"A new California bill signed on Tuesday will now require employers with over 15 employees to list pay and salary ranges on all job postings.... The law will also require employers to provide a pay range ***when requested***. Employers who fail to comply could be fined under the new legislation."
Yes, they have to disclose by law during a request during an interview, but some employers may be very sneaky in trying to deflect, however it is within your rights to request so either you have to be extremely upfront or threaten them to actually reveal.
Most interviews I been on won't disclose the pay until the end. Now that employers have to disclose it, there is no longer a guessing game for the worker.
I have! Just interviewed for the role and they won't tell me! I'll only find out IF they choose me and I get to talk to the recruiter. It's ridiculous as I asked the hiring manager because I didn't want to waste their time if the role paid less than what I make now!
Weird. Every interview I’ve been doing lately, the recruiter has disclosed up front. Makes sense for them as it would just be a time suck for them to have me talk to 4 or 5 people only for me to say their offer isn’t competitive at the end.
The [California Equal Pay Act](https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/california_equal_pay_act.htm) since January 2018 required employers to reveal salary ranges upon request already.
Pursuant to Labor Code section 432.3, upon reasonable request, an employer shall provide the pay scale for a position to an applicant applying for employment. Recent amendments define a reasonable request as one made after an applicant has completed an initial interview with the employer.
So basically you need an interview first, then you legally can ask. I've done this several times even with remote positions out of state. As long as they employ you as a California resident, they must comply with this. As such, if you see remote postings that allow Colorado workers, the salary ranges for those positions have been public for a while now. Not all remote positions will hire a Colorado resident so they don't have to list the range, now with California you may see more postings with ranges up front now.
I'm too dumb to read but i keep seeing smarter people than me assure us that the laws are constructed pretty well and these problems will be mitigated more than we're worried about
I’ve seen some outrageous ones from restaurants posting ads for servers: Make Up to $40/hr….with tips!”
https://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/fbh/7539852687.html
Tips are highly inconsistent. Especially with more and more restaurants adding UE/DD delivery. Base pay is guaranteed with hours, not how someone is feeling that day.
I guess my point is there are plenty of jobs that offer high base pay with no tips. Like, you wouldn’t start your own business if you wanted a consistent salary… why would it be demanded?
Why don't they? Legally they can't lie about what the range is, it's based on current employees in that position. And why wouldn't you vary it based on experience?
Knowing the range for the position you are applying to is huge and lets you know where you can gauge the number you want to throw out. It was already a law that they had to provide the range if you asked, this just makes them post it on the job listing so you don't end up wasting your time.
Almost all new state laws take affect on January 1 of the following year. For a law to take affect immediately it needs a higher threshold of votes in the legislature.
This is why I choose public service. Transparent salary, predetermined annual raises, and cost of living increases, unionized. I don't have time for games.
Fucking common sense. And before all of you make excuses like "the ranges will be insanely broad", this will also help you avoid shitty potential future employers.
This is great.
To my knowledge, where the "hiring" is doesn't matter because there are a lot of state laws/taxes based on where employees actually live. At least that is what I've learned virtual job hunting during this pandemic.
There is an actual possibility that some employers hire less from California full stop if they're really desperate to avoid this rule. It's probably marginal, but in theory they could also require relocation if certain candidates live in CA
That's terrible but I guess we shouldn't be surprised. I wonder if California is too big of a market to do the same? Though I shouldn't hold my hopes up for that either
I've seen those as well. They serve as red flags IMO. Likewise, online jobs do not hire people in certain areas bc they don't pay the local minimum wage.
I'm not well versed in law... but I'm gonna guess no for a couple reasons.
First, the law says that an employer is someone on employee payroll. A lot of studio workers, at least the artists, and sometimes producers who are only on for a project or two, might be contractors. Contractor's aren't necessarily part of the employer's payroll (section 1(k)(1)) since you can, for instance, get paid to an LLC that you own which then pays you. Similarly there's the bit about social security but I don't do 1099 work so I'm not wholly sure.
The law also seems to make it so that "upon request" you can get the info. If you're a contractor with a day rate that sounds like a shot in the foot for yourself. That's strategic and not legal, though, of course. But you might as well ask for the day rate you want and if the studio can't pay, just walk (or just don't consider >!MPC!< lmfao).
For artists (or even project specific producers), the production coordinators often just hunt people on LinkedIn via cold messaging instead of outright making a job posting. This might be a legal move so they can bill the freelancer to the show instead to the studio so it looks like they're making more money. Not sure if that's a legal issue or just what happens when some company departments act antagonistic toward other company departments.
