I actually know the laws and regulations that govern everything I do. The HR people are very good about sending them. And if I am ever in doubt, the CFR (code of federal regulation) is available on the internet, as well as the OPM (office of personnel management). I absolutely have to know the labor laws, because I have employees who will file legal complaints at the drop of a hat if I do not demonstrate up front that I have the law on my side. And even then, they will file complaints.
I really don't know what you think is going on, or that you are actually aware of all of the regulations? I'm going to guess that you don't supervise people? But what I can tell you is that every new hire, in my experience, asks for a "better" package than the original offer. And, regardless of your feelings about it, they very often trot out their current salary with their current employer as a bargaining point. We need employees, and we need the best we can get--do you seriously think we won't negotiate with them on the basis that you feel their salary is a confidential matter which they should be prohibited from divulging and we should be prohibited from seeing?
Also, I really don't get where you get this "monopolistic practices" stuff from.
“I really don’t know what you think is going on, or that you are actually aware of all of the regulations?”
Expert at these laws. Expert. Unlike you, I don’t just follow corporate policy and think that is the law. I read the law, not just follow corporate memos.
Some people have an overwhelming need to pretend that evil capitalists are eager to discriminate by gender so as to open themselves up to multi-billion dollar lawsuits for no actual tangible gain. Some of them post on FR.
” I’m going to guess that you don’t supervise people”
I manage executives, engineers, and scientists. Unlike you, I’m not an entry level supervisor of minimum wage workers.
I use business and executive-level strategies to determine salaries. I am not a brain dead HR bimbo that believes someone’s prior company dictates what I should pay them.
I am able to ascertain value against market wages and pay accordingly. I do not rely upon inaccurate self-disclosures by candidates of their prior wages to determine what I should pay them. You do, but thinking professionals do not. We have more intelligent and accurate strategies.
What someone else paid a candidate is useless information to me. When I am looking to pay someone $140k, I don’t look at an implied worth statement that if they were only making $85k at their prior company that they couldn’t possibly be qualified. I see it that the prior company is losing a great individual and I can land them with my higher salary. I don’t want to pay them a maximum of 10% more than their prior salary as they will continue to look for higher salaries from someone else.
You obviously do not understand such concepts and try to be the person paying no more than 10% over their prior salary. Doom on you. I get the better employees, you can keep the low paid underperformers.
“Also, I really don’t get where you get this “monopolistic practices” stuff from. “
Of course you don’t. Law is not a subject you have studied. brain dead HR bimbo type only know what corporate memos tell them. They have no brain to discern ethics and moral values. If someone else tells them they can do something they do it. Rare is it they ever have ethics or morals.
That has been my experience as well. Most applicants I deal with are very eager to tell me what they are currently making - as they want to ensure they do not receive an offer for less. Also, if we feel that we have a good candidate, we make our best effort to bring them onboard for at least as much if not more money than what they were making before. Remember, we are not only looking for good employees but we are also looking to take good employees from our competitors! But we are going to pay more than the going rate, we do need to verify.