FirstHR

Pay Transparency Laws: What Small Employers Must Do

Pay transparency laws by state, explained for small employers. The number of states is not the question. Whether your remote job posting is covered is.

Nick Anisimov

Nick Anisimov

FirstHR Founder

Payroll
21 min

Pay Transparency Laws

Every guide gives you a number of states, and every guide gives a different number. That is the wrong question. Here is the right one

Every guide to pay transparency opens with a number. Sixteen states. Seventeen. Eighteen. Fourteen. Twenty-five.

Those are real numbers, published this year, by serious organizations, and they do not agree with each other. Which tells you something important: the number of states is not a useful fact, and chasing it is a trap.

The sources disagree because they are counting different things. Some include salary history bans, which are a related but separate obligation. Some include laws that have not taken effect yet. Some include cities. And the whole picture changes every legislative session anyway, so whatever number you memorize today will be wrong by autumn.

Here is the question that actually decides whether you have a problem, and no guide leads with it: can the person you are about to hire do this job from a state that has a law?

Because if you post a remote role, the answer is almost certainly yes. And in most states, a pay transparency law applies to a job that can be performed in that state, regardless of where your company sits. Which means a fifteen-person business in Texas, a state with no such law, that posts one remote job, may be subject to Colorado's rules. And Colorado's threshold is one employee.

This guide is about that, and about what to do. Written for a US business with five to fifty people. FirstHR is not a law firm. This is general information rather than legal advice, the law here moves constantly, and if you hire across state lines you should have an employment attorney look at your job posting template once. It is a cheap hour.

TL;DR
Pay transparency laws require employers to disclose compensation, usually the salary range in the job posting. There is no federal law. Roughly eighteen states plus DC have one, though published counts vary from fourteen to twenty-five depending on what is counted. But the number is the wrong thing to focus on. The rule that matters is that most states apply their law to any job that can be performed in that state, regardless of where you are. Post a remote role and you may be subject to Colorado, whose threshold is one employee and whose penalties run to $10,000 per posting. The only workable strategy for a small business is to adopt the strictest state as your baseline and use one compliant template everywhere.

The Wrong Question

How many states have pay transparency laws? is the question everyone asks, and it is close to useless.

Consider that in 2026, published sources put the figure at fourteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, and twenty-five. All of them are being careful. All of them are counting honestly. They just disagree about what counts.

What gets counted differentlyWhy it changes the number
Salary history bansOver twenty states have one. It is a different obligation. Including them inflates the count substantially
Laws not yet in effectDelaware is enacted but does not take effect until 2027. Do you count it?
Local ordinancesNew York City, Jersey City, and four Ohio cities have their own rules. Ohio has no state law at all
Disclosure-on-request statesConnecticut, Nevada, and Rhode Island have laws, but weaker ones. Some counts include them, some do not
Public sector onlySome states regulate only government employers, which is irrelevant to you

So the count is a genuinely unstable fact, and building your compliance on it is building on sand. If you employ anyone in California, the specifics are in the California compliance guide.

Ask This Instead
Where can the person I am hiring physically do this job? That question has a stable answer, it is one you actually control, and it is the one the statutes are written around. Every state law in this area attaches to the location of the work, not the location of the employer. Get that right and the count becomes irrelevant, which is exactly where you want it to be.

What Pay Transparency Is

Being required to tell people what a job pays.

Definition
Pay Transparency Laws
Pay transparency laws are state and local regulations requiring employers to disclose compensation information to job applicants, employees, or both. The strictest form requires the salary or wage range to appear in the job posting itself. Weaker forms require disclosure only on request or before an offer is made. Many jurisdictions also impose a salary history ban, prohibiting employers from asking candidates what they currently or previously earned. There is no federal pay transparency law in the United States; these obligations exist entirely at state and local level.

The movement started in Colorado. Its Equal Pay for Equal Work Act took effect on January 1, 2021, and it remains the broadest law in the country: it applies to any employer with at least one employee in Colorado, requires a pay range and a benefits description in every posting, and requires notifying employees of promotional opportunities.

Everything since has been variation on that theme, and the variation is the problem. It is one more strand of the employment law web that attaches at different sizes in different states.

The Remote Job Trap

This is the section that matters most and that almost nobody writes, and it is why a compliance article can be relevant to a business in a state with no law at all.

