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

New York City to require employers to list minimum and maximum salaries

ny1.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–57 of 57 posts

Re: New York City to require employers to list minimum and maximum salaries

#51

Post by Manuel_D »

erichocean wrote: post #32
tablespoon wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That range probably doesn't satisfy the requirements of the new law: It's amazing how some people lazily assume they're so much cleverer than everyone else. A good heuristic is to assume you're just plain wrong if you think you've discovered a way to weasel out of a law with only five seconds worth of thought.

Right, the first thing a compliance officer will ask is: "what are your actually paid right now?" When your given range and that range don't roughly coincide, they'll ask why—and then fine you for your bullshit "are you a mind reader?" response.

> Right, the first thing a compliance officer will ask is: "what are your actually paid right now?"

And then you can point out to entry level software developers and much more senior ones and demonstrate that such a wide range is not only feasible, but already exists between employees.

Re: New York City to require employers to list minimum and maximum salaries

#52

Post by tablespoon »

999900000999 wrote: post #34
tablespoon wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 preve…

I don't see anything that needs improving. If you don't have the courage to ask how much the job pays on the first call that's your problem. If you agree to a certain wage that's what you agreed to.

> I don't see anything that needs improving.

So? The kind of information asymmetry that this regulation addresses is an actual issue, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

> If you don't have the courage to ask how much the job pays on the first call that's your problem.

That's not the problem something like this is meant to solve. Rather, it's probably meant to deal with situations like when an employer low-balls someone who doesn't know what they're worth, and they take the offer because they don't know any better. Eventually someone like that will probably get wise, but this gives them a much cheaper shortcut to that knowledge.

Re: New York City to require employers to list minimum and maximum salaries

#53

Post by DarylZero »

999900000999 wrote: post #49
DarylZero wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This lets you see the salary before you even choose to apply. By the way, your whole story makes no sense. If you weren't qualified why did you even get an interview?

Startups tend to take chances on less qualified candidates to save money. There's plenty of opportunity in this country if you're willing to work for it.

You're just saying startups have lower qualification requirements.

The question is: how do you get an interview _for a position_ where you don't meet the requirements _for that position_?

So if it's a startup, then you don't meet the lowered requirements of that startup.

It doesn't make sense. They wouldn't interview you if you didn't meet their requirements.

Re: New York City to require employers to list minimum and maximum salaries

#54

Post by DarylZero »

Manuel_D wrote: post #50
DarylZero wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unless you can read minds, it'd be hard to prove That's not how it works. There is going to be an evidentiary standard (such as "preponderance of the evidence" -- it won't be "beyond a reasonable doubt") applied by an administrative law judge. The judge can very well decide he CAN read minds -- unless YOU can read minds, or he decides to tell you, you won't know.

It'd still be easy to meet that evidentiary standard: point to an entry level software developer making ~$60k and point to a much more experienced one making north of a quarter million. Such a spread is not hard to find

The job ads for their positions will have different experience and education requirements.

Even judges understand there is a difference between "entry level" and "senior."

Re: New York City to require employers to list minimum and maximum salaries

#55

Post by 999900000999 »

DarylZero wrote: post #53
999900000999 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Startups tend to take chances on less qualified candidates to save money. There's plenty of opportunity in this country if you're willing to work for it.

You're just saying startups have lower qualification requirements. The question is: how do you get an interview _for a position_ where you don't meet the requirements _for that position_? So if it's a startup, then you don't meet the lowered requirements of that startup. It doesn't make sense. They wouldn't interview you if you didn't meet their requirements.

You're free to believe whatever you want. They originally advertised a position which paid about twice as much as what I ended up taking. They expected years upon years of specific experience, I showed them a couple of mobile apps I made and they decided to hire me at a lower rate.

That job changed my life, I'd rather just accept some people are going to make more and some are going to make less then create a dystopia where you need 10 pages of documentation to justify every hiring. There's no way this law is going to work out the way people think it well, if anything it encourages less full-time work. If you run the risk of being audited by a fairness officer, why not just outsource it instead?

Why not lean on consultants more?

As discussed elsewhere, many companies are just not hiring people from Colorado, which has a similar law. I can't find a better example of this not working.

Re: New York City to require employers to list minimum and maximum salaries

#56

Post by eschewobfuscat »

Kranar wrote: post #37
eschewobfuscat wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This hasn't caused jobs to disappear in Colorado, which has a similar law.

Several companies refuse to hire from Colorado over its law: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/07/remote-...

And these are all anecdotes. The unemployment rate has followed the national trend for Colorado, and there does not appear to be a shortage of remote work for software engineers.

Re: New York City to require employers to list minimum and maximum salaries

#57

Post by DarylZero »

999900000999 wrote: post #55
DarylZero wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're just saying startups have lower qualification requirements. The question is: how do you get an interview _for a position_ where you don't meet the requirements _for that position_? So if it's a startup, then you don't meet the lowered requirements of that startup. It doesn't make sense. They wouldn't interview you if you didn't meet their requirements.

You're free to believe whatever you want. They originally advertised a position which paid about twice as much as what I ended up taking. They expected years upon years of specific experience, I showed them a couple of mobile apps I made and they decided to hire me at a lower rate. That job changed my life, I'd rather just accept some people are going to make more and some are going to make less then create a dystopi…

> They expected years upon years of specific experience

They demonstrably didn't, since they interviewed/followed up. That's why your story doesn't add up.

Not doubting whatever you say happened, just your interpretation doesn't make sense.

Post reply on HN