Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses

NYC Employers Can No Longer Hide Salary Ranges In Job Listings 57

Posted by BeauHD from the pay-transparency dept.
Starting Tuesday, New York City employers must disclose salary information in job ads, thanks to a new pay transparency law that will reverberate nationwide. Axios reports: What's happening: Employers have spent months getting ready for this. They'll now have to post salary ranges for open roles -- but many didn't have any established pay bands at all, says Allan Bloom, a partner at Proskauer who's advising companies. Already, firms like American Express, JPMorgan Chase and Macy's have added pay bands to their help-wanted ads, reports the Wall Street Journal.

How it works: Companies with more than four employees must post a salary range for any open role that's performed in the city -- or could be performed in the city. Violators could ultimately be fined up to $250,000 -- though a first offense just gets a warning.

Reality check: It's a pretty squishy requirement. The law requires only that salary ranges be in "good faith" -- and there's no penalty for paying someone outside of the range posted. It will be difficult for enforcement officials to prove a salary range is in bad faith, Bloom says. "The low-hanging fruit will be [going after] employers that don't post any range whatsoever." Many of the ranges posted online now are pretty wide. A senior analyst role advertised on the Macy's jobs site is listed as paying between $85,320 and $142,080 a year. A senior podcast producer role at the WSJ advertises an "NYC pay range" of $50,000 - $180,000. The wide ranges could be particularly reasonable if these roles can be performed remotely, as some companies adjust pay according to location.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NYC Employers Can No Longer Hide Salary Ranges In Job Listings More

NYC Employers Can No Longer Hide Salary Ranges In Job Listings

Comments Filter:

  • How is the free market supposed to function (Score:5, Funny)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2022 @08:35PM (#63017437)
    if your boss can't cheat? This is practically socialism. Or communism. I forget which.
    • Here is how this will pan out. They list a job with a salary range of $56,000 - $89,000. No matter how much experience you have, 6 phd, whatever, your offer wont be a penny over $58,000 so you have room to "grow" at 2% annual raises. Whats that, 6 lifetimes before you hit $89,000 at that rate? Enough that inflation puts you in the poorhouse. Companies already do this now without a law, though they have university policies to disclose ranges.

      • There definitely could be a psychological shift though. The $58k without the range might feel alright but in that scenario with the range provided some people may turn it down. When the max is 86 2 over the minimum feels kinda shitty. Some people walk and look elsewhere, some people can use that to negotiate up into the closer to 70ish midrange now whereas before they had less negotiation knowledge. Long term I can see this pushing wages up. We'll see.

        If anything this turns labor into more of an actual

      • "Here is how this will pan out. (explains how it won't pan out)" This law doesn't prevent employers from being cheap dicks and they aren't legally required to stick to the salary ranges they post, only to prove that it was a good faith estimate. The scenario you posit has nothing to do with this law, which will not change the demand for workers, whatever they produce, or the money that pays them. The law is beneficial in that knowing the ballpark salary range you're looking at in a position can save you ti

      • Re: How is the free market supposed to function (Score:5, Insightful)

        by edwdig ( 47888 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2022 @10:10PM (#63017687)

        You're missing a *huge* part of this. A *lot* of people just don't know what pay range they should be looking for and keep getting underpaid because they don't know what to ask for.

        Maybe you took one job where you were underpaid, and set your future expectations off that, not knowing you're worth more. Maybe you're in a relatively specialized role and it's not easy to get comparison points. People in general just don't like to talk about what they make, so it's hard to compare to your peers.

        It's really easy to get underpaid and stay in a rut, and this helps get on the right track.

        It also gives workers massive leverage to ask for a raise if they realize they've been underpaid.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Exactly, when I was coming up I worked in a small town. The BEST IT salary was maybe 90k. Then I got a job offer w/ a national company that pays a big city market rate. The first thing they ask "What is your expected salary?" So I'm feeling senior in my career so do I ask for 75 or 80k? Wait that job pays 150k? How would I know?

