Hacker News Reader

Comment by JSeymourATL | Hacker News Reader

Employers will simply avoid remote hires in NY.

It’s happening in Colorado, where there’s a similar law. > https://www.9news.com/article/news/investigations/job-postin...

View on HN

Colorado is 1.7% of USA population and can be easily excluded; Colorado+NY is already 7.7%, and eventually you reach a large enough critical mass that can't be ignored without consequence.

However, I presume that the main target of this law is not megacorps advertising remote positions but rather local businesses hiring local workers - which can't get around this requirement.

You can add Connecticut to that list. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/...

If Colorado passed legislature requiring cars to have better emission requirements, nobody would sell cars in Colorado.

If California passed that same legislature, every auto firm would update their cars to meet those emissions standards.

Which is exactly what happened.

When you're a big enough market, the cost of dropping you isn't worth the benefit of non-compliance. NYC is huge, and has a lot of jobs that people commute in to - which would all be affected by this.

NYC is also a terrible source of remote workers for other jurisdictions: high salaries, taxes and onerous business regulations. Most Canadian companies somehow make out OK excluding all of Quebec (and it's ~22% of the population), so I don't see excluding NYC from your pool of potential remotes being a big deal for all but the most specialized US companies.

Quebec has a history of being a separate economy, and speaks an entirely different language from the rest of Canada. While in theory, everyone is expected to learn cereal box French, in practice, most anglos don't bother.

NYC has an economy five times the size of Colorado, and tons of already established firms already operating in it, which would have to comply with this law.

This thread keeps talking about remote workers, when remote work is an incredibly tiny minority of all employment. It will follow employment trends - when in-office job postings start having clear salary statements, remote will follow, if only to remain competitive. And all it will take to make this happen is a few metro areas passing laws to this effect.

I understand some companies attempting to exclude CO in order to not post salary bands, but if we're talking about tech (or especially finance), good luck avoiding hiring in NYC.

NYC is home to a ton of tech talent, and that amount seems to be increasing (exodus from SF) since the pandemic started. I'd wager it contains more tech talent than any other city. I can't imagine a competitive tech company not accepting employees from NYC, unless it's an actual top earlier-stage startup like Notion that can afford everyone to colocate in SF.

https://www.coloradoexcluded.com/

Quick, someone buy https://www.newyorkexcluded.com/

but it's still a plus for all the megacorps that have presence in NY, right?

Companies can’t avoid this if this law existed in all 50 states or if it was federally mandated. We all need to write our reps and get this to happen.

Being downvoted for wanting job adverts to have salaries posted? Da fuq?

Absolutely, classic case of “Tell me the incentive and I’ll tell you the outcome.” People love these interferences without thinking of the real consequences. NY is really trying to lose relevance and get rid of talent.

That must be why the NYC housing market is experiencing a major post-mid-pandemic boom. All that loss of relevance and departing talent is just killing them!

ps. I do not live and have never lived in NYC.

California needs to adopt this next. Can you tell me what's bad about forcing companies to be straightfoward about salaries?

To play devils advocate, there is a cost associated with enforcing this law and this is effectively paid for by the tax payers. There is a cost for complying with the law, this generally disadvantages small and new business. If only CA(and CO and NYC and CT) have this requirement it makes them less desirable places to start a new business, to hire additional employees.

But the costs for a law like this are not prohibitive

Reply on news.ycombinator.com