Help-wanted advertisements in New York will have to disclose proposed pay rates after a statewide salary transparency law goes into effect on Sunday, part of growing state and city efforts to give women and people of color a tool to advocate for equal pay for equal work.

Employers with at least four workers will be required to disclose salary ranges for any job advertised externally to the public or internally to workers interested in a promotion or transfer.

Pay transparency, supporters say, will prevent employers from offering some job candidates less or more money based on age, gender, race or other factors not related to their skills.

Advocates believe the change also could help underpaid workers realize they make less than people doing the same job.

  • 2Xtreme21@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Guaranteed employers will post ridiculous, not-at-all-helpful salary ranges to get around the law.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That’s what they did in Colorado, but it backfired because every applicant expected the high end of the range. Now they just advertise jobs that aren’t available in Colorado.

      Pay transparency helps both employers and employees, but at the expense of employers who are trying to underpay their workers.

      • JungleJim@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well good. Those companies deserve to fail if their business model can’t support itself without abusing people.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree. But many companies are operating under the presumption that this will hurt them, even though they pay a fair wage. If your pay is competitive, you want transparency. If it isn’t, you’re running an unsustainable business.

      • jballs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah we really need more states - or better yet the federal government - to pass these laws. For now, you’re just going to see job postings say “no applicants from New York or Colorado.”

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Then people will avoid applying, and instead apply to the similair job without a bullshit range. The problem is self correcting.

      This law is already in effect in Colorado/Washington/etc. Pull up an advert for seattle jobs on indeed and you’ll see that they list a large band, but then a “likely salary” point. Its clear, easy and sets expectations well.

      • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Then people will avoid applying, and instead apply to the similair job without a bullshit range. The problem is self correcting.

        I doubt it. People still applied to jobs that didn’t list a salary range. It didn’t self correct.

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          But now there’s competition. The companies that post more realistic bands will get better people.

          It’s like how minimum wage increases also help people who earn above minimum wage. The minimum standard increasing encourages better companies to do more than the minimum, because now it doesn’t put them at a disadvantage.

          • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            There was competition before though too, between jobs that didn’t list ranges and those that did. You could view a job that didn’t list a range as having an implicit range of something like 0-1000000. That competition didn’t drive companies to specifically list salary ranges.

        • cole@lemdro.id
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m currently applying for jobs and I don’t even bother with unreasonable ranges. I have a target salary so I won’t play games if the low end of your range is half that.

  • treefrog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Earn up to $17 an hour. Saw that on a sign outside Qdoba. Note this was one of the first places that started hitting me up for tips on their credit card machines.

    Asked a worker, “Your shift supervisors really make $17 an hour? Or is that supposed to be with tips.”

    He laughed and said, “No one here is getting paid that much.”

  • Fapper_McFapper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    My company would rather uproot it’s corporate office from New York to New Jersey to avoid any kind of salary disclosure.

    • rynzcycle@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      They have to provide a range. Knowing the highest is also very helpful when you’re negotiating a starting salary.

  • chakan2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This is going to be interesting as hell…I used to work for a fortune 50 and on my way out I accidentally saw the pay rates for all the people in my department.

    I should have kept that document, but was afraid of legal…and that place had Satan on their pay roll.

    The really interesting data points were 2 women, who weren’t particularly good at their jobs, were off the pay scale by over 100%. Like wildly over paid compared to the rest of the department. #3 was a guy who I thought was our best dev…came in at half their rate.

    It would be total bedlam if they had to make that public.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m sure it would be in the short term, but in the long term, I bet it would land on being a better place to work.

      • chakan2@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I can’t fathom that place ever being a good place to work…it’s old money, and they have cash reserves to keep them solvent for a century.

        They have no incentive to change. They’re happy when their high value staff quit and could care less about the churn it causes.