Are more laws really the answer?

Thoughts on unintended consequences

I’m big on pay transparency. When Illinois passed their No Salary History law, I threw a little party (in my mind.)

A lot of recruiters had a mini-meltdown (“omg how can I do my job if I don’t know what they’re making???”) Then a week later everyone realized it didn’t matter one bit.

More fairness. No downside. Good law.

Fast forward a minute. Colorado passed a law mandating salary ranges in job ads. And California is about to do the same. 

It all sounds great on the surface. We’ve seen enough “just put the damn salary in the job description” viral posts to realize everyone wants this.

But maybe, just maybe there are downsides to making it a law.

My colleague Michelle Mehlis made a post a few days ago about 10 unintended consequences of the proposed California law (here.)

Read it. She covered a lot. But I want to highlight 1 thing and mention 2 more:

1. “Indeed job postings in Colorado decreased 8% when their pay transparency law went into effect.” 

Companies avoiding hiring in specific locations is an issue.

And if you search around on remote job postings, you’ll still see some that say they’re not hiring in Colorado.

And I talked to my first candidate who had their process ended because the company decided not to hire in California now.

This is a real issue.

2. Enforcement is a joke. Guess how many companies have been fined for violating the Colorado law?

Only 3! (Here.) 

3. I’ll say it: I’d rather it be a differentiating factor.

Good companies embrace transparency. Bad companies don’t.

????You don’t have to be mandated by law to put salary info in your ad. You can just do it. Lots of recruiters already do. And they have fun outperforming those who don’t.

Besides, who’s benefiting from the listed salary range of $50k-$200k anyway?

James Hornick

Partner at Hirewell. #3 Ranked Sarcastic Commenter on LinkedIn.