any country.

For the US it may be this is the easiest way to comply with Colorado's law. Worldwide may be rolled out later, but those are probably separate business entities that have to work it out. As with all negotiations, once you've stated a number you've put a lower (or upper, depending on the side you're on) bound.

I believe WA has a similar law going into effect. Since they're based/domiciled(?) in WA the state laws apply I believe. They're not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts.

Re: Microsoft will include pay ranges in all U.S. job postings

#118

Post by llbeansandrice »

0daystock wrote: post #58
nrclark wrote: post #26

How do the Washington/Colorado salary disclosure laws interact with bonus structures and stock grants? A staff engineer might make $250k/year in base salary, but their total comp could be much higher.

"250/year with bonus and equity options" is what I'd seen - not very helpful.

These laws apply to all jobs, not just tech jobs.

Re: Microsoft will include pay ranges in all U.S. job postings

#120

Post by r00fus »

silicon2401 wrote: post #86
wonderwonder wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get ~4 recruiter emails a day and I don't think I have ever seen the salary in the initial job description. If the job looks interesting I will just reply asking what the salary is. Usually they immediately call me rather than respond via email which is pretty annoying.

This is why I stopped putting personal info in my resume. I once had a particularly aggressive recruiter try and recruit me for a contracting position (I only consider full time roles), and when I repeatedly declined his offer, he actually found my resume somewhere and just called my phone. Needless to say it was incredibly annoying and ever since then I've kept all contact info out of my resume.

I put my Google Voice on my resume (and other places like my .sig) and I generally just forward all GV calls to VM.

If they care to leave a message or send a text, I may read it. If they don't then I ignore (unless I'm expecting a call from that number in which case I'll call back in a day or two).

Sometimes (like when we were looking for a nanny a few years ago) I may let GV actually ring on my main line.

Post reply on HN