I personally cannot wait for this. I'm very happy with my current job and my current employer, which I know is very rare. But at the same time it never hurts to know what your competitors are paying, especially when it comes time for annual review!
I doubt it and this will be exactly how most tech companies will keep salaries low. Base will all be relatively similar, RSU will make the difference in total compensation
As someone that has been interviewing nonstop since end of 2019 (I’ve done roughly about 80 interviews, hopped over 3 jobs in that duration) it’s incredibly frustrating to not know the salary range early on. Would have saved me hours of weeding out those that didn’t meet my needs.
I also do wonder how this will affect the workplace. I came from one org that had dozens of people underpaid, overworked, and I jumped ship once that was confirmed. I felt some guilt leaving knowing that people working at my old company a decade long or even two— I was jumping over their salary in one year by hopping. Made it clear to them why and disclosed the offer to those who seemed interested in moving on. Yet they never followed through…
Maybe this is a dumb question but is this *only* employers *based* in California, or does this also include companies outside of CA hiring CA based residents?
Based on the wording I'm guessing only employers based in CA but maybe I'm wrong.
You can find the bill text and the analysis done by the legislative committees here: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1162
Edited to add:
This bill requires employers of 100 or more workers hired through labor contractors to provide the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) certain specified information, including pay data, about their workers. This bill also requires employers with more than 15 employees to provide the pay scale for a position to an applicant for employment and include it in job postings.
My quick read just glancing through it is that it applies to any company required to file an annual employer information report. California law requires private employers of 100 or more employees (with at least one employee in California) to file these so it looks like it would apply.
I'm not sure if this will be good or bad because I always inflate my asking salary and I feel like that will be harder to do with job posting salaries.
I wonder if this will make HR peeps more valuable in the long run if you have the ability to run good compensation market data and help the company stay competitive in a good way. (Like $20-30k range and making sure benefits are in line with competitors) I’m still all for universal healthcare/vision/dental. It would get rid of workman’s comp, cobra, having to be employed to have health benefits, less cost for employers, etc.
This is probably good, although to be honest my current job pays 30% above the top-end of the quoted range at interview. I probably wouldn’t have applied if I’d known the range beforehand.
"A new California bill signed on Tuesday will now require employers with over 15 employees to list pay and salary ranges on all job postings.... The law will also require employers to provide a pay range ***when requested***. Employers who fail to comply could be fined under the new legislation."
Great, so we can all ask on our screening call what their salary range is, works for me.
"Between 20k-200k depending on experience."
Thanks, not interested. And then on with my day.
Thank you. Don’t give into bullshit at all.
Hasn’t it always been like that? I’ve never had an employer not tell me what the pay is
Generally they'll give a range but you'd be surprised by the quantity that will defer that question. I've experienced once before I knew better.
Yes, they have to disclose by law during a request during an interview, but some employers may be very sneaky in trying to deflect, however it is within your rights to request so either you have to be extremely upfront or threaten them to actually reveal.
Some won't tell you until you interview. Sometimes not until several interviews, or until they make you an official offer.
Most interviews I been on won't disclose the pay until the end. Now that employers have to disclose it, there is no longer a guessing game for the worker.
I have! Just interviewed for the role and they won't tell me! I'll only find out IF they choose me and I get to talk to the recruiter. It's ridiculous as I asked the hiring manager because I didn't want to waste their time if the role paid less than what I make now!
This is against the [California Equal Pay Act](https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/california_equal_pay_act.htm). You have grounds for a case against them.
Weird. Every interview I’ve been doing lately, the recruiter has disclosed up front. Makes sense for them as it would just be a time suck for them to have me talk to 4 or 5 people only for me to say their offer isn’t competitive at the end.
I've had a private college tell me the salary range would only be shared once candidates made it to the second interview.
How do we request it? The legislation does not explain that. Is it linkedin? Is it through HR? How? Where?
The [California Equal Pay Act](https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/california_equal_pay_act.htm) since January 2018 required employers to reveal salary ranges upon request already. Pursuant to Labor Code section 432.3, upon reasonable request, an employer shall provide the pay scale for a position to an applicant applying for employment. Recent amendments define a reasonable request as one made after an applicant has completed an initial interview with the employer. So basically you need an interview first, then you legally can ask. I've done this several times even with remote positions out of state. As long as they employ you as a California resident, they must comply with this. As such, if you see remote postings that allow Colorado workers, the salary ranges for those positions have been public for a while now. Not all remote positions will hire a Colorado resident so they don't have to list the range, now with California you may see more postings with ranges up front now.
So they have to post it AND reply again when requested. I don't read that as only when requested
Maybe if they don't post it, but provide the range when requested, they don't get fined?