          So you do some internet searches and you see that no one has any information on what that company pays, or the information is from people who don't work there telling you that everyo

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by eth1 ( 94901 )

          I think this is a much bigger deal than most people realize. When I switched from field tech type work to Linux/network admin type work, I had trouble pricing myself. Fortunately, the job was contract-to-hire, and I had an amazing team lead, so when the contract was up, he pulled me aside and said, "don't know they're paying you right now, but the guy before you in this job was making $X." Which was a good 50% more than what the contract company was paying me.

          That was almost 20 years ago, and if I'd stayed

        • Thats doable with that range though. Arrange they have no intention of ever going above 10% from the bottom its just a frustrating bait and switch. You could just as easily say starting at $56,000 depending on experience. $56,000 - $62,000 is a statistical reality. $56,000 - $92,000 when youve never once hired above $62,000 is bait and switch. Thats the crappy side effect. I have personally seen this play out several times a week at my wifes company. But a university hospital that employs more than 30k peop
      • I think the point is they can't list a 58,000 salary and then after 3 weeks of interviews tell you the job only pays $40,000. That was the scam. People are going to learn real quick but the bottom tier is what they're actually going to pay and that's good enough. It means they can't get you off the job market and into a lower paying job.

        That's the goal of these interview scams. It's to get you to stop looking for a job because you think you're done and then offer you a lower pay that you'll take because y
        • The tell for a good position is generally that they'll have you meet their clients, they're pretty committed at that point if you make a good impression. Also, you should be pushing for hourly over salary - otherwise you get locked into "well we expect an average of 45 hours a week" - you'll actually want to work extra if you're getting paid for it.
      • Here is how this will pan out. They list a job with a salary range of $56,000 - $89,000.

        It already has panned out exactly like that:

        " NYC companies quickly find ways around new pay transparency legislation [gothamist.com]"

        Salaries for New York City-based tech jobs at Amazon were listed by the company at a range of $88,400-$185,000 per year. International consulting firm Deloitte, one of the city's largest employers, listed salary ranges between $86,800 and $161,200. Postings on The Wall Street Journal sought reporte

        • At least it gives you the range to negotiate in. If I saw "security engineer" with 0-2million posted. I'd ask for 2 million. When they scoff, I'd go "oh you said it was reasonable, so now we are negotating"
          Sure I wouldn't get the job, but they will eventually wise up and lower the gap.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by e3m4n ( 947977 )
            i suppose that depends on the company. My observation was external watching the environment my wife works in at a university hospital that employs some 30,000 people. When the manager interviews candidates, they send a recommendation to HR with salary suggestion. HR typically responds with a different, lower salary unless you were already lowballing to the bottom of the range anyway. At that time the manager calls the interviewee and gives them the offer. Its a straight accept/reject at that point. If it we
    • I'm honestly shocked that CA and NY came up with legislation requiring this. Congrats on them.

      • I'm honestly shocked that CA and NY came up with legislation requiring

        Sorry, why are you shocked? These are two of the bluest states in the nation. Wouldn't it make sense that they would lead with worker-friendly legislation?

        • lol, no. Liberal policies overwhelmingly damage the middle class permanently to temporarily cater to the lower class in order to gain votes, the only people who consistently get better off under them is the ultra-rich.

    • This is practically socialism. Or communism. I forget which.

      Is there a meaningful difference in the real world? They both end up the same way: bread lines and gulags.

  • Pointless (Score:3, Interesting)

    by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2022 @08:40PM (#63017461)

    Salaries, even at the low end, are subject to negotiation. This is especially true for entry level stuff when a candidate's credentials and winning smile are the only thing they bring to the party.

    Way back when, a dude I started work with around the same time for around the same salary told me he negotiated a bunch or freebies on top of his starting bonus because he had another offer in his hand and the hiring manager liked the cut of his jib.

