This has to be legislated? Or announced in a press release? I was speaking to an interviewer about this yesterday (for a position here in WA), and when asked about my current and expected salary, I simply sidestepped the question about my current salary and said that it was "too low to justify my current skillset" and that better compensation was one of the factors in why I was looking for something else. Then I quoted a figure I found on GlassDoor, based on my years in the industry. It was wildly more than I'm paid (my industry is hard to categorize and usually gets lumped in with far more technical jobs, throwing off the numbers), but I was still offered ~50% more than my current wage, so it certainly seems to work.

I think people need to be better informed about how no HR department will divulge your wage, so there's no reason for you to do so, not that we need to pass laws banning the practice.

I don't like questions about current, past, or expected salaries either, but like Knat @1 I mostly ignore those questions and say "I'm undervalued in my current position" or something like that, and say that expected salary depends entirely on the role I'm expected to play, my responsibilities, and the other benefits available (in other words, I need to know what they're offering before I'll tell them what I'm expecting).

If someone insists, or if it's some computer form that only accepts numbers, I'll give a slightly inflated expected salary from what I think I'm worth. I've never been forced to show current or past salaries. If I was, I'd probably put in $1 or something blatantly and obviously false. If they want to reject me for that... well, I don't think I want to work for a company that needs to know every last detail about me whilst keeping me in the dark about their own plans.

I'm a hiring manager and I've always been driven kinda nuts by managers that think they are getting a steal when the candidate says they'll work for less than you expected them to pay. They're gonna find out you low balled them and while it's no biggy to bring a noob at a lower price based on experience, it's foul to way undercut someone and, again, they're gonna find out!

This goes for HR dipshit screening candidates on salary. I had a candidate that got weeded out because she makes way more than I can pay her. Turns out, she really just wanted something different, somewhere different and was willing to take a dive to get the job! I call that knowing your priorities and hell yeah I'll interview you.

Pay what the fucking job should/can pay irrespective of past salary. And yes, we need laws to stop stupid bosses ruining people as they come in the door.

@1 well played.

I don't think this is all that wonderful, since companies fearing liability, are refusing to share information about former employees. Many now will only confirm that someone worked there. So how does any prospective employer verify previous salary level claims?

Besides, it gives Amazon more power in setting wages by telling applicants, what you were worth or what you think you're worth based on past salary is irrelevant. This is what we pay for this position; take it or leave it.

Correction: "I don't this is all that big of a deal, since companies . . . "