Amazon has prohibited its hiring managers from asking job candidates in the US about their previous salaries, Caroline O’Donovan reports at BuzzFeed, citing a post on an internal company message board:
According to Amazon’s message, which was posted Tuesday, hiring managers and recruiters can no longer “directly or indirectly ask candidates about their current or prior base pay, bonus, equity compensation, variable pay, or benefits” or “use salary history information as a factor in determining whether or not to offer employment and what compensation to offer a candidates.”
The instructions also explicitly ban the use of tools like LinkedIn Recruiter to estimate or otherwise ascertain an individual’s prior salary. According to an Amazon spokesperson, these rules were shared with all Amazon recruiters in the US, and apply equally to salaried employees like software engineers and hourly workers like call center employees.
This change comes in response to a wave of state and local laws banning salary history inquiries in the hiring process, including in California, Delaware, Massachusetts and Oregon, as well as New York City. California’s salary history ban, which came into effect at the beginning of this year, could have a particularly significant impact as that state is home to many major employers, including the tech giants of Silicon Valley. Facebook and Cisco have both announced that they will stop asking about salary histories, not just in California but throughout the US, while Google has already abandoned them nationwide.
Apple announced on Wednesday that it was bringing hundreds of billions of dollars back to the US that the company had previously held overseas to take advantage of a loophole in the US tax code that has now been closed. In doing so, Bloomberg’s Alex Webb and Mark Gurman report, the company will incur a tax bill of around $38 billion, but it also plans to spend $30 billion over the next five years on capital expenditures, with which it expects to create 20,000 new jobs and open a new campus:
“We are focusing our investments in areas where we can have a direct impact on job creation and job preparedness,” Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook said in a statement Wednesday, which also alluded to unspecified plans by the company to accelerate education programs. Apple also told employees Wednesday that it’s issuing stock-based bonuses worth $2,500 each following the new U.S. tax law, according to people familiar with the matter.
These moves came in response to the tax reform package passed by the US Congress in December, which reformed the international tax system for corporations by removing a rule that let American companies defer paying taxes on foreign income until they repatriated those earnings, incentivizing companies to stockpile some $3.1 trillion in cash overseas. Apple was among the companies best known for taking advantage of the deferral provision and faced extensive criticism for doing so, including from President Donald Trump.
Other major US companies, including Walmart, have announced raises, bonuses, and other investments in their workforce in light of the major corporate tax cut enacted last month.
As an early April deadline draws closer, reports continue to trickle in from organizations in the UK with over 250 employees that are now required to publish their gender pay gaps under rules that came into effect last year. The full list is available for download from the UK government and the press has been busy digging through it to see what the gap looks like at large, household-name brands, as well as to identify the worst offenders. Sky News reported last week that, as expected, most of the reports so far show male employees earning more, including those of some familiar companies:
Government figures show that men are paid nearly 65% more per hour at high street fashion store Phase Eight and nearly 52% more at EasyJet. Organisations with 250 or more workers must publish their figures by April, and so far 527 firms have done so. Nearly half of the organisations pay men at least one tenth more per hour and 426 of them pay men more, on average, per hour. …
Public sector bodies that show a wide divergence in pay per hour include the Royal Orthopaedic Hospital in Birmingham (men paid 34.8% more than women), and the Office for Nuclear Regulation (32.9%). Many of the firms in the top 20 in terms of those with biggest gaps are in financial services, including Virgin Money (32.5%), PriceWaterhouseCoopers (33.1%) and asset management firm Octopus Capital (38.1%).
In addition to financial services, businesses in the construction and information and communication technology sectors are reporting some of the widest gaps, the Financial Times has also reported. They add that a scant 70 employers, or 14.6 percent of those that had released their figures as of earlier this month, reported negative pay gaps as of January 1, most of which are smaller organizations working in health care and education. Nationwide, the median gender pay gap stood at 18.4 percent for all employees and 9.1 percent among full-time employees only.
Google has taken its internal IT training curriculum and, in partnership with Coursera, taken it public in the form of a certificate program. The tech giant is also providing full funding to 10,000 students, despite the fact that the majority of them will never become Googlers. Still, this initiative will allow Google to build a pipeline of talent in a critical field—they’ll have an inside track to hiring top performers from the program—while also enabling diversity across the entire sector by upskilling candidates from non-traditional backgrounds. It burnishes the company’s public image as well: The program is available to anyone, the cost is highly subsidized, and Google will have a hand in closing the digital talent gap.
