- some roles don’t really have a budget, salary will depend on applicant and can range a lot
- forcing a range means these ranges will skew lower so higher performing people will lose out and average salaries will go down
I could easily see this having the opposite effect: Forcing a range causes employers (particularly those with less name recognition) to increase posted salaries in order to get people interested enough to apply.
I don't see how posting lower salaries would do anything but discourage top applicants.
Of course they all have a budget. You're not going to have a $1m range on pay for the same position that depends on the applicant, except for maybe a few exceptional cases.
Like, everybody I know that advocates for this couldn’t imagine a world where the skills they’ve developed play a role in negotiation.
Not a real problem. That can be expressed as a range. For example, 100k-infinity.
I could see ranges having some issues
This idea that there is some evil conspiracy to screw people is crazy to me.
Everyone wants to get the best price they can for anything, I am sure when you hire a HVAC person, or a plumber you are not looking to hire the most expensive person, you are looking to hire the best value...
Why do people believe employment is something different than any other goods exchange, employers buy labor from the market no different you buy a computer monitor, or a plumber.
I think everyone should have transparent pricing for everything, if Space X can post pricing to launch something into orbit, then dave the plumber can publish his rates, and Amce Corp can publish what they are paying employees...
"Call for pricing" should be a thing of the past for products just like "We pay competitive wages" should be a thing of the past for job ads.
Bruh.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
https://goodjobsfirst.org/conspiring-against-competition/
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/14/business/economy/wages-an...
https://archive.ph/2022.03.07-193856/https://www.nytimes.com...
exceptions do not make a rule
Refer to your quote I quoted, and the data provided. There is clearly a broad effort to suppress wages, even if everyone involved isn’t getting together at a Skull and Bones convention to do it.
Believing that what happens to Dev at 2 companies means everyone is impacted...
This is like .0000000000001% of the work force.... FAANG devs really do have an inflated sense of self worth dont they
They're at least a little different, as evidenced by how employment is treated legally. There's usually a significantly larger asymmetry of power in the employee-employer relationship than there is when you buy a good as a consumer.
Asymmetry comes from the wide ranges of things we have linked to employment via regulation such as health care....
Sure we have problems like healthcare being tied to employment that are a result of some heavy-handed regulations in the WW2 era, but we also have things like a minimum wage, and overtime, workers comp..etc.
A lot of employment law is bottom up, it is top down. For example Walmart is on record advocating for an increase in the Min Wage Federally, they have zero positions they are currently paying at federal minimum wages so to them it costs them nothing, and it may have the advantage to taking out small businesses.
Lots of regulation is the same way, written by and for large companies so ensure their competition can never have a competitive advantage.
This is why over the last few decades the market has been massively consolidated, where the top 5 companies in a market used to control around 20% of a market, 80% of the market share for most markets are controlled by less than 5 companies.
This is part of the asymmetry of power -- as employers pockets get deeper, they are more easily able to have regulations implemented that further deepen their pockets. The same would be possible with labour, but there's little concentration of power there. It's a lot easier to spend $1m as a company to get the regulations you want than it is to organize however many workers to spend $1m to get the regulations they want, especially since no one will have the exact same regulations in mind.
Everyone should have transparent pricing - yes. It seems like you're just one layer of ignorance away from understanding what is actually going on. No conspiracy needed BUT that doesn't mean that there hasn't been conspiracies (note: not conspiracy theories) for wage/cost fixing.
No, you seem to be one layer of ignorance away from understanding the economic reality, you are adding a layer of complexity to labor markets attempting to treat them differently from any other market.
Has nothing to do with wealth at all....
BTW, "no u" isn't a valid response. You can use it but nobody has any interest in continuing that discussion. Just like I no longer have any desire to converse with you regarding this. Have a good life.
Only if you are an anti-capitalist that has swallowed the anti-capitalist propaganda hook line and sinker with the view that capitalism is evil and should be replaced with the utopia of socialism....
Capitalism is a system where the production is decided and owned by the capital owners. So, wealthy people. If bezos want a mega-yacht, a mega-yacht will be built.
$203 million in wages stolen in the past 5 years, and that's just in New York.[1] The US Department of Labor recovered $3 billion in stolen wages 2017-2020.[2]
A large portion of wage theft also slips through the cracks because of cash transactions that make it hard to catch or when it's difficult for victims to seek legal redress, such as when they are undocumented.
But sure, there obviously is nothing to worry about. /s
[1] https://www.propublica.org/article/thousands-of-new-york-wor...
If the range really is quite wide, the employer probably isn't really trying very hard to hire at the top end and someone at that price can compare it to their options well enough before spending time on it.
And it results in a more efficient allocation of labor for the country as a whole. For example, it could more quickly signal to people that we need fewer paper pushers and more trades workers.
This all really feels like McDonalds employees forcing the rest of us to negotiate the way they have to.
Executive comp being disclosed appears, if anything, to have had the opposite effect.
> Equilibrium effects of pay transparency in a simple labor market
> Public discourse on pay transparency has not focused on equilibrium effects: how greater transparency impacts hiring and bargaining. To study these effects, we combine a dynamic wage-bargaining model with data from online markets for low-skill, temporary jobs that differ in their level of transparency. Wages are more equal, but lower under transparency. Transparency increases hiring and employer profits, rising 27% in an online field experiment. A key intuition is high transparency commits employers to negotiating aggressively, because a highly paid worker's salary affects negotiations with other workers. We discuss implications for the gender wage gap and employers' endogenous transparency choices.
https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3328526.3329645
> Equilibrium effects of pay transparency
> The discourse around pay transparency has focused on partial equilibrium effects: how workers rectify pay inequities through informed renegotiation. We investigate how employers respond in equilibrium. We study a model of bargaining under two‐sided incomplete information. Our model predicts that transparency reduces the individual bargaining power of workers, leading to lower average wages. A key insight is that employers credibly refuse to pay high wages to any one worker to avoid costly renegotiations with others. When workers have low individual bargaining power, pay transparency has a muted effect. We test our model with an event‐study analysis of U.S. state‐level laws protecting the right of private sector workers to communicate salary information with their coworkers. Consistent with our theoretical predictions, transparency laws empirically lead wages to decline by approximately 2%, and wage declines are smallest in magnitude when workers have low individual bargaining power.
https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w28903/w289...