N.J. could require businesses to post salary ranges for open jobs under new bill

Definitely a good idea.

In my past job searches, it was quite annoying to have to go through a chunk of the process before you could find out what the salary would be.

Oh, this is a pay reduction, nevermind...
Exactly!
 
I think anyone that lists a car for sale should be required to post the asking price. And $1234 doesn't count unless it's actually $1234.
A agree. I don't look twice at an ad for ANYTHING that doesn't list the price. Keeping in mind that prices are usually some what negotiable. One the things that ticks me off are dealers that advertise something and say "$500 off" or "minimun $5000 trade in allowance" or something like that but never list a price!
 
.
Makes sense to me. Gets right to the point.
100%. Quit wasting everyone’s time. I remember back when I first got out the military I went to a fresh out veterans only job fair. The compensation listings made things so much easier. If I saw a posting like - Position: Tech. Skills Requirements: Electrical, mechanical, plumbing, HVAC, welding, carpentry and others. Pay: $10-12 an hr. - then I just kept it moving. That pay scale was low for even one of those skills if you expected competency from the person. And there was a lot of those kinds of postings let me tell you. Might as well had a sign that just said - tech needed: to be overworked, underpaid and whipped like rented mule. I only applied to the reasonable postings.
 
.

100%. Quit wasting everyone’s time. I remember back when I first got out the military I went to a fresh out veterans only job fair. The compensation listings made things so much easier. If I saw a posting like - Position: Tech. Skills Requirements: Electrical, mechanical, plumbing, HVAC, welding, carpentry and others. Pay: $10-12 an hr. - then I just kept it moving. That pay scale was low for even one of those skills if you expected competency from the person. And there was a lot of those kinds of postings let me tell you. Might as well had a sign that just said - tech needed: to be overworked, underpaid and whipped like rented mule. I only applied to the reasonable postings.

What year was this ?

I agree not to waste anybody’s time and pay should be fair for the skills a person has.
 
Here's the other side of the coin from a business owner's POV.

We used to post salary ranges but stopped because even within the same job title it can be a wide range depending on experience, certifications, etc. Some dental assistants are "on-the-job trained" which requires a certain number of hours of on-the-job training and they must take a few exams as they build up those hours. Those exams lead to certifications that allow them to do more things and work more independently. Then there are skills for which there are no certifications but they bring a great deal of value to the practice like lab work skills, impressions, and experience with orthodontics. So if you are in the process of being "on-the-job trained" and we need to essentially limit your daily activities, provide you with hours that you are not fully contributing to the practice, and pay for the 3 or 4 certifications exams that just allow you to work independently, we may offer you $18/hr. If you have all your certs and are fully licensed with no other real-world experience (just out of a trade school program) we'd start you at $24/hr. Have all your certs + 5-10 years of experience in peds/orthodontics then $30/hr. If you have all that plus you can pour up models, solder and make orthodontic appliances in-house then we start you at $35/hr.

This is just too much to put into ads and of course, even when these differences were made explicit in the ad, people who were going to start at $18/hr called thinking they would start at $30/hr because it was in the ad somewhere, reading comprehension is lacking many times, and why not, they are so wonderful. So there is a simple solution - screen all the candidates who apply with a quick phone interview and if they do well and based on their experience and certifications give them a starting salary amount on the phone so they can decide if they want an in-person interview. It really is difficult sometimes to get across in an ad why someone might start at $18/hr or $35/hr with the same job title.

For highly compensated employees, and I have employees making $165/hr, that is a whole different discussion as to why we don't post this in ads.
 
Last edited:
Here's the other side of the coin from a business owner's POV.

