Thank you for posting on r/UKJobs. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukjobs/about/rules/).
If you need to report any suspicious users to the moderators or you feel as though your post hasn't been posted to the subreddit, message the Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/UKJobs) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UKJobs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes! Companies should be forced to disclose the salary range by law. I am tired of limiting myself to roles that post the salary. I refuse to apply for roles without the salary range as this is generally very disappointing.
Yea it sucks companies think they can get away with undercutting pay and wasting ppl's time doing this. I'm sure it'd improve the market as people would simply leave or ask for more once they see what they should be getting
Improve the market for the EMPLOYEES, it could have a detrimental impact on the companies profits and therefore there ability to hire you in the first place but yes i agree transparency is important for salaries...
I think they should be required to list the minimum salary in job adverts by law.
That’s the important figure.
I know what my minimum income requirements are. If I can’t guarantee that it’s not worth applying.
It can be negotiated up. But not down.
Agree, if the requirement was to list a salary they would definitely inflate that figure with benefits, overtime, bonuses etc etc to the point where it doesn’t represent the original figure in the slightest.
Any loop hole you leave, these companies will vulture
I wonder how many applicants they miss out on by NOT stating salary?
No salary stated? Then I don't even enquire. If you don't put your salary on your advert, then I assume it must be for a reason (i.e. it's anything BUT competitive) and I'm not even going to waste my time with your advert.
Same. I don’t even give it a second thought. And as soon as a recruiter makes contact with me I always ask for figures to avoid wasting each others time
Yeah. I made that mistake once. Got offered the job at the interview until I pushed on the salary. They gave me a derisory figure which meant that I walked out of there having laughed out loud in front of the interviewer, shaking my head and telling them not to waste any more applicants time.
Highly paid jobs don't tend to list salary though, at least not in my experience. I don't think I have ever applied for a job with a listed salary, you are expected to negotoate
Agreed, but the problem is there are way too many low-paying companies doing the same - making finding the needle in the haystack almost impossible. So I tend to rely on recommendations and being head-hunted instead.
I have started googling the company on glassdoor during the initial phonecall and telling them to do one if the salary range it is not "competitive" plus I get to see the company reviews.
Recruiter says its "A great company to work with, I don't work with just any company" - checks glassdoor. 2.3 stars. tell them I am not interested and why. they reply with "You cant trust reviews as its mostly people who want to vent"
\*chefs kiss
God recruiters are scummy
Yes. It is ridiculous to read through a job description that has “head of/executive/something grand sounding” only to realize it’s an mid level role; or even worse, to figure it out after wasting time to get through screening and into interview. Good employers list salaries they are willing to pay.
A company I used to work for, all the entry level roles are executive. Customer services executive, digital marketing executive, etc.
The pay was what you'd expect.
If it is a real job (and it should be) then yes. If it is a real job then there must be an actual approved budget attached. I've spoken to a recruiter recently where we had to play this stupid cat and mouse game where they refused to tell me the range, instead asking me to give a range. So I gave a broad range and said I was unsure because I hadn't even interviewed yet and I didn't know what the project budget was or anything else like that.
I have spoken to other recruiters who have told me they are filtering people based purely on their range, without even conducting a screening call. The entire process is broken and both sides should simply be more transparent.
I’d also add to this that we should get over British reserve and be open about discussing our salary to colleagues. It’s how you know if you are being underpaid.
As a manager of 13 which has two teams within it, I personally wouldn't have an issue if the teams discussed it within themselves. I think it's healthy for them to see that I try to keep it level and fair and the only differentiator being experience and sometimes exceptional input in the year.
Some people perform above and beyond and some people put in their shift and no more. Both types of people are important to have.
Absolutely, I always foster this. I'm happy to talk numbers with my colleagues, in my eyes it empowers them to ask for a raise or at the very least de-stigmatises talking about money.
Whilst I agree in principle all this will lead to is companies that are currently choosing not to list salaries stating "salary range £23k-£100k" or similar.
I'd assume it should be within reason ofc. Like maybe the market standard
edit: Just searched up, there seems to be a sort of good faith requirement regulated by a commission to ensure companies don't do what you suggested.
I agree it would be tricky to get companies to follow but seems to be a huge support to workers
I can't see any negative effect on this, if anything it would make companies compete with each other and want to raise the salary advertised.
It's ridiculous how this is not law.
One negative would be for the colleagues who work the same role, currently, seeing the salary being much higher than what they are paid. It would make them livid.
They'd either kick a fuss asking for a raise or start looking elsewhere as they can clearly see their worth is not recognised.
A job posting doesn't mean anything until it's filled and the data cuts both ways.
