21–30 of 57 posts
Way to make harder to get a job! For my first salary role I took half the advertised pay as I knew less than half of what they wanted. With this crap I'd just not get the job.
This hasn't caused jobs to disappear in Colorado, which has a similar law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The law opens any employer up to dozens of lawsuits if they hire people for less than what was advertised.
> The law opens any employer up to dozens of lawsuits if they hire people for less than what was advertised. If it actually does do that, then spell out why that's the case (e.g. what's the penalty for hiring someone for a salary outside the posted range)? The OP makes it sound like this is only to address certain information asymmetries in salary negotiation: > Currently, New York City employers are allowed to withh…
Will be interesting to see how many (and which) corporations move headquarters to get around this.
> Will be interesting to see how many (and which) corporations move headquarters to get around this This is the wrong target. Large companies are generally fine with these sorts of laws. It's the small companies who now have another of ten million disclosure laws they have to follow, laws which vary from county to county.
Since candidates will always ask for the top of the band, I'd expect either very tight bands and candidates get moved to "more appropriate" openings or bands covering 3 standard deviations so employers can claim the range is in good faith, but still leave room for negotiation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Based on the article, I see no reason why someone would be prevented from consenting to pay below the position's current minimum, so long as they have full knowledge that is what they are in fact doing As they say, the path to Hell is paved with good intentions, I see no reason why an HR department would take the risk. When I was in my early 20s I had no degree or real experience. With misguided laws like this I wou…
> As they say, the path to Hell is paved with good intentions... The other path to Hell is to not act on good intentions. > With misguided laws like this I wouldn't of been offered a job. No, you're just making that assumption.
Only if you ignore unintended consequences
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The law opens any employer up to dozens of lawsuits if they hire people for less than what was advertised.
They still need to hire. Employers don't hire for the fun of it.
But they don't need to hire in NYC, and companies look at other regulations when deciding head count.
For example, you'll see a lot of startups freeze hiring at employee #49, since in the US (and other countries), there's a ton of HR requirements that kick in, including submitting IRS documents on magnetic tape.
One of Netscape's early advantages was that since they knew they would hire thousands of people, they skipped over all of the entry-level HR systems and started with enterprise-level systems. It was controversial at the time, but turned out to be the correct decision (the first exec was from SGI, so knew what growth looked like.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As they say, the path to Hell is paved with good intentions... The other path to Hell is to not act on good intentions. > With misguided laws like this I wouldn't of been offered a job. No, you're just making that assumption.
> The other path to Hell is to not act on good intentions. Only if you ignore unintended consequences
Some people seem to think the hand-waved threat of "unintended consequences" should be enough to kill any policy they happen to dislike. It's not.
I'm tired of the broken record fearmongering about unintended consequences, especially when it's paired (as it always is) with no constructive alternative to address the problem in question. It's an unpersuasive attempt at preventing improvement to the status quo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Will be interesting to see how many (and which) corporations move headquarters to get around this This is the wrong target. Large companies are generally fine with these sorts of laws. It's the small companies who now have another of ten million disclosure laws they have to follow, laws which vary from county to county.
What “small” company is hiring employees in so many countries that it’s burdensome to publish wages on their website.