The cost of the program is $49 per month, and scholarships will be funded by Google.org grants and distributed in part through community groups such as Year Up, Goodwill, Student Veterans of America, and Upwardly Global, per Google’s press release. The goal is for students to be ready for entry-level IT support jobs within 8 to 12 months after they complete the training, which consists of 64 hours of video lessons as well as interactive labs and assignments.
Trainees will learn to handle tasks such as troubleshooting and customer service, operating systems, and system administration, automation, and security. Once students complete the program, they will also have the option to share their information with an impressive list of corporate employers such as Bank of America, Walmart, PNC Bank, and more, in addition to Google.
While Google is the trendsetter here, Coursera is working on similar programs with other companies, Quartz’s Michael J. Coren notes:
When a district court in Washington, DC, ordered the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to rewrite its rules governing incentives for employee wellness programs last August, the court declined to vacate the commission’s current rules in order not to create disruptions in businesses that had already implemented programs based on them. The AARP, a lobbying group for older Americans and the plaintiff in the case against the EEOC, petitioned the court to amend its judgment and vacate the rules.
In its latest ruling, issued in late December, the court agreed to do so, but not until January 2019. Labor and employment attorney Jonathan E. O’Connell outlines the latest chapter of this legal drama at SHRM:
Also playing into the court’s decision to modify its prior judgement was the timeline offered by the EEOC for issuing its revised rule. The EEOC indicated that the new rule would not likely be ready until 2021. The court stated that such a lengthy delay was inconsistent with its expectation that the revised versions of the rule would be issued in a timely manner and thus also supported reconsideration of the court’s earlier decision. The court stated that “an agency process that will not generate applicable rules until 2021 is unacceptable” and strongly encouraged the EEOC to take steps to implement revised regulations faster.
Arguing on behalf of the EEOC, the Justice Department pushed back on that decision in a court filing this week, arguing that the court did not have jurisdiction to impose a deadline on the agency or force it to write new rules at all, Erin Mulvaney reports at the National Law Journal:
Jeffrey B. Banke/Shutterstock
Last week, federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents raided 98 7-Eleven stores throughout the US, arresting 21 people, including undocumented workers and franchise owners who were caught employing them. The point of the raids was not so much the arrests themselves, but rather a show of force intended to scare employers away from employing undocumented immigrant workers by demonstrating that the federal government was serious about cracking down on them, New York Times reporter Natalie Kitroeff noted earlier this week:
[A]ccording to law enforcement officials and experts with differing views of the immigration debate, a primary goal of such raids is to dissuade those working illegally from showing up for their jobs — and to warn prospective migrants that even if they make it across the border, they may end up being captured at work. Targeting 7-Eleven, a mainstay in working-class communities from North Carolina to California, seems to have conveyed the intended message.
“It’s causing a lot of panic,” said Oscar Renteria, the owner of Renteria Vineyard Management, which employs about 180 farmworkers who are now pruning grapevines in the Napa Valley. When word of the raids spread, he received a frenzy of emails from his supervisors asking him what to do if immigration officers showed up at the fields. One sent a notice to farmhands warning them to stay away from 7-Eleven stores in the area.
Employers in Northern California, in particular, are expected to be the targets of ICE’s next round of raids, the San Francisco Chronicle reported on Wednesday, in what has been described as retaliation against the wave of “sanctuary” laws passed by numerous localities and the state of California limiting the degree to which local authorities can cooperate with federal agents in immigration enforcement. Another law passed last fall bars employers in the state from voluntarily allowing ICE agents onsite to conduct immigration inspections or to access employee records without a warrant or court order.
H&M, the Swedish fast-fashion retailer, suffered a major public relations crisis last week when an advertisement depicting a black child modeling a sweatshirt with the slogan “coolest monkey in the jungle” set off a wave of violent protests at its stores in South Africa. The company quickly apologized and removed the ad from all its marketing, but the fallout has not ended: Musicians The Weeknd and G-Eazy have canceled partnerships with the company, activists have called for a global boycott, and the five-year-old model, Liam Mango, and his family have reportedly moved out of their home in Stockholm over “security concerns” after his mother was harshly criticized for defending the company over the controversy.
As part of its damage-control efforts, H&M announced on Wednesday that it had hired its first global head of diversity, the Associated Press reported:
In an email to The Associated Press on Wednesday, the retailer said Global Manager for Employee Relations Annie Wu, a company veteran, would be the new global leader for diversity and inclusiveness. The retailer said on Facebook that it’s “commitment to addressing diversity and inclusiveness is genuine, therefore we have appointed a global leader, in this area, to drive our work forward.”
At Quartz, Lynsey Chutel explains why the ad touched such a nerve in South Africa, and what other global brands can learn from this controversy: