[grimjack00]

> E.g. What if Microsoft has a job opening with a range of $110k - $170k, and the candidate they selected used to make $180k and would like $200k?

If I was reviewing job descriptions, and the max of the posted range is less than my current salary, I'm probably not going to apply.

[Victerius]

Another situation: You make 160k, the max range is 170k, but you'd like more than the max range. In the old world, this would work. You would gain more comp, and your new employer would acquire your talent. It's the free market at work. In the new world, neither of those will happen. I'm concerned about the consequences of that on economic growth and innovation.

[snowwrestler]

Salary bands are tied to title. If the max range of the listed position is $160k, and the company wants to hire you for $200k, they will just hire you into a more senior title (which has a higher range).

This is how it happens now, and how it will still happen. Disclosing the initial range target does not prevent it.

[kirillbobyrev]

Are you saying that the employers won't give 170k+ if the disclosed max range is 170k? I highly doubt that, the only change here is that the range that was previously only visible to the hiring managers within the company is now also visible to the candidates. If they could go beyond the internally visible range before, they would surely be able to do it now. The only difference is that before the candidates would have no idea whether they're already maxed out on the given range or if there's still plenty of room to negotiate.

[BuckRogers]

I don't buy it either. I think overall more people will be lifted up, than some guy that wants 200K and the highest paid employee is currently 160K, will be held down. In fact, I think that's blatantly obvious. Companies are going to lose with this because this industry has so much exploitation going on, that San Francisco alone isn't counterbalancing it or even close.