Here, I found 5 so far.

https://www.indeed.com/viewjob?jk=9e046a56c76ba933&tk=1fo21m...

https://www.indeed.com/rc/clk?jk=d87c517c32a680d3&fccid=2b2d...

https://www.indeed.com/rc/clk?jk=0e1dbdaee064b39b&fccid=c953...

https://www.indeed.com/rc/clk?jk=b1ed6d586890504b&fccid=afbf...

https://www.indeed.com/rc/clk?jk=cd34c725a1fc5766&fccid=2c62...

The 5th link says it openly in the title of the job ad.

> Principal Software Engineer – Search (open to remote work, except in Colorado)

Just search "software engineer Colorado" on Indeed, select "Remote" and maybe 1/3 of them are a Colorado exclusion.

> https://www.indeed.com/rc/clk?jk=08cf978f51852f65&fccid=ccf1...

Of tech companies doing it, one of them is eBay.

When companies say "remote OK, except Colorado", does that mean they won't accept applicants from CO? Or does it just mean that they are officially stating that they aren't advertising to candidates from CO (but they can still apply and get hired)?

A lot of them prohibit any of the work from being conducted in Colorado in the job description.

It is anecdotal from constantly seeing remote job postings saying things like

"this role can be performed from any US state except Colorado." Sometimes Hawaii is included.

Let me try and dig up a few of these.

I wish California would pass this law. It would be really hard to avoid tech workers in California.

California, IIRC, mandates that they provide you the pay range if you ask for it.

They updated the law: you have to go through at least one interview before they are forced to share it.

What kind of waste of time is that?

Prevent people from 'scraping' job postings by manually asking for salary range.

That seems like a good middle ground. Generally it's one of my opening questions for contracts. I'm honest and say that I don't want to waste anyone's time and get an upfront range and give them some wiggle room.

Yeah after the first interview. But that's way different than with the job posting.

"We're so glad you asked. Our possible range, depending on the candidate, is from minimum wage to $1M/year."

If a company answers this way, it is likely that you would succeed on a claim under the California Equal Pay Act. This kind of hair splitting doesn't generally go over well.

>The California Equal Pay Act

Does this account for the vastly different levels of output from employees? I would have to imagine nobody believes quality of work and productivity are actually equal amongst coworkers.

Pay is more a measure of what the worker is willing to accept than a measure of quality or productivity.

If you're paying someone 3x someone else, they're probably doing different jobs, which should have different pay ranges. A range of 20%, or even 50% is probably acceptable for salary (also of note the CA and CO laws only require salary disclosure, performance based bonuses or equity award ranges don't need to be shared) based on performance in a role. A difference of 3x or 10x (or 50x as is the case above) in salary means that the expectations are different.

Using athletics as an example, it's quite common to see the best players making $30+ million/year while their peers doing the same job (albeit not nearly as well) are getting paid half a million.

The peer pay differences are less pronounced in other fields, but why would we assume people are "essentially the same" at their output? I have definitely seen full stack developers that are "doing the same job" 3x-5x better than some of their peers in many cases, when you compound quality and efficiency. Not every company has enough people for tiered job rating buckets like Google, Amazon etc.

My previous company posted several openings for our team. All specifically excluded Colorado.