    This wouldn't have been reflected in the salary range for the position.

    Another (common?) practice is to low-ball the salaries and offer hefty raises for good performance after a probationary period of a year or two. Sometimes it comes with a formal promotion too, but that's a different position on paper and since no promotions are ever implied to be guaranteed, the noble version of this practice, as well as the not so noble old boy version, can proceed fully within the letter of the law.

    This strikes me as one of the less harmful instances of virtue signaling among the virtue signalling set. It isn't clear what problem it means to solve and how it will solve it, assuming there even is a problem to solve at all.

    • The freebies are not free though, the employer could just as well pay the worth of the "freebie" in salary. There definitely can be good things but just the same the law can account for that. Post a range and also just post what else they offer.

      Also maybe potential promotions should be enforced and codified, why shouldn't it be contractually bound to terms both parties agree to?

      The only people upset or have to change even in your scenarios are the business. about this seems to be the businesses. I can't

      • Re: Pointless (Score:4, Insightful)

        by AuMatar ( 183847 ) on Wednesday November 02, 2022 @12:33AM (#63017871)

        People are also misinterpreting who this is meant for. This isn't meant to help programmers making 200K in salary and another 100K+ in stock. At that level there's too many variables and perks to do an easy comparison, and truthfully they need less help negotiating. It's meant to help the people making $15 or $20 an hour, to know whether a job is worth their time applying to and prevent bait and switches. So comparing jobs making 3 that isn't exactly germane.

        • Yep, my life would have been easier starting out with rules like this in place. At the stage I'm in now I know the market well enough to know exactly what my worth is across multiple large companies. I don't need a pay range for my role, but it would be nice when kids are starting out to know at least what the range could be.

    • Salaries, even at the low end, are subject to negotiation. This is especially true for entry level stuff when a candidate's credentials and winning smile are the only thing they bring to the party.

      Way back when, a dude I started work with around the same time for around the same salary told me he negotiated a bunch or freebies on top of his starting bonus because he had another offer in his hand and the hiring manager liked the cut of his jib.

      This wouldn't have been reflected in the salary range for the position.

      Another (common?) practice is to low-ball the salaries and offer hefty raises for good performance after a probationary period of a year or two. Sometimes it comes with a formal promotion too, but that's a different position on paper and since no promotions are ever implied to be guaranteed, the noble version of this practice, as well as the not so noble old boy version, can proceed fully within the letter of the law.

      This strikes me as one of the less harmful instances of virtue signaling among the virtue signalling set. It isn't clear what problem it means to solve and how it will solve it, assuming there even is a problem to solve at all.

      I think you explained the problem it (partially) solves. People are being paid based not on their skill but their willingness and ability to negotiate. This is one of the factors behind the gender wage gap since women tend to be less confrontational and don't negotiate as much.

      My friend is an academic who is significantly underpaid relative to her peers at the same institution because when she was offered the job she was (incorrectly) told the salary was non-negotiable. So while others negotiated higher sal

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AuMatar ( 183847 )

        This law wouldn't have helped her. I advertise a job with a range of 50-60K. There's nothing preventing me from finally offering someone more than that, just less. Nor should there be anything preventing me from offering more- if I'm in actual negotiations for a great fit with another offer, I should be able to reassess what I'm willing to pay.

        So they offer her let's even say the max- 60K. The next guy who comes in can still negotiate for more- even much more. You still need to learn to negotiate.

        (R

        • This law wouldn't have helped her. I advertise a job with a range of 50-60K. There's nothing preventing me from finally offering someone more than that, just less. Nor should there be anything preventing me from offering more- if I'm in actual negotiations for a great fit with another offer, I should be able to reassess what I'm willing to pay.

          So they offer her let's even say the max- 60K. The next guy who comes in can still negotiate for more- even much more. You still need to learn to negotiate.

          (Rule #1 of negotiation- anyone who says an offer is non negotiable is lying. I've lost track of how many non negotiable offers I've negotiated).