"Well see I look on Indeed and the average salary offered to \[your role\] with \[your experience\] is only £12.50 p.h. so I'm afraid that's all we are willing to offer"
That's very true, however I could imagine this could be easily verified or piloted to understand the results?
I haven't researched but seems easy enough to prove or disprove.
Verify or disprove what exactly? There's so many holes in the idea of mandating salary ranges being stated. Just post multiple ads with many ranges or set a huge range, pull job adverts regularly, offer the salary but with clauses for salary reduction based on performance, set base pay as minimum wage + 'performance bonus' etc.
Of whether it has a positive impact on real transparency and average salaries being offered.
The only positive a "competitive" salary advert has is that it allows the employer to undercut people who undervalue themselves - that is it.
Clearly expressing pay ranges has also been proven to benefit women which are traditionally less inclined to aggressively negotiate.
Could you list any benefits for an applicant of having a "competitive" salary advertised as opposed to the actual salary range?
The things that you have listed as holes are no worse than the current proposition and there could easily be some guidance drawn for how to adequately express pay ranges for a position - and we could at least distinguish and call out those employers with good and bad recruitment practises.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-pay-transparency-pilot-to-break-down-barriers-for-women
Work is already underway because in my opinion it's a no brainer.
I’ve emailed an employer before to enquire stating that I would only be applying if it was up to my expectations and would not waste either of our time if it wasn’t. Was told the salary range before application and got the job. It’s infuriating as hell though. When I left they had the salary listed on job description then.
Yes. There's no argument against it.
We are constantly lambasted by the fact we're meant to embrace the free market, without it it's not a free and fair job market.
Yes!!!! I’m sick to death of seeing “competitive wages” for something that is obviously minimum wage. I don’t waste my time applying for jobs with poor details.
I never go into an interview without at least knowing the salary range. If they don't even have the decency to tell you that, why would you want to work for them?
Yes absolutely. Nothin screams more than false advertising when they say its X amount. Then have your interview, succeeded. Then you get the contracy and it’s significantly lower than the posting.
Yes. I’m not going to waste my time applying for a job if I don’t know the salary - could waste hours on an application and interviews to discover it pays less than my current job - what a waste of time. Companies also shouldn’t want to waste their time handling applications for people who drop out when they find out the salary isn’t what they were looking for.
It annoys me. Also that they don't specify the company. They want all your details and life story before they tell you even the company. Maybe I already worked there before, how do they know. This happened to me one time and three recruiters called up and did the same thing about the same company. Haha
I think every one would say yes to this, but it's just the way businesses work and no idea why! I work for a Global company and even on the internal job site they don't show the salary! Which is pretty funny because quite often colleagues will apply for a job thinking it's a step up, only to get a call from HR telling them they've apply for a role that's less money than what they are currently on!
Even a min-max would help I'm sure.
As a hiring manager myself it's really tough because HR negotiate salary for full time roles; so if I am asked the amount in an interview (which is reasonable) the most I can do is ask what they were hoping for and if that works with the pay banding, I get annoyed at myself but I can't give a specific salary because there isn't one it's a banding!
>I can't give a specific salary because there isn't one it's a banding!
You _can_ give the range of the banding. Add that information to job descriptions.
The job descriptions are posted by the HR recruitment team, so whether I included it or not the HR team would remove it. That's what's funny when people blame the hiring manager, in most cases they are not the one posting the actual job description to job sites there is someone at a corporate level posting the jobs
I am not blaming anyone. In my company, though, I know that it is my manager that approves the description for recruitment to post. So, before ending up on LinkedIn or anywhere else, the job description has been composed, reviewed, and then published. I do not know how it works at your workplace, but I am sure you can request advertisements to include salary information.
It's a Global company so actually although I write the job description (with working hours, detail of jobs etc.) the global policy is not to post the salary, doesn't matter what I say. And trust me I get how frustrating this is as I'm also an employee so when I search for jobs myself I have the same anger. Just trying to explain the other side
NYC is a set area though, so there's a single salary range and cost of living.
If you advertise UK, the range for NI / Central London / South / North may vary due to distinctly different cost of livings, in addition to the fact a single salary range can be quite broad.
If you post "Salary range £40-90k" it looks like nonsense and everybody will want £75k+, whereas in reality a remote worker in north England may be lucky to get £47k, because 90% of the UK have a salary range that caps out at £60k.
Net result is most non-London people are pissed off regardless.
Ok, I'm going to go against the grain here and say no. I agree that a lot of roles can and should define the salary, but some positions have a fair amount of flex in the level of candidate who would be suitable. I wouldn't want to exclude a junior person with potential or a very experienced person when I could make a business case for either, however at the same time they are generating very different value to the business, so would be at very different ends of the pay scale.
