Isn't anchoring (to current pay) a hiring tactic that virtually all companies use with all applicants, regardless of gender? Does that somehow have an outsized impact on women? Sincere questions.
I can't say virtually all but a lot of companies do this; however, it depends if they can get that info. My personal opinion is that it's not a good practice and should be eliminated by all companies. I would even be supportive of having regulation passed.
I believe you should hire someone based on the role and the value it provides as opposed to anchoring to the applicant's current pay.
I would guess that this practice does impact women more often than men; however, I'm not certain. In general, getting rid of the practice would make pay more equitable across all genders.
I agree it is not a good practice. My experience has been that hiring managers and/or recruiters ask the question, and some people answer it truthfully for one reason or another (probably something psychological, maybe related to upbringing, which may have a gender implication).
Probably. I think the point is that if you as a women is underpaid at your current job it will continue when you switch workplace. Even if the same applies to men it doesn't matter if they presumably had a fair pay already in the previous job.
What one gets payed for their current role is irrelevant in the hiring game for the next role. You simply deflect away and let them name their opening offer. Is this the real issue about negotiating tactics to maximize the pay you get?