How a Texas company breaks Colorado law without leaving Texas
You are a fifteen-person company in TexasTexas has no pay transparency law. You have never thought about this, and you have no reason to.
You post a remote jobBecause that is what everyone does now, and it widens your candidate pool, and it costs nothing.
The role can be performed from ColoradoYou did not say it could not. You did not think about Colorado at all. But a Colorado resident could do this job from their kitchen.
Colorado law now applies to your postingThe state clarified that its transparency requirements apply to any role geographically open to Colorado residents, even where the employer has no physical presence in the state.
And Colorado's threshold is one employeeNot fifteen. Not twenty-five. One. Which means the size exemption you were relying on in other states does not exist here.
Your posting is now non-compliant, and you have no ideaPenalties run from $500 to $10,000, per posting. And every non-compliant posting is a separate violation.
This is not a theoretical edge case. It is the normal situation for any small business that posts a remote role, which is most of them. And it is why the question is not does my state have a law. It is can the person I am hiring do this job from somewhere that does.

Colorado made this explicit. Its 2023 amendment clarified that employers must comply with the state's transparency requirements for any role that is geographically open to Colorado residents, even where the employer has no physical presence in the state.

And it is not just Colorado. Most states with these laws apply them to positions that can be performed within the state, regardless of employer location. New York, whose guidance for employers is published by the New York Department of Labor, applies at just four employees. Which means the moment you write remote in a job posting, you have potentially opted into the laws of every state a candidate could work from.

You Cannot Fix This By Not Thinking About It
The instinct is to assume that because your business is in a state without a law, none of this applies. That instinct is wrong and it is the single most expensive misunderstanding in this whole area. The laws attach to where the work can happen, not to where your office is. A remote posting is an invitation to candidates anywhere, and the states they live in have opinions about what your posting must contain. Excluding specific states from a remote posting is possible, and some employers do it, but it narrows your candidate pool for a compliance problem that a single template would have solved.
Still Using Spreadsheets for Onboarding?
Automate documents, training assignments, task management, and track onboarding progress in real time.
See How It Works

Three Different Obligations, Constantly Confused

Part of why the numbers never agree is that three separate things get lumped together under one heading.

Three different obligations, frequently confused with each other
Range in the posting
The strictest form, and the one most states are converging on
What it requires: The salary or wage range must be in the job advertisement itself, before anyone applies. Several also require a benefits descriptionWhere: California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, Washington, and DC. Virginia and Maine follow in 2026
Range on request
A weaker form, but still a legal obligation
What it requires: You must give the range at a defined point, such as on request or before an offer, but it need not appear in the advertisementWhere: Connecticut, Nevada, Rhode Island
Salary history ban
A separate rule that frequently travels with the others
What it requires: You may not ask a candidate what they currently earn or previously earned, and you may not use it to set their pay. You may generally ask what they are looking forWhere: Over twenty states, plus several cities
A salary history ban is not a pay transparency law, and a state can have one without the other. They are frequently reported together, which is one reason the state counts you see never agree. Verify the current position for any state you actually hire in, because this list moves constantly.

Being clear about which one applies to you matters, because they demand different actions. A posting state requires you to change your job advertisement. An on-request state requires you to train whoever answers the phone. A salary history ban requires you to change what your interviewers ask.

Those are three different fixes, in three different parts of your hiring process, and doing one does not do the others. The interview script in particular is the one people forget, and it is covered in the guide to illegal interview questions.

The Size Threshold, and Why You Are Probably Covered

Small employers reach for the size exemption almost reflexively, on the assumption that these laws are aimed at big companies. Look at the actual thresholds before you rely on that.

The size threshold is not the same everywhere, and it is the thing that decides whether you are covered
Colorado1 employee
The broadest coverage in the country. There is no small-business exemption
New York4 employees
One of the lowest thresholds. Most small businesses are covered
Maine10 employees
Effective 2026
California15 employees
SB 642, effective January 2026, tightened what a pay range may be
Illinois15 employees
Also requires notifying employees of promotions within 14 days of an external posting
Washington15 employees
Applies if you have one Washington employee or recruit there
Massachusetts25 employees
A grace period applies to early violations, then penalties escalate
Hawaii50 employees
One of the higher thresholds
Illustrative and subject to change. Read the top two rows together and the small-business problem becomes obvious: a company with six people is exempt in California and covered in New York and Colorado. There is no headcount at which you can stop paying attention, which is precisely the opposite of what most owners assume.

