Submitted by Sariel007 t3_zebydk in UpliftingNews
Comments
Gremlin-Overlord t1_iz5og8g wrote
Please dear God, do this everywhere.
TTT_2k3 t1_iz5rbpf wrote
I was thinking “$1-$100,000,000”
[deleted] t1_iz5sheh wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iz5slpd wrote
[removed]
MyAccountWasBanned7 t1_iz5t8q5 wrote
Now do the other 49!
This should have always been the case. The stigma around discussing and being transparent about wages (created entirely by predatory executives) needs to die.
vrenak t1_iz5tppu wrote
And to get into the last bracket from the 100k/yr to the 100M/year, you just need to have worked there for 80 years.
vrenak t1_iz5tycc wrote
Consequences should be company wide everyone goes to the high end of the promise, including CEO, no bonuses or other incentives can be given out.
Fishy1911 t1_iz5vd51 wrote
We've had this in Colorado for a few years. Some of the big tech companies exclude hiring remote here because of it.
alabasterwilliams t1_iz5wqoy wrote
In Minnesota, discussion of wages and earnings is not against labor laws, but your employer can stipulate no wage discussion while on the clock, which is where most employees get together.
It’s a fucked system, and if you ever shied away from the discussion of wages, you aren’t helping the situation.
[deleted] t1_iz6105x wrote
[removed]
First-Celebration-11 t1_iz62t9e wrote
New York companies already dealt with this: “$0-$1,000,000”
forgot_to_growup t1_iz63gdc wrote
Which companies?
JohnSnowsPump t1_iz63t0b wrote
California passed the same law this year.
Fishy1911 t1_iz64ckh wrote
Great question. It was a few years ago, there were news articles about companies having the Colorado exception, when we first did this, so it shouldn't be hard to Google. I wasn't looking and I'm not in tech.
alnyland t1_iz64zmv wrote
I see this regularly, especially for remote - “remote available but not in Colorado”. It trends with the shittiness of the company, so I haven’t really bothered.
[deleted] t1_iz6b3ry wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iz6b8iu wrote
[removed]
DynamicHunter t1_iz6c3ie wrote
Hopefully a median makes its way into these laws. But the minimum posting is far more important than the maximum.
DynamicHunter t1_iz6c6jo wrote
That sounds like it’s against federal labor law which supersedes state law
scdirtdragon t1_iz6hd4d wrote
California also starts new year, Colorado has had it a while, its coming state by state
destructivecupcake t1_iz6mnvg wrote
They should have to also post the median pay for the job, not the average or the range. Coming from a sales background, yeah one guy whose been there for 20 years is making $150k a year, but the rest of us who’ve been there 2 years are making $50k.
skylercollins t1_iz6nlsb wrote
Oh cool, more intrusion on free speech and free association.
scyber t1_iz6ny6g wrote
New York has this now. I had forgotten about it till I looked at some jobs my company recently posted
[deleted] t1_iz6r1l3 wrote
[removed]
__theoneandonly t1_iz6r8is wrote
There were a couple companies who tried to pull this in the first days, but regulators swooped in and let them know that wasn’t acceptable right away.
TheRealVillain666 t1_iz6r9m1 wrote
Or when employers advertise : €650 per week.
How fucking long is that week!
Tell me the hourly rate.
First-Celebration-11 t1_iz6rg9g wrote
Good to see they caught it before it became common practice.
joeyboii23 t1_iz6s949 wrote
I live in Colorado where this is already a law. Generally when looking for a job if I see a very high band I immediately know that it’s going to be on the lowest end of that and it’s probably not a smart idea to apply for that job. If I see a reasonable pay band I know it’s probably for real and I should apply.
1 - 10000000 would make me immediately skip to the next job post.
SereneDreams03 t1_iz6sbbg wrote
Possibly, but as a job seeker at least you know what the low end of their offer is. Personally, whenever I am looking for a job that is the number I care about, because that is what I am going to assume they will pay me.
[deleted] t1_iz6u29n wrote
[removed]
CamelSpotting t1_iz6upz8 wrote
Cause some goober decided to name a state and the capitol the same thing.
CamelSpotting t1_iz6uxqq wrote
Bad troll, shoo.
8urnMeTwice t1_iz6x8fs wrote
I saw a Palantir ad that claimed $30k for a developer, why bother?