          Well it would have helped since even 50-60k shows it's non-negotiable. Besides, this wasn't organization policy, it was an unethical dean taking advantage of an applicant who didn't know the system as well. If the official policy was in the advertisement it would have helped her.

          Also, while the employer can offer more than the advertised 50-60k range there's also a distinct disadvantage to them low-balling the range. Higher quality candidates aren't going to bother applying if they're going to need to negot

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by edwdig ( 47888 )

        I think you explained the problem it (partially) solves. People are being paid based not on their skill but their willingness and ability to negotiate. This is one of the factors behind the gender wage gap since women tend to be less confrontational and don't negotiate as much.

        My friend is an academic who is significantly underpaid relative to her peers at the same institution because when she was offered the job she was (incorrectly) told the salary was non-negotiable. So while others negotiated higher salaries she took the minimum because she was told it was her only option. This law would have protected her.

        More generally, there's a big information asymmetry regarding standard salaries when some one applies for a job. This helps correct that asymmetry. Just the awareness of the range puts the applicant in that much better position to negotiate a fair salary.

        Ability to negotiate is some of it. Your negotiation skills don't matter if you don't know the range that's in play. You can have great negotiation skills and come out with a bad offer if you don't know what you should be asking for.

  • Good (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Arethan ( 223197 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2022 @08:41PM (#63017471) Journal

    Hiding pay ranges from prospective and current employees is highly disingenuous.

    Some tips:

    If you feel embarrassed about your high pay, you might want to self reflect more on how you earn it -- more than just deliverables, but also in the learnings from your past experience that you actively bring to the table every day.

    And if you are enraged about your low pay... GOOD! You obviously needed a solid kick in the ass to make you less agreeable, so you can finally negotiate like an adult. Go raise some hell, get what you deserve, and if you get pushback, go find a new gig that will pay you what you want.

    • I think that we are paid way too much, and that pay should go down.
      There is no reason that a fresh out of college software engineer should be making $210k+

      4 Years of Experience, not even a Sr Eng role, and being offered $450k is ridiculous.
      All it does is push up prices of housing, rent, and goods in the area, which has the knock on effect of starting to price-out the working class who keep everything in the city operating.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Arethan ( 223197 )

        Uh... fresh out of college software engineers aren't making $210k+.

        But, if any of them are, their employers are absolute fools. There are zero fresh college grads that are worth that rate, unless they're bringing patents with them.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by rayzat ( 733303 )
          Shockingly they are. I was mentoring an intern at my company so we kept in regular touch. The coding he was doing here wasn't the coding he wanted to do. He reached out over the summer asking me to review an offer to make sure it was fair because I had a history of working with that company and actually knew his hiring manger. Granted this was NYC. but his offer was $310k, $30k signing 2 years of claw-back if you leave, some bonus plan in the 5-15% range depending on performance, and $310k in stock( 4year v

  • Range still matters (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gurps_npc ( 621217 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2022 @08:45PM (#63017485) Homepage

    It does not matter if they have a huge range. Why? Because if everyone has a range, than the job searchers will be able to compare. And Compare they will. They absolutely will be picking the one with higher values. Competition will drive these numbers up. Then they will find people will refuse to accept anything lower than the range.

    These numbers are hugely important. One of the problems is that right now the businesses abused their power. They do stupid things like 'entry level' for a job that has 5 years experience required. They abuse their power and treat people like crap. But you do not know until AFTER you show up for the interview.

    This law will even the playing field a little bit. Just enough to perhaps help the people that really need it.

    Specifically the people that are good at their job but are bad at interviewing for a job. They get screwed over their salary. This may stop some of that.

  • Glassdoor, levels fyi, and many other similar sites pretty much made tech salaries public. They even group by location, job role, level, and sometime years of experience.

    This is good.