We used to post salary ranges but stopped because even within the same job title it can be a wide range depending on experience, certifications, etc. Some dental assistants are "on-the-job trained" which requires a certain number of hours of on-the-job training and they must take a few exams as they build up those hours. Those exams lead to certifications that allow them to do more things and work more independently. Then there are skills for which there are no certifications but they bring a great deal of value to the practice like lab work skills, impressions, and experience with orthodontics. So if you are in the process of being "on-the-job trained" and we need to essentially limit your daily activities, provide you with hours that you are not fully contributing to the practice, and pay for the 3 or 4 certifications exams that just allow you to work independently, we may offer you $18/hr. If you have all your certs and are fully licensed with no other real-world experience (just out of a trade school program) we'd start you at $24/hr. Have all your certs + 5-10 years of experience in peds/orthodontics then $30/hr. If you have all that plus you can pour up models, solder and make orthodontic appliances in-house then we start you at $35/hr.

This is just too much to put into ads and of course, even when these differences were made explicit in the ad, people who were going to start at $18/hr called thinking they would start at $30/hr because it was in the ad somewhere, reading comprehension is lacking many times, and why not, they are so wonderful. So there is a simple solution - screen all the candidates who apply with a quick phone interview and if they do well and based on their experience and certifications give them a starting salary amount on the phone so they can decide if they want an in-person interview. It really is difficult sometimes to get across in an ad why someone might start at $18/hr or $35/hr with the same job title.

For highly compensated employees, and I have employees making $165/hr, that is a whole different discussion as to why we don't post this in ads.

It would be interesting to see the % of business owners that agree with mandatory salary range posting vs employees.
 
It would be interesting to see the % of business owners that agree with mandatory salary range posting vs employees.
Yup...and as always it's interesting to see the employee's perspective vs the owner's/manager's perspective. Typically, the worker bees see it as something sinister/stupid/a huge blunder/oversight meanwhile my business partners and I are just trying to make it simpler because clearly candidates can't be bothered to read and comprehend an entire ad with accurate and easy-to-understand information. Not posting ranges and the phone interview have eliminated anyone actually wasting their time by taking the time to meet in person - be it because they didn't know the starting salary or because they really thought they were worth $35/hr with no experience.
 
Yup...and as always it's interesting to see the employee's perspective vs the owner's/manager's perspective. Typically, the worker bees see it as something sinister/stupid/a huge blunder/oversight meanwhile my business partners and I are just trying to make it simpler because clearly candidates can't be bothered to read and comprehend an entire ad with accurate and easy-to-understand information. Not posting ranges and the phone interview have eliminated anyone actually wasting their time by taking the time to meet in person - be it because they didn't know the starting salary or because they really thought they were worth $35/hr with no experience.

.and your employees that have put years into making 33 an hour instantly feel they are getting ripped off when they see the posting.
 
.and your employees thats put years into making 33 an hour instantly feel they are getting ripped off when they see the posting.
Right…they always feel like seniority should count more than it does, especially since the market commands what the market commands. Yes, they make $10/hr more than where they started 5 years ago and now the market dictates a similarly qualified hire starts at $7/hr more than where they started and in their mind that means they instantly deserve more to “keep it fair”.

Not quite…
 
The pay-range legislation is a direct result of claims that employers pay women and minorities less for the same work. The widely debunked claim that women get paid only 78% of what men make in the same job with the same experience is still having an effect. But I'm all for pay transparency and posting ranges, as it avoids games.

One favorite among some employers right now is to have a policy against offering a job applicant more than 10% or sometimes 15% above a prior salary. That's a big reason some companies ask about prior pay, and addressing that is the next step. The real criteria for pay should be, what is the position worth to the employer? For now, posting pay ranges will help with some of that, if it prevents employers from low-balling some candidates based on prior pay.

I've worked for employers that prohibited employees from discussing their pay among themselves. It makes you wonder what the employer was trying to hide.

In general, much of this kind of legislation is the result of past excesses by employers, especially large companies.
 
Here's the other side of the coin from a business owner's POV.