Many people have suggested CEO pay rose after transparency rules were enacted. If it's good enough for your boss, it's good enough for you
[deleted] t1_iz6xe8u wrote
[removed]
Sariel007 OP t1_iz71ac1 wrote
CO already has it too. I think CA might. Progress one state at a time.
[deleted] t1_iz71kre wrote
[removed]
Sariel007 OP t1_iz71x7e wrote
Lol, if you have to straight up lie to trick people into applying for your company or to vote for you then you really need to re-evaluate your life choices.
iNogle t1_iz7268o wrote
The initial name for Washington state was Columbia, but that was rejected due to its similarity to District of Columbia. Real forward thinking there
Sariel007 OP t1_iz727gz wrote
If only there was some way of knowing... like clicking the link and reading the article where it clearly spells this out.
Sariel007 OP t1_iz72fhm wrote
If only there was some way of knowing... like clicking the link and reading the article where it clearly spells this out.
forgot_to_growup t1_iz72xr6 wrote
Interesting that shitty companies are opposed to transparency…….
Festernd t1_iz72zuu wrote
*city
It's not the entire state, just something like 50% of the population :)
TheRealMoofoo t1_iz73oc8 wrote
Maybe gonna be a little trickier with how large the tech presence in WA is.
forgot_to_growup t1_iz73vdq wrote
I was thinking the same thing. I live near Seattle and the tech presence is huge.
T-Wrex_13 t1_iz746mp wrote
Or you could just waste their time, go through the rounds, and then ask for the top end when you get to the end
p-d-ball t1_iz749a1 wrote
"I'll take the higher number, please."
Fenastus t1_iz7613c wrote
Also in Colorado the range has to be reasonable
Not sure of the specifics of that though
hammonjj t1_iz76de8 wrote
It has to be a “good faith estimate”. I report any job listing I see without a range. Not sure how much good it does but there are supposed to be fines for it
hammonjj t1_iz76q9q wrote
And how exactly is this an infringement on free speech?
Fenastus t1_iz76tit wrote
That's all well and good, but there needs to be specific language defining what a good faith estimate is. That's far too broad and open to interpretation to actually be effective. Enforcement would be a logistical nightmare as every company would end up trying to fight it, and companies that actually meant well might get flagged as well
MtFuzzmore t1_iz76ual wrote
If it’s a remote position and you’re in the US then you’re not their target candidate anyway. They’re shopping for somebody in South America who will do that job for that rate.
KittenKoder t1_iz76wvh wrote
Hey now, we're a bit slow sometimes but we get there eventually. :P
KittenKoder t1_iz771bx wrote
Oh look, a bootlicker!
KittenKoder t1_iz77cuk wrote
As much as I wish we were, we're not the first to do this. ;)
alabasterwilliams t1_iz792g6 wrote
It’s messy, but the languages allows wiggle room in an at will employment state.
I’m busy now, but the federal labor department spells it out pretty clearly.
EverythingGoodWas t1_iz7a15i wrote
Just always demand the highest
SpectralMagic t1_iz7ajkj wrote
Fucking useless I've seen this shit already, it does nothing assuming this bill does what I think I does.
"Acme Job Listing ($15,000-$76,000 Annually)"
DoublePostedBroski t1_iz7bae8 wrote
It definitely needs to include language that says that the range given represents a .75-1.10 compa-ratio so that outliers are not included.
cote112 t1_iz7cwj7 wrote
Yeah I did, it's about getting people taking about it lol
RealFrog t1_iz7hdyy wrote
The ranges must be "good faith", which is a laugher. Citigroup posted some jobs with a range of $0 to $2,000,000 -- then blamed a "computer glitch". Suuuuuuure it was.
casicua t1_iz7hplg wrote
The law passed here in NY state this year, and they require “good faith” representation of salary range. I’ve already seen some hilarious ranges on job listings like “$50-150k DOE” or “$70-175k depending on location and experience”
The good news is that if job listings are any indication, I’m being grossly overpaid for my position.
[deleted] t1_iz7hs8e wrote
[removed]
skylercollins t1_iz7hto0 wrote
Compelled speech is an infringement on free speech.
RealFrog t1_iz7hz0o wrote
It does tell you Acme is a bunch of lying scumbags who have no intention of paying anything above $15K so your time is better spent looking elsewhere.
skylercollins t1_iz7hz8m wrote
Then expose the companies that do that. Don't attack free speech and think you're doing a good and noble thing. You're not.