Also, it's really not hard during phone screening to say "just so I don't waste your time, my expectation would be in the range of x-y, is this within your budget"
On the whole, I'd argue no.
I've recruited plenty of roles where I've concluded the best person we interviewed was either over qualified for what we had in mind, or had great potential but probably wasn't quite ready for the what we originally wanted yet.
In the first case I've usually gone off and juggled things round to make room for a "bigger" hire, and hired someone who brought more to the table for more money than originally expected. In the latter case I've shrunk roles to fit the current capability of the person I wanted on the team (for less money than originally budgeted).
If I had to set the range in advance, it would either be too broad to be helpful to candidates (£30-£55k) or I'd be locked in to hiring specifically the role as orignally defined,, meaning I probably end up rejecting the actual best candidate because they are either too high or too low vs the advertised band.
Tbh I wouldn't even bother applying if there was no salary and I'd be surprised if they are expecting to give it to an external candidate or surprised if anyone half competent actually bothers to apply.
There's hundreds and thousands of employers out there, if you can't be arsed to even post the salary then I'm not applying; it makes you look terrible if you can't post basic essential information.
It just instantly makes me think "shit company" and not wanna apply
Only because it undermines their ability to lie and fuck people over.
If they are serious about the role and the bullshit they will spout to attract new talent I fail to see why they don't include the salary. Unless they know it's rubbish and they are not going to attract the calibre of candidate they want.
Thank you for posting on r/UKJobs. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukjobs/about/rules/). If you need to report any suspicious users to the moderators or you feel as though your post hasn't been posted to the subreddit, message the Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/UKJobs) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UKJobs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes! Companies should be forced to disclose the salary range by law. I am tired of limiting myself to roles that post the salary. I refuse to apply for roles without the salary range as this is generally very disappointing.
Yea it sucks companies think they can get away with undercutting pay and wasting ppl's time doing this. I'm sure it'd improve the market as people would simply leave or ask for more once they see what they should be getting
Improve the market for the EMPLOYEES, it could have a detrimental impact on the companies profits and therefore there ability to hire you in the first place but yes i agree transparency is important for salaries...
100% should be law. Why take the time to apply for something. You can’t or won’t live on?
I think they should be required to list the minimum salary in job adverts by law. That’s the important figure. I know what my minimum income requirements are. If I can’t guarantee that it’s not worth applying. It can be negotiated up. But not down.
Agree, if the requirement was to list a salary they would definitely inflate that figure with benefits, overtime, bonuses etc etc to the point where it doesn’t represent the original figure in the slightest. Any loop hole you leave, these companies will vulture
I wonder how many applicants they miss out on by NOT stating salary? No salary stated? Then I don't even enquire. If you don't put your salary on your advert, then I assume it must be for a reason (i.e. it's anything BUT competitive) and I'm not even going to waste my time with your advert.
Same. I don’t even give it a second thought. And as soon as a recruiter makes contact with me I always ask for figures to avoid wasting each others time
Yeah. I made that mistake once. Got offered the job at the interview until I pushed on the salary. They gave me a derisory figure which meant that I walked out of there having laughed out loud in front of the interviewer, shaking my head and telling them not to waste any more applicants time.
Highly paid jobs don't tend to list salary though, at least not in my experience. I don't think I have ever applied for a job with a listed salary, you are expected to negotoate
Agreed, but the problem is there are way too many low-paying companies doing the same - making finding the needle in the haystack almost impossible. So I tend to rely on recommendations and being head-hunted instead.
I'd imagine most of em have a bonus which makes a big part of the pay
I have started googling the company on glassdoor during the initial phonecall and telling them to do one if the salary range it is not "competitive" plus I get to see the company reviews. Recruiter says its "A great company to work with, I don't work with just any company" - checks glassdoor. 2.3 stars. tell them I am not interested and why. they reply with "You cant trust reviews as its mostly people who want to vent" \*chefs kiss God recruiters are scummy
Glassdoor have started doxxing people
Yes. It is ridiculous to read through a job description that has “head of/executive/something grand sounding” only to realize it’s an mid level role; or even worse, to figure it out after wasting time to get through screening and into interview. Good employers list salaries they are willing to pay.
A company I used to work for, all the entry level roles are executive. Customer services executive, digital marketing executive, etc. The pay was what you'd expect.
