[compscistd]

Why wouldn’t you? As a person with a job, are you ashamed of how much you make (either too much or too little)? Or is it a violation of your privacy? If you were a person looking for a new job, you want to know how much people are making in that company (or others in the same market) so you aren’t being undercut for the same job.

No reason why my coworkers should make more or less than me if we have the same title. Making salary information public either through averages per title or ranges (upper and lower) should naturally even out the salaries per title. As things stand, some people are privileged in all sorts of ways when it comes to a company’s undisclosed salary ranges. For example, in my last role I had a friend in the company who could confirm two separate salaries for the role I was applying and I was offered 10% lower than those two salaries. I can ask for a 15% increase in my counteroffer and be confident this is a valid number. If I didn’t have friends who were in the industry that weren’t comfortable sharing salary ranges, I’d have to stick to the Levels FYI site, but my last company wasn’t on there.

When I left, I learned new hires, who were new to tech, earned less than I did when I was at their title. It may be awkward socially to have people know how much I make (or even within a range) but it’s better than the economic disadvantages that unconnected applicants face in today’s job markets. Hope that offers some insight.

[pc86]

> No reason why my coworkers should make more or less than me if we have the same title.

Of course there is. You wrote a book and they didn't. They have more relevant experience than you. The hiring manager really wanted you but you had a competing offer and they didn't. They are young and wanted more equity and you wanted higher cash.

There are a whole host of reasons why people in the same title can make wildly different salaries - they're not all nefarious.

[brabel]

All the reasons you gave are really bad reasons! Do you really think that it's fair and normal that someone gets a much higher salary than you while doing the same exact job (and let's assume, performing at the same level) just because she had another offer at the time of hire?? That's ridiculous. It goes even against the interests of the company itself as it's logical to think they might have other candidates like you who are happy to accept the salary offer and won't be able to leverage it to get another, better offer (if that happens often, clearly the company is just underpaying, but for the discussion about whether the difference in salary is justified by only the circumstances of the candidates, we assume that's not the case).

[pc86]

It's very unlikely both people are performing at the same level. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses.

Whether I think it's fair or not is irrelevant, it is normal/standard practice that getting multiple offers simultaneously will increase your compensation across most or all of those offers.

And how is it against the company's interests to pay its employees a salary they'll accept?