Read the top two rows again. Colorado: one employee. New York: four.

Which produces a genuinely awkward result for a small business. A six-person company is exempt in California, where the threshold is fifteen, and covered in both New York and Colorado, where it is four and one. Your headcount does not give you a clean answer. It gives you a different answer per state.

And note what this does to the remote trap. The state with the lowest threshold in the country is also the state that most explicitly reaches remote roles. Those two facts, combined, are why a small business posting a remote job is in scope almost by default.

What a Good Faith Range Actually Is

Every posting state requires a good faith range. Employers reliably try to comply with this by posting a range so wide it says nothing, and regulators have noticed.

What counts as a good faith range
$40,000 to $400,000No
This is not a good faith estimate. It is a refusal to answer, dressed as compliance. It will attract regulator attention and candidate contempt in equal measure
Competitive salaryNo
Not a range at all. In a posting state this is simply a violation
$90,000 and upNo
Open-ended ranges are explicitly prohibited in several states. There has to be a top
DOE, or commensurate with experienceNo
The classic evasion, and it is now a fineable offence in a growing number of states
$95,000 to $115,000Yes
A real band, reflecting what you actually intend to pay someone hired into this role now. This is what the law asks for
California's 2026 amendment sharpened this considerably: a pay scale is now defined as a good faith estimate of what the employer reasonably expects to pay for the position upon hire. Note upon hire. Not what the role could pay after three years of promotions. What you would pay the person you are about to hire.

California sharpened the definition considerably. Per SB 642, effective January 1, 2026, a pay scale means a good faith estimate of the salary or hourly wage range that the employer reasonably expects to pay for the position upon hire.

The words upon hire are doing enormous work there. It is not what the role might pay after three years of good reviews. It is not the full band from entry to senior. It is what you would pay the person you are about to hire, now.

A Wide Range Is Worse Than It Looks
Posting $40,000 to $400,000 may technically contain a number, and it will fail on two fronts at once. Legally, it is not a good faith estimate, and states are increasingly explicit that open-ended or absurdly broad bands do not comply. Commercially, every candidate reading it knows exactly what you are doing, and it signals either that you do not know what the role is worth or that you are hoping to underpay whoever accepts. You have complied with nothing and advertised something unflattering.

The uncomfortable implication, and the reason many employers resist this, is that you cannot post a good faith range for a role you have not thought about. If you do not know what the job is worth, the law is now forcing you to find out. That work starts with a written job description, which most small businesses also do not have.

What Must Actually Be in the Posting

More than the range, in several states, and this is where employers who thought they had complied discover they have not.

ElementRequired whereNote
Salary or wage rangeEvery posting stateA genuine band. Top and bottom. Not open-ended
General description of benefitsColorado, Washington, Illinois, and othersHealth, retirement, and the major items. Not an itemized list
Other compensationColorado and othersBonuses and commissions, where they are a meaningful part of the package
Application deadlineColoradoAn anticipated closing date for applications
Internal postings tooColorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, and othersPromotions and transfers, not just external hiring
Promotion notificationColorado, IllinoisIllinois requires notifying employees within 14 days of an external posting
Third-party postingsMost statesIf a recruiter or job board posts on your behalf, it is still your obligation

Two rows deserve emphasis.

Internal postings. An employer who carefully fixed their careers page and then promotes people via a quiet conversation in the kitchen has a gap. Several states extend the disclosure requirement to promotions and transfers, and Colorado requires that employees be notified of the opportunity before the selection is made.

Third-party postings. If a recruiter or a job board posts the role, the obligation is still yours. You cannot outsource compliance by outsourcing the posting, and this is a live risk for small businesses who use agencies precisely because they do not have an HR function, a pattern that recurs throughout small business HR.

Penalties, and Why They Add Up Faster Than You Think

The number that should get your attention is not the maximum fine. It is the word per.

JurisdictionPenaltyThe mechanics
Colorado$500 to $10,000Per violation. Each non-compliant posting is a separate violation. So is each missed promotion notice
California$100 to $10,000Per violation. A first violation may be waived if you correct all postings
Illinois$500 to $10,000Per violation, escalating with repetition
Washington$500 to $1,000Per violation, with a cure period available
MassachusettsWarning, then escalatingA grace period for early violations, then penalties into the tens of thousands
New York CityUp to $250,000For repeated violations. The first can be cured within 30 days without a fine

Per posting. Which means an employer who has been posting non-compliant job ads for a year has not committed one violation; they have committed as many violations as they published advertisements.

