I never have but I have never been told I couldn't share pay information. Certainly I have with my accountant and financial advisor. I've also been asked when applying for a new job whether or not I've been 100% forthcoming.

Such a “requirement” is illegal. https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-right...

And pot was illegal in the 70s.

It still is.

At the US federal level. It may or may not be illegal at the state level--and is regulated in any case.

It is still illegal in every US state. States can legalize it at the level of their own laws, and they can choose not to enforce federal laws, but that doesn't actually make it legal while federal laws are in place that conflict. A federal agent could choose to walk into any dispensary in a "legal" state and arrest everyone there, and they could be prosecuted in federal court. Yet at a practical level there has been a decision to defer to the states on what they will enforce, but that is a decision of executive authority rather than the law.

I expect you'd have a pretty complicated jurisdictional case if a team of FBI agents were to go into a dispensary in a state where it was legal and round everyone up. And pretty much no sane politician would go anywhere near it. I also wouldn't (hypothetically) travel with the stuff over state boundaries.

But in the US, federal labor law makes it illegal for employers to prevent employees from sharing pay information (at least for employees who are entitled to unionize).

They can request it, but can't stop you if you do.

You can also request them to do likewise, with similar recourse.

A request is nothing without teeth behind it.

Teeth like employment at-will?

Basically the only advantage an employee can have in this sort of negotiation is not needing to be employed by that company.

It's generally quite unlikely that sharing your salary is going to result in getting bitten by that. You'd need to do labour organization (or be completely surrounded by rats and snitches and other vermin at your workplace, who already have an axe to grind) to actually get blowback for this stuff.

Most of the taboo around it is cultural, because people here attach their self-worth to their paycheck.

You could also always do it anonymously or pseudonymously. You'd have almost no chances of retaliation in that case.

Isn't being dismissed because of something like that and being able to prove it is a bit like winning a lottery?

The singular of anecdote is not data. Getting hit by lightning is also unlikely, but it happens to thousands of people every year.

That doesn't mean I'll be flying a kite in a thunderstorm, but it also doesn't mean that you should lock yourself in a bunker the moment the sky turns grey.

Most of the taboo around this is cultural, not retributive.

Firing people at will includes firing them because you got the feeling they may be behaving in any way in any situation perhaps in conflict to any request you made. Odds are someone won't get fired for stealing office supplies and in at will place they may be more often fired for misunderstandings related to a misperception where they don't come clean on something they never did.

That there was no way to sue the company in that example is a demonstration that the employee lacked any right to break any taboo.

As such there are teeth anywhere that is at will for any request whether it is reasonable or not and whether it relates to a taboo the employee may be expected to have or not.

>The singular of anecdote is not data.

No funnier response to a post directly proving you wrong. L