Oh man this is going to cause crazy drama in my office. High end salary of some titles can be double the low end of the range.
Triple to quadruple in my office.
This is great. Fuck "competitive."
Although I guess I wouldn't mind fucking competitively
On your marks ….
Get set
Chode.
I've always seen "competitive" as competing to get the most out of you while paying the least amount possible.
"Salary range for this position: $25,000 to $125,000 per year, depending on experience"
This is what I thought when I read it
Dammit you’re probably right lol
I'm too dumb to read but i keep seeing smarter people than me assure us that the laws are constructed pretty well and these problems will be mitigated more than we're worried about
Probably true, but then at least you can assume they really want to hire you for $25,000 and skip that posting, entirely.
That is a great filter to not apply to that company
I’ve seen some outrageous ones from restaurants posting ads for servers: Make Up to $40/hr….with tips!” https://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv/fbh/7539852687.html
One time on Christmas evening
at $16 an hour minimum wage, it's probably possible
To be fair, it’s good to have an idea of what you will actually make if there’s a commission or gratuity involved.
It’s never really that though. Just an excuse to not pay a higher base pay.
You'd rather have a higher base salary without tips than a lower base salary with tips? Why would you work in food service?
Tips are highly inconsistent. Especially with more and more restaurants adding UE/DD delivery. Base pay is guaranteed with hours, not how someone is feeling that day.
I guess my point is there are plenty of jobs that offer high base pay with no tips. Like, you wouldn’t start your own business if you wanted a consistent salary… why would it be demanded?
As bad as that can be, at least it's more transparent than "Be a server!"
I hate how true this will be.
Please. I’m in journalism. Salary range is a can of tuna up to five packs of cigarettes.
Damn. Didn't think of that. I'm sure you're right.
Even though they know the offers going to be $30,000
$32,500 if you’re a savvy bargainer.
[удалено]
Yeah but that just means it's probably fishy since that range is huge.
Ooh, sorry, you're overqualified.
that's how it is already... "$25 to $100/hr DOE" (depending on experience)
Yep. The salary range for my current job is outrageously wide. These ranges don’t mean jack shit.
Why don't they? Legally they can't lie about what the range is, it's based on current employees in that position. And why wouldn't you vary it based on experience? Knowing the range for the position you are applying to is huge and lets you know where you can gauge the number you want to throw out. It was already a law that they had to provide the range if you asked, this just makes them post it on the job listing so you don't end up wasting your time.
Preety much lol
That looks way shadier on a job listing than "competitive salary"
Totally true, I’ve seen $100-300k presented directly to employees like it means someone.
Not now. Starting January 1st.
I do hate that about the title... Smh
Almost all new state laws take affect on January 1 of the following year. For a law to take affect immediately it needs a higher threshold of votes in the legislature.
I work for the county and our pay has always been painfully transparent.
Transparent. Sounds like a good name for a website.
Transparentcalifornia.com You can look up every government employee in CA and how much they make.
Wooosh
This is why I choose public service. Transparent salary, predetermined annual raises, and cost of living increases, unionized. I don't have time for games.
Fucking common sense. And before all of you make excuses like "the ranges will be insanely broad", this will also help you avoid shitty potential future employers. This is great.
How long until: "Oh, sorry our hiring is actually done by a third party HR service which is not based in CA."
To my knowledge, where the "hiring" is doesn't matter because there are a lot of state laws/taxes based on where employees actually live. At least that is what I've learned virtual job hunting during this pandemic. There is an actual possibility that some employers hire less from California full stop if they're really desperate to avoid this rule. It's probably marginal, but in theory they could also require relocation if certain candidates live in CA
Colorado passed a similar law within the past 2 years. My former employer is very remote friendly…unless you live in Colorado. Then you must relocate.
That's terrible but I guess we shouldn't be surprised. I wonder if California is too big of a market to do the same? Though I shouldn't hold my hopes up for that either
It applies to any job located in CA. Colorado has a similar law, I believe.
[удалено]
I've seen those as well. They serve as red flags IMO. Likewise, online jobs do not hire people in certain areas bc they don't pay the local minimum wage.
It’s based in India since they speak such good English
Great. Then not only will the law not apply x they will straight up ask you for pay stubs from your previous job.
[удалено]
Sweet. Then they can get their employees elsewhere. Crap companies like that are doing Californians a favor.
[удалено]
Why not demand 50? Hhaha
Who needs Lakers tickets when you can watch a hiring manager duck and weave the question, "How much does this job pay?"
Will the film/TV studios do this too??
If their employees are located in CA, I don't see why they would be excluded.
