> If it was because they were following advice they read
> somewhere because worried it would influence their offer,
> I'd try to dispel that myth within the context of
> Automattic.
If knowledge of a candidate's previous salary doesn't influence your offer, why do you ask for it and what do you do with it?
I still don't understand, why you think you're entitled to know a candidates previous salary. But yes, I wouldn't trust you with that information.
I agree it can be uncomfortable for people, as is almost everything around compensation. I don't think we're entitled to know, but it is an expression of trust when someone shares it, and thus far with ~99% of people we've hired over 10 years it hasn't been an issue.
Re:Talking About Money
by eli_gottlieb on Saturday May 02, 2015 @11:18PM
(#9479672)
Why should people express trust in you by deliberately sacrificing information relevant to their own interests before you've proven yourself trustworthy?
As the adage goes... trust is earned, not given. I would not divulge my current/previous salary either.
Re:Talking About Money
by eli_gottlieb on Sunday May 03, 2015 @07:28PM
(#9483503)
Well actually, one usually builds trust by giving it in small pieces, showing that you're willing and able to develop a relationship with the other person. But the key word there is small: you don't place yourself at a large disadvantage until the other person has shown themselves to be trustworthy in previous instances where less was at stake.
Our culture is really built on two-way trust: since we're distributed and seldom see each other you don't know how someone is going about their work, and most of our HR policies come down to the honor system. The company places an incredibly amount of trust in employees, and vice versa people place a great amount of trust in the company, including that we'll do our best to treat them fairly. It's a responsibility the folks on the operations side of Automattic, including myself, take very seriously.