We used to post salary ranges but stopped because even within the same job title it can be a wide range depending on experience, certifications, etc. Some dental assistants are "on-the-job trained" which requires a certain number of hours of on-the-job training and they must take a few exams as they build up those hours. Those exams lead to certifications that allow them to do more things and work more independently. Then there are skills for which there are no certifications but they bring a great deal of value to the practice like lab work skills, impressions, and experience with orthodontics. So if you are in the process of being "on-the-job trained" and we need to essentially limit your daily activities, provide you with hours that you are not fully contributing to the practice, and pay for the 3 or 4 certifications exams that just allow you to work independently, we may offer you $18/hr. If you have all your certs and are fully licensed with no other real-world experience (just out of a trade school program) we'd start you at $24/hr. Have all your certs + 5-10 years of experience in peds/orthodontics then $30/hr. If you have all that plus you can pour up models, solder and make orthodontic appliances in-house then we start you at $35/hr.

This is just too much to put into ads and of course, even when these differences were made explicit in the ad, people who were going to start at $18/hr called thinking they would start at $30/hr because it was in the ad somewhere, reading comprehension is lacking many times, and why not, they are so wonderful. So there is a simple solution - screen all the candidates who apply with a quick phone interview and if they do well and based on their experience and certifications give them a starting salary amount on the phone so they can decide if they want an in-person interview. It really is difficult sometimes to get across in an ad why someone might start at $18/hr or $35/hr with the same job title.

For highly compensated employees, and I have employees making $165/hr, that is a whole different discussion as to why we don't post this in ads.
I think what you posted makes complete sense, obviously someone's value to your business varies greatly depending on the experience they bring to the table. The issue for you as the business owner is that you potentially miss out on great candidates if you don't post a range. Even if it is a wide range ($18-$40/hr depending on experience) it still lets a potential applicant know that you are open to compensating them more if they come in with more experience, or that if they come in at the bottom they have the potential to move up as they gain experience and prove themselves. I say this as someone who has applied to jobs in the past where they posted a list of preferred qualifications but no pay range, and after the interview and later on the job offer, it was clear they were trying to just get the most experience they could for the least amount of pay, and there was no potential to move up. It obviously goes both ways, people shouldn't expect higher pay for entry level jobs, or to move up the ladder without first gaining experience, but employers also shouldn't expect someone to bring experience for entry level pay.

The bottom line is giving a salary range will attract more interest from applicants, regardless of how wide the range is. Every time I've applied for a job that didn't list the salary range, the compensation ended up being below the current market rate, never was it higher, since employers who can pay higher than the market rate usually advertise that to attract applicants.
 
Right…they always feel like seniority should count more than it does, especially since the market commands what the market commands. Yes, they make $10/hr more than where they started 5 years ago and now the market dictates a similarly qualified hire starts at $7/hr more than where they started and in their mind that means they instantly deserve more to “keep it fair”.

Not quite…

What do you tell an employee if they ask for a raise cause they feel underpaid by a few dollars ?
 
I think what you posted makes complete sense, obviously someone's value to your business varies greatly depending on the experience they bring to the table. The issue for you as the business owner is that you potentially miss out on great candidates if you don't post a range. Even if it is a wide range ($18-$40/hr depending on experience) it still lets a potential applicant know that you are open to compensating them more if they come in with more experience, or that if they come in at the bottom they have the potential to move up as they gain experience and prove themselves. I say this as someone who has applied to jobs in the past where they posted a list of preferred qualifications but no pay range, and after the interview and later on the job offer, it was clear they were trying to just get the most experience they could for the least amount of pay, and there was no potential to move up. It obviously goes both ways, people shouldn't expect higher pay for entry level jobs, or to move up the ladder without first gaining experience, but employers also shouldn't expect someone to bring experience for entry level pay.

The bottom line is giving a salary range will attract more interest from applicants, regardless of how wide the range is. Every time I've applied for a job that didn't list the salary range, the compensation ended up being below the current market rate, never was it higher, since employers who can pay higher than the market rate usually advertise that to attract applicants.
Something to consider. I'm a dentist with no formal training in business like most dentists and at some point for my MBA I'll have to take a few courses on management/HR and it will be interesting to see if our system, which was "developed" through nothing more than trial and error, changes.
 