    However, one should be self conscious. If you get less than median, and is not your first time on that job, ask more. If you are getting slightly median, and have experience ask more. If you are offered the top of the band, ask for bonuses, and equity. They already want you, and it does not hurt to negotiate.

    Granted, I have not

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by edwdig ( 47888 )

      Glassdoor is worthless unless you're looking to work at a huge company. If you're not, you're just getting a few random data points that aren't very reliable.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by stikves ( 127823 )

        Does it really matter?

        If in your city Google is paying $120k, Boing is paying $110k, and Chase Bank is paying $140k, can't this be useful when negotiating with a small startup?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by edwdig ( 47888 )

          Knowing what Chase pays helps if you're negotiating with a smaller bank, or a financial services company. It won't help much if you're talking to a company in a completely different field, as the payscales tend to be very different.

          Startups tend to pay low for their field, unless you're lucky enough to get one that's got tons of investors funding it to the point that profits don't matter. Large companies tend to pay better than medium companies.

  • It matters even if the range is BS (Score:5, Insightful)

    by khchung ( 462899 ) on Tuesday November 01, 2022 @09:55PM (#63017653) Journal

    It takes effort to scan through job ads, shortlist jobs, and to write up applications. It takes even more investment in time and energy to go through job interviews. To the point that, some people will take a low offer to justify the effort they spent (sunk cost fallacy).

    By forcing employers to post a salary range in the ad, it will let job applicants skip over lowball positions. It will also set an expectation (anchoring effect) so that if they give an low offer at the end of the process, job applicants would be rightly offended less like to take the offer.

    Overall, it saves everyone's time. Job applicants can skip over ads with too low a range, good faith employers can waste less time going through applicants with too high expectation. Only dishonest employers lose, which is good.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      It takes effort to scan through job ads, shortlist jobs, and to write up applications. It takes even more investment in time and energy to go through job interviews. To the point that, some people will take a low offer to justify the effort they spent (sunk cost fallacy).

      By forcing employers to post a salary range in the ad, it will let job applicants skip over lowball positions. It will also set an expectation (anchoring effect) so that if they give an low offer at the end of the process, job applicants would be rightly offended less like to take the offer.

      Overall, it saves everyone's time. Job applicants can skip over ads with too low a range, good faith employers can waste less time going through applicants with too high expectation. Only dishonest employers lose, which is good.

      This.

      Here in the UK it's normal to list a salary, a lot of people sort jobs by salary deliberately excluding jobs that are below what they are willing to accept. A few jobs like to cheat by putting a higher range than they're willing to pay. I.E. a job is listed in the £40,000 bracket but says £35,000 "dependent on experience". That's a red flag to avoid that job. Two in fact, "dependent on experience" means "we're going to use any excuse to offer you less".

      Although to be honest it doesn't

  • Of course companies that have been hiding the remuneration ranges will now post meaningless ranges if they want to get around it.Like project admin position for 20k-80k. It means nothing and it's very hard to prove the final offer is in bad faith.

    • Of course companies that have been hiding the remuneration ranges will now post meaningless ranges if they want to get around it.Like project admin position for 20k-80k. It means nothing and it's very hard to prove the final offer is in bad faith.

      If I see a job listed with that kind of range I will move on to the next one. Employers playing that game will find that it limits their options.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by edwdig ( 47888 )

      If they do that, people looking for jobs will immediately realize what's going on and know that's not a place they want to apply.

  • Fixed that for you.
  • ...don't have a wide salary range. Most people qualified & experienced for those jobs will know what the likely range is & what a good offer should look like. All this law does is save both employers & job seekers a lot of time & effort in that qualified & experienced workers can see crappy jobs straight off & not bother with them. It just streamlines the hiring process & is good for everyone.

    On the other hand, looking at the minimum salary offered in all the ads allows job seek
  • then almost any job "could be performed in the city". Just how far is NYC trying to reach?
  • Is this supposed to help improve the workforce somehow? https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]

Slashdot Top Deals

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Close