The share of postings that publish a salary varies by a factor of five depending on where the job is and who is hiring. Almost none of that variation is about generosity.
The three real reasons
- Law. Where disclosure is mandated, rates jump immediately and stay high. Where it is not, most employers omit it.
- Negotiating position. An employer that does not publish keeps the option of paying different people differently for the same work. Publishing removes that option, which is the point of the laws.
- Internal equity risk. Publishing a range for a new hire tells existing staff what the company thinks the role is worth. Many employers would rather not have that conversation.
Where disclosure is required
The direction of travel is one way. Several US states and cities require a range in the posting; the EU pay transparency directive obliges member states to require pay information to candidates before interview, with national implementations landing through 2026. Enforcement varies more than the statutes do.
What happens to the data when a law lands
Two things, and only one is good. Disclosure rates rise sharply — that is the intended effect. Ranges also widen, because a wide band satisfies the requirement while preserving flexibility. The result is more data of lower precision, which is still an improvement on no data.
What this means when you read our numbers
A cohort in a disclosure jurisdiction has a higher disclosure rate and wider ranges. A cohort without one has a lower rate and narrower ranges from a self-selected group of employers. The medians are not directly comparable, and we print the disclosure rate next to every one of them so the difference is visible rather than hidden.