Last edited:
What do you tell an employee if they ask for a raise cause they feel underpaid by a few dollars ?
We do quarterly reviews which are an honest assessment of their performance and we give them a rating based on their performance. Once per year, we review their four previous reviews and ratings and we make a decision on a raise. Those who make more progress than others or simply maintain a higher performance review score get a larger raise. We do not hide this and each and every person fully understands why they got the minimal or maximum raise and that over time this will lead to differences in what people are paid. Sometimes this is easy - hygienists make money for the practice and we can run a report to see hygienist 1 produced $450,000 last year on 5 days per week while hygienist 2 produced $375,000 last year on 5 days. Sometimes, it is less quantifiable and it comes down to assistant A does what she's paid to do, nothing more and nothing less, but I've had to speak to her 5x this year because of her bad attitude or she's causing issues with other staff members and she'd receive a low score and I tell her why. If that makes her angry she can leave. If she wants a better raise she can respond to my feedback and do a better job, and if she does do that, I make sure to praise her when I see it, and it is part of her next review.

If they ask for a raise sometime in the intervening months between our scheduled reviews, for any reason, we sit down with them and review their performance with them and either agree or disagree. The practice is 14 years old, in a very competitive labor market 30 miles from Boston, and we have a bunch of employees that have been there for 14 years, a bunch for 8+ years, and only a few for less than that. Most of the people who have left did so because they retired.
 
Last edited:
Here's the other side of the coin from a business owner's POV.

We used to post salary ranges but stopped because even within the same job title it can be a wide range depending on experience, certifications, etc. Some dental assistants are "on-the-job trained" which requires a certain number of hours of on-the-job training and they must take a few exams as they build up those hours. Those exams lead to certifications that allow them to do more things and work more independently. Then there are skills for which there are no certifications but they bring a great deal of value to the practice like lab work skills, impressions, and experience with orthodontics. So if you are in the process of being "on-the-job trained" and we need to essentially limit your daily activities, provide you with hours that you are not fully contributing to the practice, and pay for the 3 or 4 certifications exams that just allow you to work independently, we may offer you $18/hr. If you have all your certs and are fully licensed with no other real-world experience (just out of a trade school program) we'd start you at $24/hr. Have all your certs + 5-10 years of experience in peds/orthodontics then $30/hr. If you have all that plus you can pour up models, solder and make orthodontic appliances in-house then we start you at $35/hr.

This is just too much to put into ads and of course, even when these differences were made explicit in the ad, people who were going to start at $18/hr called thinking they would start at $30/hr because it was in the ad somewhere, reading comprehension is lacking many times, and why not, they are so wonderful. So there is a simple solution - screen all the candidates who apply with a quick phone interview and if they do well and based on their experience and certifications give them a starting salary amount on the phone so they can decide if they want an in-person interview. It really is difficult sometimes to get across in an ad why someone might start at $18/hr or $35/hr with the same job title.

For highly compensated employees, and I have employees making $165/hr, that is a whole different discussion as to why we don't post this in ads.
The other issue is it doesn't take into account the benefits end of things. Some companies pay less vs. others but include a heavy benefits package that of course is part of your compensation. I always found a phone interview and an up-front discussion of the compensation range etc. handled the "wasted time" bit of hiring that happens.
 
It would be interesting to see the % of business owners that agree with mandatory salary range posting vs employees.
I'd call that "duh"? Employees want as much info no salary as they can get to keep things in check and employers want to keep as much of that on the DL to give themselves maximum flexibility in hiring. Would be 100% predictable outcome along that line.
 
.and your employees that have put years into making 33 an hour instantly feel they are getting ripped off when they see the posting.
To my post above related to "salary compression". I don't know too many people that wouldn't feel that way, pretty natural as a long-term employee and employers stating it shouldn't matter are full of it if they think they would be cool with it in the same situation.
 
Back
Top