Salary History Bans: What the Evidence Shows | Hiring Research

Choose the reference point you can defend

General negotiation experiments show that first offers can pull final settlements toward the opening number. That supports preparing a role-based range, but it does not prove that withholding salary history always improves an individual outcome.³

Negotiation anchor

The first number frames the conversation.

Changing the reference point changes what both sides treat as reasonable.

FIG 01

History anchor

What did you make?

Past pay becomes the baseline
Earlier gaps can carry forward
The role's value enters late

Role anchor

What is this work worth?

Scope and market set the frame
Expectations become explicit
Current value matters more than history

Salary-history rules vary by location. When you can, discuss the role, the market range, and the value of the work instead of letting past pay set the offer.

Fig. 1 / The first numberStarting with the role and market range can keep past pay from setting the conversation.

What salary history bans actually changed

Hansen and McNichols studied the early effects of statewide salary history bans. They found the gender earnings ratio increased by about 1% in states with bans, with the gains concentrated in several subgroups. Their design estimates the net policy effect; it does not show that every employer switched cleanly from past pay to market pricing.¹

Disclosure can help and hurt

A separate field experiment used hundreds of recruiters and more than 2,000 fictional applications. Employers made negative inferences about candidates who did not disclose. For men and other higher-paid candidates, disclosure produced higher salary offers but also fewer callbacks after accounting for salary. That is a tradeoff, not a slogan.²

What candidates can control

Know the local rule, ask for the employer's range, and prepare your own walk-away point before the conversation. Never invent a current salary. If you choose not to disclose, be ready to redirect calmly; if you do disclose, understand what signal the number may send in that market.

Why the first number matters

Across three general negotiation experiments, the party making the first offer obtained a better outcome, and first offers strongly predicted final settlements. Those experiments were not salary-history-ban studies, so use them for the narrower lesson: prepare the reference point you want to discuss and the evidence behind it.³

Limitations

•Legal requirements vary by jurisdiction. This is not legal advice.
•The two salary-history studies are NBER working papers, not guarantees about an individual negotiation.
•The negotiation experiments tested first offers generally, not salary-history disclosure specifically.

Common questions

Do salary history bans help everyone equally?

No policy average is a promise for one candidate. Outcomes depend on the market, employer, role, and individual circumstances.

Should I disclose salary history if asked?

There is no universal answer. Check local law, know your target, and decide with the specific stage and leverage in mind.

What should I say instead?

A useful redirect is: ‘Could you share the budgeted range for the role? I’m evaluating the scope, level, and total package.’ If you give a target, explain the role and market evidence behind it.

How this shows up in your report

Bring your market evidence

The negotiation review can use the role scope, level, location, and market evidence you provide. It does not fetch a private compensation benchmark.

No universal disclosure rule

We do not pretend the evidence says every candidate should always disclose or always refuse. Law, leverage, and employer inference all matter.

Salary history: the evidence is more complicated than ‘never tell’