201–210 of 244 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You forget that if companies win we win by higher interest rates on bank accounts and higher stock prices.
Who is "we"? People who already have wealth? Sure.
It always amazes me when I hear about people asking this question. Don't these hiring managers consider for a second how intrusive and rude it is? Aren't they concerned they may come across as douchebags for asking it? And yet I've been asked this several times by people that act like it's no big deal, like asking how was the traffic on the way in. Are they under pressure from the top? Or are hiring managers in gener…
Asking doesn't hurt anyone. However giving certain answers could. What prevents employees from claiming that this information is "confidential" (polite version of "it's not your business"). Or outright lying about it?
My employer asks this question. I refused to answer when asked in person/phone. As we got further in the hiring process they asked as part of the form they fill in to setup the background check. Again I refused to answer this question. I failed the background check due to this. When we discussed it they said it was necessary so they could verify if I had lied about my salary when I'd given it previously. I pointed ou…
Very unlikely. I don't know a single company that would reply to that request. That's sky high in terms of liability.
> Lying on your application form is almost always cause to fire. So if they ever find out you lied you about your previous salary you can be fired on the spot.
You drank the HR FUD too much. A company doesn't go through all the troubles to hire someone just to get rid of him the next week for some stupid forms that noone cares about.
Asking doesn't hurt anyone. However giving certain answers could. What prevents employees from claiming that this information is "confidential" (polite version of "it's not your business"). Or outright lying about it?
Lying is not a good way to start off a business relationshiop.
[Edit: if a potential employer asked my previous salary] I would have zero qualms (zero) saying any number I wanted. If I was asked for paystubs I would say I'll get them later and add that the number may not have been exact, it could be off substantially I want to be upfront about that. If I have to put a number in a form and sign that I swear it is accurate, I would put an asterisk and explain that it is indicative…
You are worth whatever you can get someone to pay you. Some people may come in with a lower ask but then you have yourself, are they a bargain or are they just less talented? If they come in high, are they overpriced or are they just that good?
I also think this only works for the employee if there is a shortage in this field and employers are desperate (but the market will force those prices up) or if you are trying to just get more than your experience might warrant. Let's say you are a knowledge worker making $80K and hoping to go to $90K. So, in the new rules, the employer asks for your expected salary and you say "give me your best offer". The employer will either get annoyed and work with the candidate that said $85K in response or they low ball you at $60K because they can play games too. You say "no" and they ask what you are looking for, rinse and repeat. It seems like you still end up at the same place with the same result except the negotiation process sucked. As a candidate, I don't see the downside of saying I want X+ dollars. I'd rather know about the job and culture and other things than $5K more or less.
I'll either politely refuse to answer or if I have thought about it beforehand then I'll give a number that guides them towards the salary I am looking for this time around. I don't really mind the question. It's a little rude and it's only asked to get a gauge of salary expectations so why not ask what the current salary expectations are directly.
I've actually flat out said "that it isn't really relevant, but can you share your range and we'll see if that makes sense once I learn more about the role?" It has worked a few times. Some get surprised when someone tries to flip that on them. The ones that balk get dropped from consideration.
It's not a practical reply.
An important detail: Comcast, backed by the local Chamber of Commerce, has threatened to sue the city over this law. On what basis? The corporation's Constitutional First Amendment free speech right to ask the question: http://www.investopedia.com/news/comcast-threatens-sue-city-... Are these the same free speech rights the Supreme Court recently bestowed on the corporations? I remember that at the time legal analyst…
Are all employers corporations? And even as such, this is just outlawing information. I do not understand how so many on the left support such a measure. It's a question -- outlawing questions, especially between private parties in a consensual relationship (applicant and employer), is backwards. You can choose not to answer it; you can lie; you can choose not to work for employers that ask the question in the first…
So is intellectual property. We live in a world where information is routinely outlawed. Some of us are used to it.
>outlawing questions, especially between private parties in a consensual relationship (applicant and employer), is backwards
It would be a consensual relationship if there were some sort of basic income that were enough to live on with dignity.
It's an article of libertarian faith that the employer/employee relationship is an equal and consensual one, and an easily disprovable one at that: try living with debt, no savings and no job for 5 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably because there is a very large disparity in power and information. A few points: 1. You will always need the job more than Comcast will need you (unless you're unusually skilled, most workers aren't) 2. Comcast knows how much the pay every one of their employees, you the job seeker do not. 3. Comcast is only asking so they can figure out the lowest pay you'll accept. You have no way to figure out how high the…
I think all your other points are good, but a response to #4. I think one issue might be that it's ambiguous to enforce. If implemented, could an employer not rephrase the question: "How much would you like to get paid?" and still get away with the same discrimination? Is the final solution here a race to the bottom to normalize wages to prevent perceived discrimination based on non-quantifiable metrics?
That's not rephrasing the question. That's a completely different question.
I understand the goal of this law but don't see how it solves it. I usually ask people what their current salary is now. I want to offer them (at least) a modest raise to come here. I want them to be happy and excited. I also want to not waste a ton of time negotiating salary if they want 50K more then I have available in my budget. You are worth whatever you can get someone to pay you. Some people may come in with a…
"Are you asking this question because you don't have faith in your own ability to interview and value employees or because you are trying to lowball me?"