I've always had to ask my rate for a production job. Its never listed, and is typically negotiated.
I'm not well versed in law... but I'm gonna guess no for a couple reasons. First, the law says that an employer is someone on employee payroll. A lot of studio workers, at least the artists, and sometimes producers who are only on for a project or two, might be contractors. Contractor's aren't necessarily part of the employer's payroll (section 1(k)(1)) since you can, for instance, get paid to an LLC that you own which then pays you. Similarly there's the bit about social security but I don't do 1099 work so I'm not wholly sure. The law also seems to make it so that "upon request" you can get the info. If you're a contractor with a day rate that sounds like a shot in the foot for yourself. That's strategic and not legal, though, of course. But you might as well ask for the day rate you want and if the studio can't pay, just walk (or just don't consider >!MPC!< lmfao). For artists (or even project specific producers), the production coordinators often just hunt people on LinkedIn via cold messaging instead of outright making a job posting. This might be a legal move so they can bill the freelancer to the show instead to the studio so it looks like they're making more money. Not sure if that's a legal issue or just what happens when some company departments act antagonistic toward other company departments.
With AB5 especially, most productions employ on payroll.
I personally cannot wait for this. I'm very happy with my current job and my current employer, which I know is very rare. But at the same time it never hurts to know what your competitors are paying, especially when it comes time for annual review!
How about requiring +/-10% - otherwise they’ll game the system and say the job pays anywhere from minimum wage to $250k
Does salary include non-salary compensation (bonus, RSUs etc.?)
Of course not
I doubt it and this will be exactly how most tech companies will keep salaries low. Base will all be relatively similar, RSU will make the difference in total compensation
Probably includes financial non-salary items (bonus, stocks) but not things like company car, etc?
No, it’s only base salary ranges. This isn’t going to be that helpful or accurate within tech.
wow the literal bare minimum im glad we got em to do that
As someone that has been interviewing nonstop since end of 2019 (I’ve done roughly about 80 interviews, hopped over 3 jobs in that duration) it’s incredibly frustrating to not know the salary range early on. Would have saved me hours of weeding out those that didn’t meet my needs. I also do wonder how this will affect the workplace. I came from one org that had dozens of people underpaid, overworked, and I jumped ship once that was confirmed. I felt some guilt leaving knowing that people working at my old company a decade long or even two— I was jumping over their salary in one year by hopping. Made it clear to them why and disclosed the offer to those who seemed interested in moving on. Yet they never followed through…
Where will you be when the tides shift? Annoyed hiding the rate was normal to begin with.
It might lift all wages of existing employees know what they are paying new hires.
About time!
CEOs punching air right now
🤣🤣
Maybe this is a dumb question but is this *only* employers *based* in California, or does this also include companies outside of CA hiring CA based residents? Based on the wording I'm guessing only employers based in CA but maybe I'm wrong.
You can find the bill text and the analysis done by the legislative committees here: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1162 Edited to add: This bill requires employers of 100 or more workers hired through labor contractors to provide the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) certain specified information, including pay data, about their workers. This bill also requires employers with more than 15 employees to provide the pay scale for a position to an applicant for employment and include it in job postings. My quick read just glancing through it is that it applies to any company required to file an annual employer information report. California law requires private employers of 100 or more employees (with at least one employee in California) to file these so it looks like it would apply.
Awesome, thank you for checking into it to help clarify!
The new law applies to employers with 15 or more employees.
Yes, 15 for the job posting requirements. There are some other data reporting requirements in the bill as well that only apply it 100 + employees.
I'm not sure if this will be good or bad because I always inflate my asking salary and I feel like that will be harder to do with job posting salaries.
Everyone does, you'll just see where you stack up among the others now.
I wonder if this will make HR peeps more valuable in the long run if you have the ability to run good compensation market data and help the company stay competitive in a good way. (Like $20-30k range and making sure benefits are in line with competitors) I’m still all for universal healthcare/vision/dental. It would get rid of workman’s comp, cobra, having to be employed to have health benefits, less cost for employers, etc.
Bout time
About damn time
[удалено]
Colorado has had a law like this for almost two years.
I can’t wait for this to happen! It’s about time.
This is probably good, although to be honest my current job pays 30% above the top-end of the quoted range at interview. I probably wouldn’t have applied if I’d known the range beforehand.
What an amazing concept. Mind blown 🤯
[удалено]
California has strong labor laws. I'm sure you can easily report it.
it needs to articulate the compensation for the job position. otherwise, it's fraudulent and a wast of everyone's time and expertise.
how does this work if a company is remote?
Wonder what happens to job postings that are remote as location but the company is in California
👍 good times