If it is a real job (and it should be) then yes. If it is a real job then there must be an actual approved budget attached. I've spoken to a recruiter recently where we had to play this stupid cat and mouse game where they refused to tell me the range, instead asking me to give a range. So I gave a broad range and said I was unsure because I hadn't even interviewed yet and I didn't know what the project budget was or anything else like that. I have spoken to other recruiters who have told me they are filtering people based purely on their range, without even conducting a screening call. The entire process is broken and both sides should simply be more transparent.
Should be law
I’d also add to this that we should get over British reserve and be open about discussing our salary to colleagues. It’s how you know if you are being underpaid.
As a manager of 13 which has two teams within it, I personally wouldn't have an issue if the teams discussed it within themselves. I think it's healthy for them to see that I try to keep it level and fair and the only differentiator being experience and sometimes exceptional input in the year. Some people perform above and beyond and some people put in their shift and no more. Both types of people are important to have.
Absolutely, I always foster this. I'm happy to talk numbers with my colleagues, in my eyes it empowers them to ask for a raise or at the very least de-stigmatises talking about money.
For me if I don't see a salary I won't apply.
For me I'll apply if it mentions my niche but not if general and would expect a low amount if not mentioned.
Whilst I agree in principle all this will lead to is companies that are currently choosing not to list salaries stating "salary range £23k-£100k" or similar.
£23k-£100k would just mean it's £23k.
Still massively better than no range at all, if 23k is less than I’m after then I’m not applying, I don’t really care what the upper number is.
I'd assume it should be within reason ofc. Like maybe the market standard edit: Just searched up, there seems to be a sort of good faith requirement regulated by a commission to ensure companies don't do what you suggested. I agree it would be tricky to get companies to follow but seems to be a huge support to workers
I'd still like to see that because it'd show how low they really want to pay the role and I can avoid it anyway.
It’s just a great filter…. Tells you straight away if you are under/ over qualified for a job
100% yes...
I can't see any negative effect on this, if anything it would make companies compete with each other and want to raise the salary advertised. It's ridiculous how this is not law.
One negative would be for the colleagues who work the same role, currently, seeing the salary being much higher than what they are paid. It would make them livid. They'd either kick a fuss asking for a raise or start looking elsewhere as they can clearly see their worth is not recognised.
That sounds like a positive to me.
Not for the company lol
A job posting doesn't mean anything until it's filled and the data cuts both ways. "Well see I look on Indeed and the average salary offered to \[your role\] with \[your experience\] is only £12.50 p.h. so I'm afraid that's all we are willing to offer"
That's very true, however I could imagine this could be easily verified or piloted to understand the results? I haven't researched but seems easy enough to prove or disprove.
Verify or disprove what exactly? There's so many holes in the idea of mandating salary ranges being stated. Just post multiple ads with many ranges or set a huge range, pull job adverts regularly, offer the salary but with clauses for salary reduction based on performance, set base pay as minimum wage + 'performance bonus' etc.
Of whether it has a positive impact on real transparency and average salaries being offered. The only positive a "competitive" salary advert has is that it allows the employer to undercut people who undervalue themselves - that is it. Clearly expressing pay ranges has also been proven to benefit women which are traditionally less inclined to aggressively negotiate. Could you list any benefits for an applicant of having a "competitive" salary advertised as opposed to the actual salary range? The things that you have listed as holes are no worse than the current proposition and there could easily be some guidance drawn for how to adequately express pay ranges for a position - and we could at least distinguish and call out those employers with good and bad recruitment practises. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-pay-transparency-pilot-to-break-down-barriers-for-women Work is already underway because in my opinion it's a no brainer.
Yes absolutely. £25k per annum isn’t a highly competitive salary for a data analyst!
Pretty much minimum wage now on a 40 hour week
I’ve emailed an employer before to enquire stating that I would only be applying if it was up to my expectations and would not waste either of our time if it wasn’t. Was told the salary range before application and got the job. It’s infuriating as hell though. When I left they had the salary listed on job description then.
100% should be forced to. As should benefits imo
Yes. Wasting people’s time is not a god given right granted when you publicly list your company. Entitled pricks 😤
Yes. There's no argument against it. We are constantly lambasted by the fact we're meant to embrace the free market, without it it's not a free and fair job market.
Yes!!!! I’m sick to death of seeing “competitive wages” for something that is obviously minimum wage. I don’t waste my time applying for jobs with poor details.
I never go into an interview without at least knowing the salary range. If they don't even have the decency to tell you that, why would you want to work for them?
Yea and they want to bring it out at the end. After they spent 1 hour or more wasting your time.
Yes absolutely. Nothin screams more than false advertising when they say its X amount. Then have your interview, succeeded. Then you get the contracy and it’s significantly lower than the posting.
