zlacker

I'm not sure if meta discussions are allowed in these hiring posts, but I just want to remind people that effective yesterday California now requires job postings to include a salary or hourly wage range. Companies with fewer than 15 employers are exempt so it might not apply to all California based startups, but I already see multiple job postings here for larger companies which are clearly violating this new law.

I personally would love to see HN make this a requirement for all postings going forward and not just for the California based ones.

>>slg+(OP)
Same with New York but I see several companies with NYC in their location with no salary info.

>>slg+(OP)
It's my opinion that posts like this ruin these discussions and more generally are what ruins forums as they grow in size. Above a certain size you get people who think they and their agenda is more important than the actual topic and the noise drown out the good that the forum is trying to do. I don't see a solution for public forums, but it's sad to see it happening.

>>slg+(OP)
https://buildremote.co/companies/companies-leaving-californi...

>>versio+d4
In my opinion, pointing out to our fellows on this board that they are violating the law rises above “agenda” but if you want to call that noise I guess you’re entitled to your opinion

>>versio+d4
I actually dont know if I like the new law - but while it is in effect it seems like it should be enforced? Otherwise its just a tax on the companies that invest in HR and are trying to abide by labor laws.

I know its minor but I dont think we should just pick and choose which labor laws to follow, especially with something as relatively unobtrusive to do as this.

>>versio+d4
Hear, hear. It's not just forums, it's basically all forms of civil society these days. Organizations of all stripe get drown in activists. Always marching through the institutions.

>>seneca+z5
Enforcing the law is “activism” now? Does that make police activists as well?

>>netfl0+u4
Yes that's cool and all, but if a company is in California today it still needs to comply with the current legislation.

>>CoolGu+s3
Immediate red flag that makes me wonder what else the company might be clueless about...

>>lovich+P4
IMHO it is a worthwhile discussion, but not according to @dang's understanding of HN:

> HN is not a site for discussing legal matters per se, but only the ones that gratify intellectual curiosity, and only to the extent that they do. That is what we're optimizing for here.

Taken at face value, it is unclear if this particular discussion "gratifies intellectual curiosity"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20620430

>>slg+(OP)
Colorado has had this since 2021 as well. Despite that I still see a lot of jobs from companies in Colorado without them posted. And as I understand it, it includes out of state companies if they are willing to hire remote employees that live in Colorado.

As far as I know these are now the locations with requirements to post salary ranges:

- Colorado (2021) - All job postings

- New York City (Nov 2022) - All job postings

- Washington (2023) - Any company with 15 or more employees

- California (2023) - Any company with 15 or more employees

Edit: Formatting

>>TAForO+ma
This is less a discussion of the law it self and more a discussion on whether actively breaking laws directly on HN is acceptable. Framing it properly makes it much broader than simply a discussion on this particular law.

>>slg+(OP)
Would down-voting anything against the law be appropriate/incentivizing?

>>wildrh+O7
Not necessarily clueless, maybe the consequences of violating aren't that dire or the laws aren't actively enforced.