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

Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 406 posts

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#141

Post by fennecfoxen »

aynyc wrote: post #60

I remember when NY/NJ came out with law preventing employers asking your previous wages (they used to ask for W2!!!). People were saying, oh, employers just won't hire in NY/NJ anymore! Guess what, job market is still hot as the sun and salary range went up across all my job searches and I don't have to deal with bullshit recruiters trying to play with comps.

Are the labor markets in New York and New Jersey substantially similar to the labor markets in Colorado?

(And should we expect the specific regulations in NY/NJ (forbidding certain questions) and those in Colorado (requiring disclosure of information, and, requiring certain notifications of existing employees) to have the same effect?)

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#142

Post by MattGaiser »

jcomis wrote: post #114

As a Coloradan another thing that's happening is companies are listing their jobs as Remote, only advertising in CO, and just mentioning it's a CO only job verbally. They do the thing where they sit in the gray area due to pandemic "Oh, it's remote, FOR NOW, but it's a CO job" Or listing the job as Denver and a few other cities, but it's really just Denver/Boulder (Twitter currently doing this). Another pattern is li…

A lot of the problem is what the job pays is highly dependent on who is chosen for the role, especially for those catch all job postings that are just Software Engineer -- All Levels.

So it genuinely could be anywhere between 40-250K.

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#143

Post by sokoloff »

bb123 wrote: post #94
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #55

A competitive market would enable me to sort by salary and benefits and apply for the best job. However companies don't want to compete on salary, and potentialy drive them up - they want maximum leverage. They get more leverage if process is obscure, so that you only agree salary late in the process and for the applicant, pulling out is risky. The market is not really free - its being manipulated by one side. Simila…

Thats just nonsense. There absolutely is a requirement to disclose known faults with the property, and if a survey (which every buyer does) shows up something serious, there is a legal requirement to disclose it to all parties. Also most banks will cover the cost of a survey.

The buyer is the only one bringing money into the transaction. Regardless of who signs the check, the buyer is paying for all of the things.

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#144

Post by dominotw »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #70
zachrose wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What competition is being hampered by this law?

Indeed, the definition of "perfect competition" in economics includes that all participants have perfect information. But, that's actually the reason companies hate this law: in "perfect competition" no long-term economic profit is possible. Long-term profits are the result of when a market disobeys the definition of "perfect competition," such as when there's information asymmetry, patents and trade secrets to prote…

> I recently had to play a round of "don't give a number" with a recruiter last week. Needless to say, that didn't go very far.

I had this happen to be last week too. I am not sure what ppl say to recruiters when they keep asking this question.

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#145

Post by inter_netuser »

privacylawthrow wrote: post #66
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is 6 months enough? Can't spots get filled between that time?

6 months is not compliant. Employees have to be made aware of the posting on the same calendar day the job is posted. For jobs that are in constant demand, the company has to either send a daily email or have some kind of banner on its corporate intranet. There is also no geographic restriction so if a company has any offshore service centers, it would need to post any promotional jobs to its Colorado employees as we…

Amazing, they have to notify about jobs in Thailand to Colorado employees?

Love it.

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#146

Post by aynyc »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #141
aynyc wrote: post #60

I remember when NY/NJ came out with law preventing employers asking your previous wages (they used to ask for W2!!!). People were saying, oh, employers just won't hire in NY/NJ anymore! Guess what, job market is still hot as the sun and salary range went up across all my job searches and I don't have to deal with bullshit recruiters trying to play with comps.

Are the labor markets in New York and New Jersey substantially similar to the labor markets in Colorado? (And should we expect the specific regulations in NY/NJ (forbidding certain questions) and those in Colorado (requiring disclosure of information, and, requiring certain notifications of existing employees) to have the same effect?)

In terms of overall job market, no idea. In technology, I would imagine yes. I work in NYC, every job except capital market type I got reached out by recruiters have CO listed.

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#147

Post by MattGaiser »

logosmonkey wrote: post #137
elliekelly wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who says the CO remote employee requires special treatment? That would be a terrible leadership decision. The easy and obvious approach would be to treat all employees under the CO standard. It’s as simple as posting all open positions internally. Or even sending a firm-wide email when a new position is posted externally. I have a hard time believing most companies aren’t already doing this with the exception maybe o…

Yeah, I don't quite get the rub here. The corporations I've worked for always post jobs internally first and normally they email the entire org with open positions. In general I've found most corporations want to hire internally since it's cheaper overall.

I think it depends on the company.

In a past organization a friend was HR at, there were branch office jobs and corporate jobs. Officially you could get promoted to the corporate office. Unofficially, don't bother as they optimized for different things for each hiring pool.

So they tried to keep the corporate jobs only available to the corporate people as otherwise the branch people would get excited and then end up having their dreams dashed from repeatedly applying and having their resumes chucked while an external hire filled their job.

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#148

Post by WaitWaitWha »

jorgemf wrote: post #77
WaitWaitWha wrote: post #52

I understand the public reasoning why the law was passed. I am not sure it is the right solution. As a business I would be very concerned that the cost/compensation for those few individuals with the qualification in Colorado will become very expensive as my competitors outbid each other to the sky (CO pop. 5.759mm US Census 2019). I remember the pre-dot com boom. IT was "rolling in money"... As an employee, I am now…

Compensation doesn't have to be only the salary. The company can offer you other non-tangible things that might be worth work with them even for a lower salary. Maybe more free time, or more flexibility in your life it is worth less money in the salary.

Agree & I understand regarding creative compensation.

Is this true for most jobs, or just for above a certain level? What percentage of CO workers fall below that threshold?

I do not know. The average annual salary in CO in 2019 was $61,819 according to Statista. It will be interesting to see how this law impacts it over time.

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#149

Post by jcomis »

MattGaiser wrote: post #142
jcomis wrote: post #114

As a Coloradan another thing that's happening is companies are listing their jobs as Remote, only advertising in CO, and just mentioning it's a CO only job verbally. They do the thing where they sit in the gray area due to pandemic "Oh, it's remote, FOR NOW, but it's a CO job" Or listing the job as Denver and a few other cities, but it's really just Denver/Boulder (Twitter currently doing this). Another pattern is li…

A lot of the problem is what the job pays is highly dependent on who is chosen for the role, especially for those catch all job postings that are just Software Engineer -- All Levels. So it genuinely could be anywhere between 40-250K.

The law only requires a minimum for the specific title. So it does fail if a company is just looking generically and they don't wish to follow the law in spirit by listing the minimums per level. And once you are in discussion and land at a level the recruiter is essentially obligated to tell you, so it's not just job listings.

Re: Companies excluding Coloradans from remote jobs to avoid sharing salary ranges

#150

Post by ClumsyPilot »

nradov wrote: post #136
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In sane countries the seller must comission a survey and provide it to the buyer. The UK system where each buyer comissions a survey is absurd. I do not understand how the mortgage helps you - you are still paying for it, and if the survey uncovers issues, you either take mortgage on a house with problems, or you are out of pocket. If you pull out, and next house you view has issues too, you have to take it because a…

That's not sane, it's crazy! As a buyer why would I trust a surveyor selected by the seller? I would rather pay inspector myself for an independent opinion. In the US this only costs a few hundred dollars for a typical house, which is a tiny fraction of the overall transaction price.

For the same reason you trust an auditor and accountant hired by Tesla to produce quartely earnings report - they are on the hook if they lie.

Surely you do not hire an independant accountant every time you buy stocks?

Post reply on HN