Share This Article
“By allowing employers to ask applicants for their desired salary after posting a salary range, the law weakens one of its central goals and leaves applicants in a more precarious bargaining position.”
Two years. That is how long it took me to find a steady source of income after my employment at a government job ended during my probationary period. Although I am happy to report that I am now three months into a new job, I will never forget the challenges I faced while searching for work, especially during the interview process.
Job interviews can be stressful because applicants must anticipate what questions an employer may ask and prepare thoughtful responses. Fortunately, New York City has enacted reforms to make the hiring process fairer and more transparent. One such reform was the New York City Pay Transparency Law, which took effect in 2022 and requires employers to include a good-faith salary range in job advertisements. For job seekers like me, the law was intended to eliminate the awkward guessing game surrounding compensation and give applicants a clearer understanding of what a position pays before they apply.
Yet, despite its good intentions, the law contains a loophole: Even when an employer posts a salary range in a job advertisement, applicants are often asked during interviews, “What is your desired salary?” In many interviews, this question is asked early in the conversation, before applicants have had an opportunity to demonstrate their qualifications or learn more about the position. In practice, this question can undermine the very transparency the law was designed to create.
The desired salary question may seem harmless, but appearances can be deceiving because questions such as this can potentially harm applicants.
First, it places applicants in a vulnerable position. In the interviewer-applicant dynamic, the interviewer holds significant power, such as determining who advances to the next stage of the hiring process and, ultimately, who receives a job offer. When I went on interviews, I was especially vulnerable because I was an older adult with a family to provide for and had been unemployed for more than a year. Like many job seekers, I was eager to return to work and concerned that certain answers could jeopardize my chances of being hired.
The desired salary question forces applicants into a difficult balancing act. Give an amount that is too high, and an applicant risks being viewed as too expensive and removed from consideration. Give an amount that is too low, and the applicant may leave thousands of dollars in potential earnings on the table. Either way, the employer gains information while the applicant bears the risk.
Second, this loophole undermines the very people the law was intended to protect: the applicants. This includes recent college graduates, workers returning to the labor force after caring for a loved one, women re-entering the workforce after caregiving responsibilities, and older workers changing careers. These individuals often have less bargaining power and may be more likely to undervalue themselves during salary negotiations.
When New York City leaders promoted the Pay Transparency Law, one of its key selling points was that it would help reduce pay inequities by giving applicants greater access to compensation information before they entered negotiations. The law was intended to level the playing field.
However, by allowing employers to ask applicants for their desired salary after posting a salary range, the law weakens one of its central goals and leaves applicants in a more precarious bargaining position.
If employers already know what they are willing to pay, why should applicants be required to name a desired salary before receiving an offer?
So, how can we improve a law that was created with good intentions?
The answer is simple: New York City should amend its laws to prohibit employers from asking applicants for their desired salary when a good-faith salary range has already been disclosed in a job advertisement. If an employer has already determined what it is willing to pay for a position, there is little justification for requiring applicants to guess what compensation they want. Instead, employers should evaluate candidates based on their qualifications, experience, and ability to perform the job. After doing so, they should make an offer within the posted salary range. If an applicant believes additional compensation is warranted based on experience or qualifications, the parties can negotiate from there.
Any amendment should also be written broadly enough to prevent employers from simply rephrasing the question. Otherwise, employers could substitute alternative phrases such as, “What pay range would you be comfortable accepting?” or “What compensation package would make this opportunity attractive to you?” The goal should be to prohibit the practice of soliciting an applicant’s salary expectations after a salary range has already been disclosed, regardless of how the question is worded.
The Pay Transparency Law was enacted to provide applicants with greater transparency and bargaining power during the hiring process. Closing this loophole would help ensure that the law fulfills its original purpose and delivers on its promise of creating a fairer and more equitable hiring process for all New Yorkers.
Leon Tulton is a Bronx resident and community advocate.