You’re a hiring manager trying to build the best team possible. You want to find the most qualified candidates, make fair offers, and get your new hires excited to join your company. But an old, opaque hiring practice is standing in your way: asking for a candidate’s salary history. 

This common question can perpetuate inequities and limit your applicant pool, while offering little real insight. That’s why a growing number of cities and states have passed laws banning the practice. Though change can be challenging, eliminating this question can widen your talent pipeline, empower applicants, and signal your commitment to equitable pay.

In this article, we’ll dig into the roots of this entrenched hiring norm, its unintended harms, and the business case for dropping it. We’ll hear arguments from both sides, and explore steps for making this transition in your organization. The path forward calls for expanding opportunity by judging applicants only on their abilities, not past pay.

A Brief History of Salary Checks 

Pinning down the exact origins of asking for salary history in hiring is tricky. But records show the practice picking up steam in the 1950s and 60s alongside the rise of a professional HR field tasked with systemizing recruiting. 

Questions about past pay and expectations offered data points for the emerging science of compensation benchmarking. By the 1980s, inquiring about earnings history was standard operating procedure for many employers and recruiters.

Proponents argue it helps gauge candidate expectations and saves time by filtering applicants based on previous pay levels. But is a decades-old norm still serving companies in today’s talent market? A growing consensus says no.

How Salary History Checks Hold People Back

Julie has years of experience as a project manager. She learned she was paid 10% less than a new male colleague in a similar role at her last job. But when she interviews for a higher level position, disclosing this lower salary disadvantages her in negotiations. The outdated pay gap follows Julie like an anchor holding her back. 

This scenario plays out across industries, as historically underpaid groups find past disparities hinder their advancement. Women and people of color carry the burdens of lower lifetime earnings. Relying on salary history transfers past discrimination into the future.

The Case for Salary History Checks

Some argue checking salary history is a useful benchmark and helps streamline negotiations. But its detrimental impacts outweigh these benefits. 

Benchmarking can be done without asking candidates to disclose prior pay which may be artificially low. And “streamlining” in this case means perpetuating unfair pay gaps that limit diversity.

Rather than doubling down on an opaque metric, companies can better achieve hiring goals through skills assessments and understanding candidates’ expectations.

Momentum Building to Ban the Practice

In 2016, Massachusetts passed the first law prohibiting employers from asking about salary history. Cities like San Francisco, New York and Philadelphia soon followed. 

By 2022, over 20 states and municipalities enacted bans, though some face legal challenges. Leading employers have also dropped the practice, including Amazon, Starbucks and Bank of America.

The national dialogue on racial justice is driving more regions to consider bans. Public support is strong, with most Americans approving prohibitions on uncovering past pay.

Benefits of Leaving Salary History Behind

Widening the talent pipeline – Banning salary history questions allows you to consider candidates based on merit alone, without bias from past gaps. You can access a more diverse pool.

Closing pay gaps – Setting pay based on skills rather than arbitrary history helps build equity and inclusion.

Empowering applicants – Candidates can negotiate pay based on the value they bring, rather than past salary anchors. This empowers skilled applicants.

Signaling values – Instituting a ban demonstrates your commitment to equitable, transparent compensation. This attracts top talent who share your values.

Making the Transition 

Change brings challenges, but the shift away from over-reliance on salary history can be managed with care:

Pass thoughtful policies – Legislation should be carefully crafted to allow exceptions only when candidates voluntarily provide history.

Update hiring practices – Train recruiters, adjust screening procedures, and audit systems to remove unintentional access to prior pay data.

Educate staff – Communicate the “why” behind reforms and provide guidance on equitable, skills-based compensation setting. 

Respond to concerns – Skeptics may worry bans limit business rights or flexibility. But thoughtful policies can level the playing field while allowing access to useful hiring data.

Additional Steps Toward Pay Equity

While banning salary history checks tackles a clear barrier, additional actions are needed to transform compensation practices:

– Require pay scale disclosure during hiring

– Develop unbiased compensation algorithms 

– Expand training programs that build in-demand skills

– Strengthen pay equity laws

– Enable flexibility to change jobs without long-term pay anchoring

Eliminating a problematic question opens the door to solutions that judge all candidates based on merit alone.

Conclusion

Asking for salary history seems innocuous, but it chains hiring decisions to past inequities. Thoughtful banning of this outdated practice offers benefits: wider applicant pools, reduced pay gaps, and empowered candidates.  

Despite implementation challenges, forward-looking employers recognize eliminating this question removes barriers and advances their values. When we judge applicants only by their abilities, we build workplaces where everyone can thrive and reach their full potential.