Why Do Kenyan Companies Insist On Last Or Current Salary?

Why Do Kenyan Companies Insist On Last Or Current Salary?
Why do Kenyan companies justify needing a candidate’s salary history? Especially in light of the fact that job positions with similar titles at different companies often have substantially different performance objectives.

How could your salary history be considered relevant to the market value of your ability to do the job for which you’re applying? Or for that matter how could it be relevant to the worth a company places on having the job performed well?

I know Human Resource professionals who speak of requiring salary information as if it is their given right as a potential employer to have it. I beg to differ. How much money you make is private. It’s none of their HR business! The only pay rates a company has a natural right to know are those which it pays.

Suffice it to say that enough Kenyan companies require current or most recent salary information that the query of how to handle it comes up regularly. Every time it does I ponder the question of why these companies do it.
Human Resources professionals will justify the practice of requiring salary histories by mentioning benchmarking, wanting to see a history of progression, the need to stay within defined salary ranges and/or as an effort to save time. Some will go so far as to admit that it is how they know how to structure an offer of employment.

Let’s look at these reasons one at a time. In my mind benchmarking to a position’s market range is a good way to hire average workers. That may be fine for some positions at certain companies, but personally I don’t want to work for a company that aims for average.

And if the goal of benchmarking is to keep pay equitable from person to person within that company role, define a recruiting range based on the level of skills and experience required using the benchmarks as guidelines. A candidate’s compensation at another company has no relevance to this internal goal.

Salary history is not the only way to see a history of progression in a candidate’s career. Properly constructed CV show this history very well and properly structured applications can too.

As for the need to save time while staying within defined salary ranges; why don’t these companies just divulge the salary range and let the candidate tell them whether or not her expectations fall within this range? That would accomplish the same objective. Surely this course of action is a better choice than violating a person’s privacy.

If flexibility is a concern, state a salary range instead of the position’s full salary range. That will preserve flexibility. (But then companies that require salary histories aren’t known for flexibility.)

Some companies balk at divulging salary ranges noting the need to manage expectations. On the surface this argument appears to have merit. Human nature being what it is, when a salary range is quoted; candidates seem to hear only the top figure. Conversely, when a required salary range is quoted, HR managers seem to hear the low figure.

Even so, companies can easily manage expectations by making it clear that where a specific offer falls within a hiring range depends upon to what degree a candidate’s qualifications meet the position requirements.

So why do companies really require salary histories? One of the justifications noted above holds the seeds of truth: salary histories are used to structure offers of employment. Or to rephrase that from the job seeker’s perspective, current or most recent salary information is used… to restrict the leverage you, the candidate, may have to negotiate salary.

Right out of the gate these companies require the potential employee to act against his or her own best interests. Mr. Company is saying, “I’ve got the power and if you want to be considered for this position, you must give up a big chunk of yours.”

Do you want to work for a company that does that? It seems to me this attitude has the potential to foster a “Father Knows Best” atmosphere at best and an “Us Against Them” atmosphere at worst. No thank you! In today’s economy there are more people than jobs. If you’re out of work, of course you’re going to submit your candidacy to every position for which you might be qualified.

But if you have a choice between working for a company that requires your salary history as a condition of employment and working for one that does not, I advise you to think long and hard before working for a company that does. After all, if a company justifies violating your privacy to save time and money (at your expense), what else will be sacrificed for the same reason?

What do you suppose would happen to these companies if enough ‘A’ players refused to consider them as potential employers? They would cease to be competitive and either change their archaic policies or suffer the consequences.

For my money, show me a company that is above board in its relationships with all stakeholders. One that pays a competitive wage for quality work; fosters a commitment to excellence and understands that happy employees improve profits. Then you’ve shown me a company that will ultimately have a competitive advantage. And one that will be worth working for.

Where do you stand on this issue? Would you, could you, have you or do you work for a company that demanded access to your salary history? How did that turn out? Are you glad or sorry you did or didn’t go down that road? Share your thoughts