Colorado's enforcement is not theoretical either. As of mid-2024 the state had received over 1,600 complaints and assessed hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines under the transparency provisions. Keep the postings and the ranges you used, because records are what you would produce, and the guide to record retention sets out how long.

Anyone Can Complain, Including People Who Never Applied
A detail that changes the risk calculus entirely. In Colorado, complaints can be filed anonymously, and third parties can file them on behalf of affected workers or the public. Which means the person who reports your non-compliant posting does not have to be a candidate, does not have to have applied, and does not have to identify themselves. A competitor could do it. An advocacy group could do it. Someone scrolling a job board could do it. You are not protected by the fact that nobody complained, because the people who might complain are not only the people you hired.
Companies Using FirstHR Onboard 3x Faster
Join hundreds of small businesses who transformed their new hire experience.
See It in Action

The Strictest-State Strategy

Now the practical answer, and it is the only one that survives contact with a small business.

Do not build a different job posting for each jurisdiction. That is a system that requires somebody to correctly identify the applicable law every time they post a role, forever, in a landscape that changes every legislative session. You will get it wrong, and you will get it wrong on the day you are busiest.

Instead: take the strictest applicable state as your baseline and use one template everywhere. It is the same logic that governs the rest of your HR processes: make the compliant path the only path.

1
List where your people actually work, and where remote candidates could be
Not where you are incorporated. The physical work locations of every employee, plus every state a remote hire could plausibly live in. If you have not restricted the posting geographically, that is most of them.
2
Identify the strictest law in that set
Usually Colorado, because of the one-employee threshold and the benefits and deadline requirements. Sometimes Illinois or New York, depending on your situation.
3
Build one posting template that satisfies it
A genuine pay range with a top and a bottom. A general description of benefits. Other compensation, if bonuses or commission are meaningful. An application deadline. That template will satisfy nearly every jurisdiction at once.
4
Use it for internal postings too
Promotions and transfers. This is the gap employers leave open after fixing their careers page, and it is a separate violation in several states.
5
Fix the interview script
Remove any question about current or previous salary. Replace it with a question about expectations, which is generally still permitted and gets you the same information.
6
Tell whoever posts jobs, including recruiters
Third-party postings are still your obligation. An agency posting a non-compliant ad on your behalf is your violation, not theirs.
7
Set a calendar reminder to re-check annually
This area changes every year. An annual review is the entire maintenance cost, and skipping it is how a compliant employer becomes a non-compliant one without doing anything.
One Template Is Not a Compromise. It Is the Point.
The reason this works is that it removes the decision from the process. Nobody has to know which state applies. Nobody has to check a chart. There is one way to post a job, it is compliant everywhere you might hire, and it is the only one available. A compliance system that depends on somebody remembering something is a compliance system that will fail. One that makes the compliant path the only path will not.
What worked for me
We posted a remote role and I did not think about this for a second, because we are not in a state with a law and it did not occur to me that a law somewhere else could reach us. A candidate asked, quite politely, why the posting had no salary range when she was in Colorado and Colorado requires one. She was right. She was entirely right, and she had done more research on our legal obligations than we had, which is not a good look for a company she was considering joining. Nothing came of it, and it should have. The fix took one afternoon: we rewrote the posting template once, with a real range, benefits, and a deadline, and now that is simply how we post jobs. It has never come up again, and the range in the ad has if anything improved the quality of the applications, because the people who apply already know the number works for them.

Is There a Federal Pay Transparency Law?

No, and the absence explains everything else about this subject.

What exists federallyWhat it doesWhat it does not do
Equal Pay Act of 1963Prohibits sex-based wage discrimination for substantially equal workDoes not require you to publish a pay range
National Labor Relations ActProtects employees' right to discuss their wages with each otherDoes not require you to disclose anything proactively
Salary Transparency ActWould require disclosure of ranges in postingsIntroduced in Congress. Not enacted
Pay Equity for All ActWould ban salary history inquiries nationallyIntroduced. Not enacted

The NLRA point is worth pulling out because employers get it wrong constantly. Per the National Labor Relations Board, employees have a protected right to discuss their pay with each other.

Which means a policy in your handbook prohibiting employees from discussing their salaries is unlawful, in every state, regardless of whether that state has a pay transparency law. It has been unlawful for a long time. And a surprising number of small business handbooks still contain one, copied from a template somebody found online. It belongs on the list of policies to review this year.