[deleted] t1_iz7ibwf wrote
[removed]
Human_2468 t1_iz7iiil wrote
It would be nice to not have to be interested in a posting and find out it is below my current salary. I'm not going to make a move that is lateral or a step down from where I am now.
cote112 t1_iz7ij04 wrote
Exactly why I was hoping one State might learn from another instead of acting like a separate country and making the same mistakes.
[deleted] t1_iz7jwje wrote
[removed]
PM_ME_COMMON_SENSE t1_iz7k0en wrote
Yup. Starts Jan 1 in California
[deleted] t1_iz7njxe wrote
[removed]
1nv1s1blek1d t1_iz7nm3l wrote
Every state should have this. They just started doing this in New York and it saves me so much time applying for jobs.
[deleted] t1_iz7nsoh wrote
[removed]
Gullible-Medium123 t1_iz7o76h wrote
Do you consider other accurate labeling requirements to be free speech intrusions as well? (I'm not being snarky, I'm earnestly trying to better understand your perspective here.)
Like packaged food manufacturers being required to include ingredients and nutrition information; car manufacturers reporting miles per gallon according to a standardized test; property owners who wish to enforce access restrictions on their property having to post notice of such restriction ("no trespassing"); data collection companies having to let you know how they intend to use your data (privacy policy and terms of service); news services having at least a nominal duty to the truth; and so on?
Paradachshund t1_iz7onxh wrote
What's your take on warning labels? For example, overdose warnings on medications.
joeyboii23 t1_iz7pnhk wrote
Yeah I’m not sure what’s defined as reasonable though, because I have definitely seen jobs in range of 50k - 150k. That’s a huge difference for the same job.
Lurking_was_Boring t1_iz7ukqg wrote
New York recently went in to effect as well.
EDIT: New York City only, not the entire state.
Kinggambit90 t1_iz7wtp4 wrote
Nyc not nys, still progress though
Lurking_was_Boring t1_iz7x4bl wrote
My mistake, thanks for the clarification!
Jplopinyourpants t1_iz7zatx wrote
It’s already a law in Colorado.
VentingID10t t1_iz81h2z wrote
Yes, so now all job salary ranges become ridiculously large so it ends up meaning nothing. They'll just post, "the salary range is 33,000 to 87,000 depending on skills, education and experience."
Bitter-Basket t1_iz82b80 wrote
The insanity in my state continues. The concept of "equality" and "fairness"has been perverted beyond comprehension.
Longjumping-Bench143 t1_iz837yk wrote
Yay
djdestrado t1_iz83lqg wrote
This will lead to far fewer jobs posted in Washington. More will be posted internally, locking out new entrants to the job market. Some companies will simply move elsewhere. Others will find or carve out loopholes.
Subocularis t1_iz85m2e wrote
Name and shame
[deleted] t1_iz86i5y wrote
[removed]
Tavarin t1_iz87lz9 wrote
> According to the department, vague language such as "$60,000 per year and up" or "up to $29 an hour" won't meet the new law's transparency requirements.
Tavarin t1_iz87oh6 wrote
Because companies will have to be honest about what they intend to pay? How is that perverted beyond comprehension?
Bitter-Basket t1_iz886zt wrote
Who is seriously going to accept a job without knowing what the pay is ? You really need the government to wipe our asses for every aspect in life ? Insane.
TheConboy22 t1_iz899iv wrote
Negotiating wages is the best way to get paid. Negotiated myself an additional 10k a year with my most recent job. It’s a bit nerve wracking, but know your worth.
AustinTreeLover t1_iz8abps wrote
Been job searching lately and sometimes under "job range" employers will put something like "$0-$100000/hr".
VentingID10t t1_iz8ajz3 wrote
Oh, that's good to know. Thank you.
skylercollins t1_iz8ayru wrote
>Do you consider other accurate labeling requirements to be free speech intrusions as well?
Yes, until it crosses the line and becomes fraud.
>Like packaged food manufacturers being required to include ingredients and nutrition information; car manufacturers reporting miles per gallon according to a standardized test;
Absolutely.
>property owners who wish to enforce access restrictions on their property having to post notice of such restriction ("no trespassing");
This should not be required but it is wise to do in order to avoid legal liability in the harm they bring to trespassers. "I didn't know I was trespassing because there was no indication I was on private property" should be a valid offense when suing somebody for harming you.
