Somewhat ironic that my first memory of "freedom".is being locked in a large padded room with 100 kids and John Wayne. Still, it worked out great from a social POV, everyone shopped on Saturday morning because the shops were closed Saturday afternoon and all day Sunday, so after "shopping with the kids", the kids got to burn off their energy and mum and dad got a quiet afternoon to restore theirs.
Any ethical issue is evenly matched. When they ask for your pay stub, they're also gathering info on how much your current employer is paying for the position and skillset on your resume. The ethics are the same for you to disclose that to a potential employer as it is for them to disclose exactly what their existing employees are making.
To which the company will likely say "thank you for your time and we'll show you to the door".
To be clear, I agree with you but being right carries a non-trivial risk of not getting the job. That may or may not be a good thing.
Well, to be a good negotiator, you have to be willing to LOSE.
But to make that easier...you want to be looking for a NEW job while you STILL have a job.
Things are a bit more dicey if you are out of work and NEED a job....so, try always to negotiate from a vantage point of power. If you don't need the job, you can negotiate much better. Saying no doesn't bother you in that game of chicken.
And in this day in age, you should be interviewing for new jobs at least 1-2 times a year, if for nothing else, to keep in practice.
The only way you move forward in salary and responsibility if you're in the W2 race, is to change jobs every few years.
Then perhaps you short-circuit this from happening altogether, and instead pose the question of relevance when current salary is queried.
It is an odd question. It's like going to buy a new car and the dealer asking you what you paid for your last one.
One of the golden rules of negotiation is..the first party to give a solid number is the loser.
I'm negotiating contract bill rates these days, thank goodness I've not had to negotiate a W2 salary in awhile, with having to factor what benefits they offer, etc. I'd much rather know what I'm paying for health, retirement,e tc...and know what my bill rate is, profit vs necessity.
That being said, I stick with broad numbers and narrow it down to have them give me a number first and then we negotiate. I start higher than their number and they come up, I go down, them up...etc.
Its all part of the dance.
The obvious response to which is, "Sure, but in exchange, I'll need copies of the pay stubs for those working for you in comparable positions."
It's bipartisan. The thing is, they will let it expire, use that to get into office, stage or provoke another major incident, then reinstate the patriot act, only tougher. Using the excuse that getting rid of it made the country vulnerable to terrorist attack. Later the skeptics, and anti war protesters will group together and fight to stop whatever insane killing is going on. The Democrats will take credit for this and use it to get back into office. It's a tag team match between big oil and the motion picture and movie industry.
Don't get too comfy with this.
The Senate will likely pass the Houses "freedom act" bill that basically puts most of the Patriot act back in function, with the single difference being that the metadata will be housed at the phone companies, and a warrant will be needed for each query into it.
Better than before, but certainly not doing away with it totally as I'd like, and start over. The other provisions for lone wolf and traveling wiretaps will be back in full force though.
Likely this will be law again by Wednesday.
Not at all.
The point is not in this. I could've used their income easily. The point is that the inequality is so crazy. What do you think is the combined net worth of the poorest one billion people? Do you think it is less, equal or more than the top 10 ?
Now remember that by numbers, we are comparing 10 people to the combined population of three USAs. Find a justification that would survive five minutes of philosophical debate.
I'm all for income inequality. I like to earn more than other people because I studied, I know my stuff, I can work hard and constantly learn. I like to be rewarded for being good at what I do.
But the rate of inequality is just crazy.
I'm ok with me earning 5 times as much as someone else. I'm also ok with someone better than me earning 5 times as much as I do.
But 500 times? You must be kidding.
Stop being silly.
It's pure propaganda to make this about employee law. He could have had taxes overdue or not paid his utility bills, it's absolutely the same thing. He didn't pay a bill that he knew about and it killed his company. Balancing your budget is what the CEO (in bigger companies CFO) job is about. He didn't do his job and now he's trying to put the blame elsewhere.
The last holdout, of course, is government.