Check Your Handbook Today
If your employee handbook says anything like employees are expected to keep salary information confidential, or discussing compensation with colleagues is grounds for discipline, delete it now. That clause is unenforceable, it is a federal labour law violation independent of any state pay transparency rule, and it is the kind of thing that turns a routine dispute into a much more serious one. It is a five-minute fix and a great many small employers have this clause without knowing where it came from.

Beyond Compliance

A short section, because there is an argument here that has nothing to do with law.

Posting a range costs you the ability to underpay someone who does not know what the role is worth. That is the actual thing being lost, and it is worth being honest that some employers experience it as a loss.

What you get in exchange is that every applicant already knows the number works for them. Nobody goes through four interviews and then discovers you are twenty thousand dollars apart. Your candidate pool is smaller and enormously better qualified, in the specific sense that they have already accepted your economics, which shortens the whole recruitment process.

And there is a harder benefit. A posted range forces you to decide what the role is worth before you meet anybody, which prevents the most common source of internal pay inequity in a small business: paying whatever the individual negotiated. Two people doing the same job on different pay, because one asked harder, is exactly the pattern that these laws exist to break, and it is exactly the pattern an informal small business drifts into without ever deciding to.

Deciding the number in advance, and writing it down, is not a compliance chore. It is the foundation of a defensible pay structure, and you were going to need one eventually anyway.

Common Mistakes

These recur, and the first two account for most of the exposure.

The Recurring Failures
Assuming you are exempt because your state has no law, when the laws attach to where the work can be performed and your remote posting reaches everywhere. Assuming you are exempt because you are small, when Colorado's threshold is one employee and New York's is four. Posting a range so wide it says nothing, which fails the good faith test legally and fails commercially at the same time. Fixing the external careers page and forgetting internal promotions and transfers, which several states also cover. Assuming a recruiter posting on your behalf carries the obligation, when it remains yours. Asking a candidate what they currently earn in a state with a salary history ban. Keeping a clause in the handbook prohibiting employees from discussing pay, which is a federal labour law violation independent of anything else. And chasing the number of states, which nobody agrees on and which will change before you have finished reading about it.

The unifying error is treating this as a research problem. It is not. Research gives you a number that is wrong, from a chart that is out of date, about states you may not be in.

It is a template problem. Build one job posting that would satisfy the strictest state in the country, use it everywhere, and the research question dissolves. That takes an afternoon and it does not need to be repeated. The rest of the recurring small-employer errors are collected in the HR rules and regulations guide.

Key Takeaways
Published counts of how many states have pay transparency laws range from 14 to 25, because sources count different things. The number is not a useful fact.
The question that matters is whether the job can be performed in a state that has a law. Most states apply their rules based on where the work happens, not where you are.
A remote job posting can therefore subject a company in a state with no law to the laws of states it has never operated in.
Colorado's threshold is one employee, and it explicitly reaches remote roles open to Colorado residents. There is no small-business exemption there.
Thresholds vary enormously: one employee in Colorado, four in New York, fifteen in California and Illinois, twenty-five in Massachusetts, fifty in Hawaii.
A good faith range means what you actually expect to pay upon hire. A band from $40,000 to $400,000 fails legally and embarrasses you commercially.
Several states require more than the range: a benefits description, other compensation, an application deadline, and coverage of internal promotions.
Penalties are per posting, not per company, and in Colorado anyone can complain anonymously, including people who never applied.
The only workable small-business strategy is to adopt the strictest state as your baseline and use one compliant job posting template everywhere.
A handbook clause prohibiting employees from discussing their pay is unlawful under the NLRA, in every state, regardless of transparency laws. Delete it.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are pay transparency laws?

Pay transparency laws are state and local rules requiring employers to disclose compensation information to job applicants and employees. The strictest form requires the salary or wage range to appear in the job posting itself, before anyone applies. Weaker forms require disclosure only on request or before an offer. Many jurisdictions also ban asking candidates about their salary history, which is a related but separate obligation. There is no federal pay transparency law, so the rules are set entirely at state and local level.

Which states have pay transparency laws?

Roughly eighteen states plus the District of Columbia, though counts published by different sources range from fourteen to twenty-five depending on whether they include salary history bans, local ordinances, and laws not yet in effect. States requiring the range in the posting itself include California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, and Washington, with Virginia and Maine joining in 2026 and Delaware in 2027. Connecticut, Nevada, and Rhode Island require disclosure on request rather than in the advertisement.