>news services having at least a nominal duty to the truth; and so on?
Absolutely.
Lying, defamation, hate speech, all of it are free speech and should be legally protected. Cancel culture can go where the law shouldn't.
SereneDreams03 t1_iz8b0g6 wrote
That only really works if you are in a position to negotiate, if they actually value your labor, most jobs are just looking to hire bodies to fill a certain role.
Maybe in your field negotiating a contract is common, but in my field there is not too much wiggle room on how much companies are willing to pay. If one company isn't willing to pay me what I'm worth, I just go to a different company, but that's why it's important that I know the salary range upfront, so I don't waste my time interviewing for a bunch of different jobs, just to find out how much they are willing to pay.
skylercollins t1_iz8b3qn wrote
Same thing. If the manufacturer and prescriber want to avoid liability for harming you then they will include overdose warnings as a matter of prudence.
Darth_Vagrance t1_iz8bgij wrote
I can see thinking this is unnecessary... But bad? How is this in any way bad?
Tavarin t1_iz8bo44 wrote
This mis about applying to jobs, so people don't waste their time applying to jobs that pay less than they will accept. If no companies are posting salary info with their job postings, then people have to apply and go through interviews before they find out what it pays, thus wasting their time massively.
Gullible-Medium123 t1_iz8bu5k wrote
Interesting. Thank you for taking the time to explain in more detail.
So far I quite disagree, but I don't think I've run into your particular stance before. I will keep an open mind as I research further.
frogjg2003 t1_iz8crq1 wrote
Unfortunately, they only learn from each other when it comes to restricting rights. Actually making life better for the common man is every state for itself.
djphatjive t1_iz8d38m wrote
We have this in Colorado and it’s awesome.
Paradachshund t1_iz8fxo3 wrote
So if I'm following your philosophy, and let me know if I'm not understanding you, companies should be held liable if they fail to disclose a salary range of their own volition, and it should be something you could sue them over. Is that right?
Clarkeprops t1_iz8j7kw wrote
There’s no labour shortage. There’s a wage shortage. Funny how these free market fucks seem to forget how supply and demand works.
pamplemoussemethode t1_iz8oyqj wrote
I work in this field and deal with questions about this law from companies constantly, the "good faith" language is just as frustrating to the people who are asked to post ranges as it is to job seekers. The thing is that what you posted isn't a hilarious range at all...it's actually totally reasonable. It's just that it's covering a mix of multiple levels, and multiple locations.
Imagine a company is willing to hire anything from an L2 to an L4 for a role, in any geo from Fargo, ND to San Francisco, CA. But because they could theoretically hire in NYC, and already have one employee there, they have to post a range for the role. In theory, they could just post the NYC range for the role. But they'd still need to post the spread from L2 to L4, so the range already becomes broad. And then there's the fact that that's not what they'd pay in Fargo, so the range gets stretched even further in order to not mislead candidates in other markets. The result is a really wide spread, usually much wider than what you shared.
No one is doing a good job navigating this. In some cases I've seen businesses create multiple job postings just for specific markets, and give the exact pay range by level so that candidates get 100% accurate information. Then they get flooded with applicants that aren't in that market, and have to deal with wading through the noise, while also managing a bunch of duplicate job postings.
The pay transparency laws are a big positive for job seekers, but right now everyone is still trying to figure out the best way to follow them.
pamplemoussemethode t1_iz8pp32 wrote
NYC is taking it pretty seriously, reporting a violation is easy and each violation carries a $250,000 fine. There's a 30 day grace period to correct your first violation, but after that there's no getting out of it. California fines go up to $10K per posting. Overall, states are getting more strict.
pamplemoussemethode t1_iz8pspw wrote
You should report this when you see it if the job posting is covered by a current law. No state allows you to post a range that you wouldn't be willing to pay.
Alexstarfire t1_iz8rquu wrote
Unless for some reason they tell you a higher number I would just get up and walk out. If they can't even get the salary range right why would I trust anything else they say?
porcelainvacation t1_iz8sfxm wrote
That’s not unusual in engineering, the $50k is entry level and the $150k is 10+ year’s experience.
1x2x4x1 t1_iz8zq7y wrote
And then another law saying you need to pay within 20% range
santascumdumpster t1_iz90d3u wrote
$40 a year is a very, very, very, low, low end
SurlyJackRabbit t1_iz950h2 wrote
Be careful what you wish for.
