California passes law requiring companies to post salary ranges on job listings

Re:California passes law requiring companies to post salary ... by gwright on Friday September 02, 2022 @05:29PM (#32695915)

Don't disagree, but the challenge in this area is that no two people are alike and so the market price for developer-a is not the same as the market price for developer-b. Related, it depends on what job you are applying for as the same person applying for two different jobs isn't going to automatically end up with the same compensation.

I'm not saying that some transparency wouldn't help, just that market pricing for labor doesn't work the same way it does for a commodity.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California passes law requiring companies to post salary ... by lotsofpulp on Friday September 02, 2022 @05:30PM (#32695934)

Sure, and for those positions the market will decide that a wider pay range for job listings is justified. That is the purpose of not forcing a certain pay range.

Personally, I do not see a reason to legislate a specific bottom or top range. Let the pay range be $min wage to $1B. Eventually, employers who try to do that will be forced to change by lack of quality workers applying to them.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California passes law requiring companies to post salary ... by mlyle on Friday September 02, 2022 @05:57PM (#32696182)

> Sure, and for those positions the market will decide that a wider pay range for job listings is justified.

Agreed. (and/or we end up with finer graduated positions with similar pay bands).

> Personally, I do not see a reason to legislate a specific bottom or top range. Let the pay range be $min wage to $1B.

If you don't require any good faith description of the pay bands, the law is useless. You can post accurate, narrow pay bands now if you want. Or you can post none. Workers have been letting companies get away with posting none.

$min wage to $1B is functionally equivalent to none.

[ Parent | on HN ]