Do pay transparency laws apply to remote jobs?

Yes, and this is the point most small employers miss entirely. In most states the law applies to a position that can be performed within the state, regardless of where the employer is located. Colorado clarified this explicitly: its requirements apply to any role geographically open to Colorado residents, even if the employer has no physical presence there. So a Texas company posting a remote job that a Colorado resident could do is subject to Colorado's law, and Colorado's threshold is one employee.

Is there a federal pay transparency law?

No. A Salary Transparency Act and a Pay Equity for All Act were introduced in Congress but have not been enacted. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 prohibits sex-based wage discrimination, and the National Labor Relations Act protects employees' right to discuss their wages with each other, but neither requires an employer to publish pay ranges. Everything in this area is state and local law, which is precisely why it is so fragmented and why multi-state and remote employers face the greatest complexity.

What size does my company have to be for pay transparency laws to apply?

It depends entirely on the state, and this is where small employers get caught. Colorado applies to any employer with at least one employee in the state, so there is no small-business exemption at all. New York applies at four employees. Maine at ten. California, Illinois, and Washington at fifteen. Massachusetts at twenty-five. Hawaii at fifty. Which means a six-person company is exempt in California and covered in both New York and Colorado. There is no headcount at which you can stop paying attention.

What is a good faith salary range?

A range that genuinely reflects what you expect to pay for the position, rather than a band so wide it communicates nothing. Posting $40,000 to $400,000 for a role you actually intend to pay $95,000 for may satisfy the letter of a statute while defeating its purpose, and regulators have noticed. California's 2026 amendment defines a pay scale as a good faith estimate of what the employer reasonably expects to pay for the position upon hire, which rules out ranges spanning every seniority level the role might eventually reach.

What has to be in a compliant job posting?

At minimum, the salary or wage range, expressed as a genuine band with a top and a bottom. Several states require more: Colorado requires a general description of benefits and other compensation plus an application deadline. Washington and Illinois also require a benefits description. Some states extend the requirement to internal postings for promotions and transfers, and Illinois requires notifying employees of promotional opportunities within fourteen days of an external posting. Check the specific state, because the extras vary.

What are the penalties for violating pay transparency laws?

They vary widely and they add up per posting rather than per company. Colorado runs from $500 to $10,000 per violation, and each non-compliant posting counts separately. California's civil penalty is $100 to $10,000 per violation, with first violations potentially waived if all postings are corrected. New York City reaches up to $250,000 for repeated offences. Beyond the fines, a public enforcement action is a recruiting problem, because candidates evaluating your offer can read about it.

Can I still ask a candidate what they currently earn?

In over twenty states, no. Salary history bans prohibit asking a candidate about their current or previous compensation and prohibit using it to set their starting pay. The rationale is that anchoring a new salary to an old one perpetuates any inequity already present. You may generally still ask what the candidate is looking for, which gets you the information you actually need. Check your state, and check the states your remote candidates might be in.

Do these laws apply to internal promotions?

In several states, yes, and this catches employers who fixed their external postings and forgot the rest. Colorado requires notifying all employees of promotional opportunities and posting the range. Illinois requires informing employees of promotional opportunities within fourteen days of an external posting. Massachusetts and New York extend disclosure requirements to promotions and transfers. If you have carefully made your careers page compliant and are still promoting people via a quiet conversation, you may have a gap.

What is the simplest way for a small business to comply?

Adopt the strictest applicable state as your baseline and use one job posting template everywhere. Trying to maintain a different template for each jurisdiction is a system you will get wrong, because it depends on somebody correctly identifying the applicable law every time they post a role, forever. A single template that includes a genuine range, a benefits description, and an application deadline satisfies almost every jurisdiction at once, and it removes the decision from the process entirely.

Do I have to tell existing employees their pay range?

In several states, yes, on request. California requires providing pay scale information to current employees for their own position upon request. Colorado requires including the range in internal postings. Minnesota requires employers with a handbook to include notice of employees' wage disclosure rights in it. And separately, under the National Labor Relations Act, employees have a protected right to discuss their wages with each other, which means a policy prohibiting pay discussions is unlawful regardless of what your state requires.

Ready to transform your onboarding?

7-day free trial No credit card required
Start Your Free Trial