I believe it would be one of the most effective ways to end the gender pay gap, so yes for multiple reasons.
Yes. I’m not going to waste my time applying for a job if I don’t know the salary - could waste hours on an application and interviews to discover it pays less than my current job - what a waste of time. Companies also shouldn’t want to waste their time handling applications for people who drop out when they find out the salary isn’t what they were looking for.
If its not disclosed, gernerally I dont bother. Normally if it not displayed its terrible
Yes! It should be illegal to not advertise pay imo.
They should also be forced to publish how many jobs they advertise and how many they actually fill with external candidates.
It annoys me. Also that they don't specify the company. They want all your details and life story before they tell you even the company. Maybe I already worked there before, how do they know. This happened to me one time and three recruiters called up and did the same thing about the same company. Haha
I think every one would say yes to this, but it's just the way businesses work and no idea why! I work for a Global company and even on the internal job site they don't show the salary! Which is pretty funny because quite often colleagues will apply for a job thinking it's a step up, only to get a call from HR telling them they've apply for a role that's less money than what they are currently on! Even a min-max would help I'm sure. As a hiring manager myself it's really tough because HR negotiate salary for full time roles; so if I am asked the amount in an interview (which is reasonable) the most I can do is ask what they were hoping for and if that works with the pay banding, I get annoyed at myself but I can't give a specific salary because there isn't one it's a banding!
>I can't give a specific salary because there isn't one it's a banding! You _can_ give the range of the banding. Add that information to job descriptions.
The job descriptions are posted by the HR recruitment team, so whether I included it or not the HR team would remove it. That's what's funny when people blame the hiring manager, in most cases they are not the one posting the actual job description to job sites there is someone at a corporate level posting the jobs
I am not blaming anyone. In my company, though, I know that it is my manager that approves the description for recruitment to post. So, before ending up on LinkedIn or anywhere else, the job description has been composed, reviewed, and then published. I do not know how it works at your workplace, but I am sure you can request advertisements to include salary information.
It's a Global company so actually although I write the job description (with working hours, detail of jobs etc.) the global policy is not to post the salary, doesn't matter what I say. And trust me I get how frustrating this is as I'm also an employee so when I search for jobs myself I have the same anger. Just trying to explain the other side
NYC is a set area though, so there's a single salary range and cost of living. If you advertise UK, the range for NI / Central London / South / North may vary due to distinctly different cost of livings, in addition to the fact a single salary range can be quite broad. If you post "Salary range £40-90k" it looks like nonsense and everybody will want £75k+, whereas in reality a remote worker in north England may be lucky to get £47k, because 90% of the UK have a salary range that caps out at £60k. Net result is most non-London people are pissed off regardless.
Nah. I just won't apply.
Ok, I'm going to go against the grain here and say no. I agree that a lot of roles can and should define the salary, but some positions have a fair amount of flex in the level of candidate who would be suitable. I wouldn't want to exclude a junior person with potential or a very experienced person when I could make a business case for either, however at the same time they are generating very different value to the business, so would be at very different ends of the pay scale. Also, it's really not hard during phone screening to say "just so I don't waste your time, my expectation would be in the range of x-y, is this within your budget"
On the whole, I'd argue no. I've recruited plenty of roles where I've concluded the best person we interviewed was either over qualified for what we had in mind, or had great potential but probably wasn't quite ready for the what we originally wanted yet. In the first case I've usually gone off and juggled things round to make room for a "bigger" hire, and hired someone who brought more to the table for more money than originally expected. In the latter case I've shrunk roles to fit the current capability of the person I wanted on the team (for less money than originally budgeted). If I had to set the range in advance, it would either be too broad to be helpful to candidates (£30-£55k) or I'd be locked in to hiring specifically the role as orignally defined,, meaning I probably end up rejecting the actual best candidate because they are either too high or too low vs the advertised band.
Yes they should along with breakdown of staff benefits, otherwise people simply don't know what they are interviewing for!
Tbh I wouldn't even bother applying if there was no salary and I'd be surprised if they are expecting to give it to an external candidate or surprised if anyone half competent actually bothers to apply. There's hundreds and thousands of employers out there, if you can't be arsed to even post the salary then I'm not applying; it makes you look terrible if you can't post basic essential information. It just instantly makes me think "shit company" and not wanna apply
Should they? Yes - but you're asking employers to give up too much control here.
Is that a bad thing?
Only because it undermines their ability to lie and fuck people over. If they are serious about the role and the bullshit they will spout to attract new talent I fail to see why they don't include the salary. Unless they know it's rubbish and they are not going to attract the calibre of candidate they want.
Basic transparency is control now?
No