What happens when this is inacted is that each individual employee loses a ton of bargaining power. Wages flatten across the board and actually go down. Remember, your employer can see what everyone is paying so they don't have to compete as hard to get a good employee. And asking for that raise means you aren't asking for just you to get a raise... you are asking for every single person at your salary level to get a raise. Think that's going to happen? No more exceptions for top performers. Salary bands all the way. Good for equity, though, if that's your goal.
It's not as good as it sounds. Take it from a Coloradan.
fusionsofwonder t1_iz98say wrote
I'm in WA, and my company has two open positions in my job rating and I cannot wait to see how they update them.
[deleted] t1_iz9bd2w wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iz9bndh wrote
[removed]
covertpetersen t1_iz9e3dm wrote
>Who is seriously going to accept a job without knowing what the pay is ?
So instead of knowing what the salary range is before a job interview, or even an application, you'd rather waste your time on those things and then find out the salary is too low?
Use your head
skylercollins t1_iz9jcus wrote
No, you're not following me. Not disclosing a salary range does not bring actionable harm to anybody, not like ingesting poison or injuring yourself.
Duh.
skylercollins t1_iz9ji8a wrote
It's just the principled free speech stance taken to its logical conclusion. Wherever you disagree, apply that disagreement consistently across the board and you'll probably reach some very distasteful conclusions, at least I hope you would, assuming you're a kind and decent person.
thewildcardbb1 t1_iz9oytf wrote
Just cancel Netflix and stop eating out
Mushu_Green t1_iz9ppjf wrote
i wish it was like this everywhere...
onkel_axel t1_iz9pss5 wrote
Just ask them how they feel if you actually didn't go to college and leave.
Lakersrock111 t1_iz9s749 wrote
I asked and they said no. How are you all negotiating?
weauxbreaux t1_iz9sdyi wrote
It's awesome in theory but in practice,
A) Employers still don't post their ranges
B) Many employers just say "Nobody from Colorado will be considered"
SereneDreams03 t1_iz9tb5c wrote
That is exactly my point, if a company to list a job as $40,000-$200,000, then I would know that it is not even worth my time to apply because the pay will likely be $40,000.
colemon1991 t1_iz9u0of wrote
Didn't one say $0-$1 million? I remember there was something idiotic like that from a news article. The position even required 3-5 years experience.
Dhiox t1_iz9vd07 wrote
I recommended a guy for a job I have, told him what I made and the dude managed to negotiate a dollar extra in pay to what i make, despite less experience and schooling. Now I know the absolute minimum i should be demanding for my next raise.
casicua t1_iz9vxr5 wrote
Somehow still less insane than a lot of listings that say stuff like “$20/hr Master’s Degree required”
Fozzymandius t1_iz9zaqt wrote
Your employer already uses industry wide hiring tools that have salary ranges and caps for positions by job title. Yes this can flatten wages, but it also gives people a better idea of what is out there and potentially more room to bargain.
I used a job posting with pay info (it was not required by law at the time) as evidence of need for a pay raise and was given a ~18% raise.
TheConboy22 t1_iza2zst wrote
Confidently. Companies typically ask how much you think the job pays. I always high ball here. When they tell me a price I say that I like the job but for me to make the change that I’ll need to make around x (higher than they offered) they typically try to low mid me and we haggle to a middle rate. That’s my experience on it. You have to have reason to be paid more though. If the job is easily replaced by the next Joe than good luck.
Paradachshund t1_iza346u wrote
So is the line causing bodily harm to another party? That's where free speech should end?
2goornot2go t1_iza447g wrote
I wonder if there will be any mechanisms to keep employers actually paying according to the salary ranges they publish. I used to work at a (big tech) company and found out at one point that I had been being paid less than what the range specified for a while and I wasn't aware of this (ranges weren't shared with us individual contributors lol) until I started working with a manager who went to bat for me to get me back in the range. Should be illegal to pay an employee less than what the employer specifies for that role/location and hopefully this is a big stride towards that.
SurlyJackRabbit t1_iza5b2q wrote
Not saying that can't happen... you got lucky. Your employer is now open to a lawsuit unless they give everyone else with your same job title the same raise. Of course the employer is using tools already... but this kind of law makes the data feeding into those tools even better.
