A new campaign is calling on employers to stop asking people their salary history during the recruitment process, Refinery29 reports.
Women's rights organisation The Fawcett Society said questions about historic salary make it harder for workers - especially women, people of colour and people with disabilities - to increase their pay.
The Fawcett Society's found that 61 per cent of women feel less confident about negotiating a higher salary after they've been asked about their pay history. Nearly as many (58 per cent) said they felt they had been offered a lower salary after being asked this question.
63 per cent of women said they think more highly of a potential employer if they avoid asking salary history questions during the recruitment process. The majority of women said their salary should be dependent on their skills, responsibilities and the value they add to the company rather than what they've been paid in the past.
The Fawcett Society's report was released earlier this month on Equal Pay Day; the day women in the UK essentially begin working for free for the remainder of the year because of the gender pay gap.
"At best salary history questions are annoying and our research shows asking them can damage an employer's reputation," The Fawcett Society's chief executive Jemima Olchawski said.
“But it goes deeper than that - asking about salary history can mean past pay discrimination follows women, people of colour, and people with disabilities throughout their career. It also means new employers replicate pay gaps from other organisations. On Equal Pay Day we’re calling on employers to commit to closing their gender pay and to stop asking about past salaries."
The Fawcett Society pointed out that questioning a potential employee about their salary history has already been "banned to some degree" in 21 US states. Meanwhile, nearly four in 10 British workers admitted that they have lied about their salary history, suggesting the question is potentially pointless as well as discriminatory.
Source: Refinery29
(Link and quotes via original reporting)
A new campaign is calling on employers to stop asking people their salary history during the recruitment process, Refinery29 reports.
Women's rights organisation The Fawcett Society said questions about historic salary make it harder for workers - especially women, people of colour and people with disabilities - to increase their pay.
The Fawcett Society's found that 61 per cent of women feel less confident about negotiating a higher salary after they've been asked about their pay history. Nearly as many (58 per cent) said they felt they had been offered a lower salary after being asked this question.
63 per cent of women said they think more highly of a potential employer if they avoid asking salary history questions during the recruitment process. The majority of women said their salary should be dependent on their skills, responsibilities and the value they add to the company rather than what they've been paid in the past.
The Fawcett Society's report was released earlier this month on Equal Pay Day; the day women in the UK essentially begin working for free for the remainder of the year because of the gender pay gap.
"At best salary history questions are annoying and our research shows asking them can damage an employer's reputation," The Fawcett Society's chief executive Jemima Olchawski said.
“But it goes deeper than that - asking about salary history can mean past pay discrimination follows women, people of colour, and people with disabilities throughout their career. It also means new employers replicate pay gaps from other organisations. On Equal Pay Day we’re calling on employers to commit to closing their gender pay and to stop asking about past salaries."
The Fawcett Society pointed out that questioning a potential employee about their salary history has already been "banned to some degree" in 21 US states. Meanwhile, nearly four in 10 British workers admitted that they have lied about their salary history, suggesting the question is potentially pointless as well as discriminatory.
Source: Refinery29
(Link and quotes via original reporting)