Prospective employees are no longer “expecting the unexpected” when it comes to pay transparency, brushing aside previous norms that deemed questions about compensation “unprofessional” during early interview stages.
Over the past few years, numerous U.S. jurisdictions have passed laws in line with this rising tide, such as New York City employers with four or more workers being required as of this past November to include a position’s minimum and maximum annual salary, or hourly wage, in any job posting.
A pair of title insurance and settlement service professionals shared their thoughts with The Title Report. Tayler Tibbitts is vice president and county manager for Fidelity National Title in Idaho. Natalie Robinson is vice president of people and culture for real estate private equity firm Peachtree Group. She also spent six years as human resources director at national title and settlement provider OS National.
Both cite the title industry-specific effects of increased pay transparency and other labor gains and believe some may be key in attracting younger professionals to an aging workforce.
“There’s a been a shift as generationally, the workforce changes,” Robinson said. “The increasingly diverse talent pool has been advocating for more (pay) transparency and a clearer understanding about how this potentially impacts their economic future. In my experience, it’s not just about the pay and range, it’s the total benefits package and what it means for employees and their work-life balance.
“There is also a focus on information about an organization’s DEI commitments and how their company invests back into the local community. Candidates are asking more up-front questions to get an understanding for whether they will be a good fit culturally. Where historically, there has been a stigma around asking these questions at the start of the interview process, hiring managers must now be prepared for this increased scrutiny.”
California has long-standing requirements for businesses to disclose pay scales if that information is requested. However, as of Jan. 1, employers with 15 or more workers, with at least one residing in the state, must include the pay scale for a position in any job posting, including positions posted by third parties.
“Pay transparency has definitely become more of an acknowledged concern,” Tibbitts said. “It’s out in the open a little bit more. Not so much in our industry yet but in a big way for tech and other areas. In my perspective, it’s the nature of a competitive economy. Labor has been a limited resource for a while, especially because of the pandemic, and employers are trying to respond accordingly.”
Employers in the state of Washington with 15 or more employees have been required to disclose the minimum wage or salary for a position once a job offer is made, a roughly 4-year-old provision.
Other states that have recently enacted stricter pay transparency requirements include Rhode Island, Nevada, Maryland, and Connecticut. They are joined by local governments in Toledo, Ohio, Cincinnati, Jersey City, N.J., and Westchester County, N.Y.
“In the states where (pay transparency laws) are being introduced, it’s the next evolution of employment laws and practice,” Robinson said.
The proliferation of remote work is adding to employers’ complexities when trying to remain compliant with updated pay transparency requirements. That rings especially true for businesses that recruit across state lines. This means a company posting a job that could be performed remotely from any state must be sure to adhere to transparency regulations across all jurisdictions.
Colorado’s Department of Labor and Employment has specifically cracked down on employers attempting to skirt certain states’ transparency laws by stating that workers from those areas aren’t eligible for remote positions.
“We’re starting to see that a trend of some younger applicants,” Tibbitts said. “It could also be a function of a sort of changing of the guard in the industry but it could be adding to it. The younger generation cares a lot about the transparency and it’s not going to go away. Our industry has to make the adjustment just like the tech industry and others have adjusted.”
Pay transparency updates also come during a time of increased industry attention from federal regulators, and possible broader changes in the employer-employee relationship.
Recent fines handed to Old Republic and Stewart by the New York attorney general for their use of no-poach agreements have come with rumblings of a possible federal ban on non-compete provisions for employees.
“I think every company, down to the local leadership level, has some discretion about whether to continue to use non-competes,” Tibbitts said. “I’m personally not a fan of non-competes, from the employee or employer perspective. If you need to do that to keep someone there, something’s not working right.”
Proponents of outlawing non-competes, including New York Attorney General Letitia James, call the practice harmful and a barrier for employees seeking out higher salaries or better working situations.
“In a well-functioning labor market, employers don’t need no-poach agreements and instead compete by offering higher wages or enhanced benefits to attract the most valuable talent for their needs,” her office recently stated. “These agreements reduce competition for employees and disrupt the normal compensation-setting mechanisms which in turn harm the interests of employees.”
Robinson sees pay transparency as well as increased regulatory scrutiny as a definite shift in the labor market that may be permanent.
“Driving transparency and creating a detailed onboarding training process, which I’ve seen in practice, will be critical to organizations who want to keep pace,” she said. “It will shore up the title industry in diversifying its talent pool, especially at the escrow officer level, and identify candidates needed to build a robust workforce for the long-term.”