Overall, wages go down 2% when these kinds of laws are passed so your experience is the exception not the rule.
Bgrngod t1_iza5ld9 wrote
I work in the ATS space and these laws rolling out, all with subtle differences, are really a lot to try and work with. There are some other state variations on wage notification for Nevada, Connecticut, and soon Rhode Island, where they opted to require this information is shared during the hiring process before the first interview or before the initial offer.
I totally support the idea behind it, and 100% understand why going down this path is a great idea. It's transparency that drives supply/demand theory. Buuuut... it's a patchwork mess right now.
For clients I work with that want to do it and support it, it's still a huge PITA to figure out exactly what the best way to handle it is. Their wage ranges are all over the place depending on regions, so the big discussion revolves around how to bucket particular regions. A lot of these setups started as one position with the exact same details flagged for the entire country. Now they have to split that up and maintain separate positions for each different regional pay range that needs to be posted.
Mix that in with how a lot of aggressive 3rd party job boards are scraping career pages without permission, and then creating their own postings as if the company with the job opening did it, and things get messy REAL fast.
Fozzymandius t1_iza5r5o wrote
I got lucky that I negotiated a raise? No, I demanded it and the threat of me leaving for more money made them give me a raise. It was a real threat that I could easily follow-up on even today.
And there is no one else with my job title in this market for my company. I cover the entire PNW. Even if there was someone else they can't be sued for negotiating a raise with me.
SurlyJackRabbit t1_iza708m wrote
Yes, you got lucky... which isnt to say that what you did doesn't occur. It's definitely more the exception than the rule. If they call your bluff then you got to call their bluff and actually take that other job, which is generally a pain in the ass... Pay transparency is good for the company, good for equity, but bad for top performers since everyone has to be treated the same and your job has a much stronger negotiating position (genereally) since they can no longer approve raises for just one person.
Bitter-Basket t1_iza7l8p wrote
Don't waste your time if that makes you uncomfortable. Use your head. You need the government to tuck you in at night too ?
Lakersrock111 t1_iza8ikz wrote
And which person decides? The hiring manager?
TheConboy22 t1_izaaa35 wrote
In my scenario. The person who is interviewing you decides. They make the determination if they want to hire you. They have a range of pay they can pay and want to pay you the lowest within that range.
Lakersrock111 t1_izadlpu wrote
Fozzymandius t1_izaepbs wrote
I won't say it was lucky because it was an ultimatum, which I was happy to enforce either way. It would be lucky if I was banking on the raise.
Pay transparency for wage brackets doesn't mean they can't approve individual raises. The wage bracket for my job is realistically $50-175k. It may be more of a problem if you're looking for a job with a small bracket of acceptable pay, but a company should be able to justify wages for top earners. You can easily tell people that they would need to demonstrate more skills and experience to earn higher amounts. Maybe you'd argue this opens them up to suits but I say a competent HR department would be able to demonstrate that pay is apportioned by actual metrics.
If it isn't then that smacks of discrimination against lower earning employees or nepotism/favoritsm.
[deleted] t1_izafzmn wrote
[deleted]
joeyboii23 t1_izag52v wrote
Makes sense for some jobs I suppose, but if it’s like a call center you better run.
covertpetersen t1_izamotm wrote
Are you ok?
Bitter-Basket t1_izanvhz wrote
I'm great ! You apparently dig the coddling and dependency though. So the real question is are you ok ?
skylercollins t1_izbar5k wrote
The line is aggression or the threat of aggression (the initiation of force against a person or property).
Telling a business they have to disclose a salary in their job listing is telling him that you're going to throw them in prison if they don't. All laws are backed up with force. Always. That's an initiation of force against non-force. I don't know about you, but that violates my most fundamental of principles.
santascumdumpster t1_izbhc1h wrote
But the original comment said 40, not 40k
SereneDreams03 t1_izbhmmd wrote
I assumed they meant 40k, but I DEFINITELY wouldn't be taking a job for $40 a year haha.
Paradachshund t1_izbjhrw wrote
Is it true that the penalty is prison? And who goes to prison in the salary example? Wouldn't it be the company who's liable rather than an individual?
skylercollins t1_izbmffd wrote
Every law ends in prison, or death. Don't support laws that you wouldn't kill for. End of story.
freeshavocadew t1_izl1yj7 wrote
It's better than nothing
AutoModerator t1_iz5hjng wrote
Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.
All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.