Salary History Inquiry Restrictions and Hiring Standards

Salary history inquiry restrictions regulate whether employers may ask job applicants about prior compensation and, in some jurisdictions, whether employers may use voluntarily disclosed salary history in setting pay offers. These rules operate at the state and local level across the United States, with no single federal statute establishing a blanket prohibition. The practical effect on hiring processes is substantial: compensation benchmarking, offer structuring, and interview protocols must all be calibrated to the jurisdiction where a role is filled.

Definition and scope

Salary history inquiry restrictions fall into two functional categories: inquiry bans and reliance bans. An inquiry ban prohibits employers from asking candidates about past compensation during the application or interview process. A reliance ban goes further, prohibiting employers from using salary history information — even when a candidate volunteers it — as a basis for setting compensation. Some jurisdictions enforce only one type; others enforce both.

The legal authority for these restrictions derives from state legislatures and municipal ordinances rather than a unified federal mandate. As of the information available from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and state labor agencies, 21 states and more than a dozen municipalities have enacted some form of salary history restriction, according to tracking maintained by the National Women's Law Center. The rationale underlying these statutes connects directly to pay equity: when prior compensation reflects discriminatory pay practices, using that history to set new offers perpetuates the original disparity. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 (29 U.S.C. § 206(d)) provides the foundational federal framework for pay equity, though it does not itself restrict salary history inquiries.

Employers operating nationally — including those managing hiring standards for remote and distributed workforces — face the added complexity that a single posted role may attract applicants from multiple jurisdictions, each with different inquiry and reliance rules. The broader legal framework for hiring standards situates these restrictions alongside other pre-offer compliance obligations.

How it works

In practice, salary history restrictions alter three operational stages of a hiring process:

  1. Application forms — Salary history fields must be removed from applications in covered jurisdictions. Applicants cannot be required to provide prior pay to advance in the process.
  2. Recruiter and interviewer conduct — Hiring personnel must be trained not to solicit salary history verbally. A candidate who spontaneously discloses prior pay may, depending on jurisdiction, still trigger a reliance ban.
  3. Offer construction — Compensation offers must be anchored to market data, role-based pay bands, and internal equity analysis rather than an applicant's disclosed or inferred prior salary.

The contrast between inquiry-only bans and reliance bans is operationally significant. Under an inquiry-only ban, an employer in a state like Texas — which has not enacted statewide restrictions — may receive and act on voluntarily disclosed information without restriction. Under a reliance ban, as enforced in states including California (California Labor Code § 432.3) and Massachusetts (Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 149, § 105A), even unsolicited disclosure cannot be used to set pay. New York City's Local Law 67 (2017) represents one of the earliest and most-cited municipal examples of a combined inquiry and reliance ban, subsequently expanded by the New York State Equal Pay Law.

An employer's obligation also includes posting pay ranges in jurisdictions such as Colorado (Colorado Equal Pay for Equal Work Act, C.R.S. § 8-5-101) and New York State, where pay transparency requirements operate alongside salary history bans as complementary mechanisms for reducing information asymmetry.

Common scenarios

Multi-state recruitment: A company headquartered in a non-restricted state that posts a role open to applicants in California, Illinois, and New York must apply the most restrictive applicable standard or maintain jurisdiction-specific intake protocols. Failure to do so exposes the employer to claims under each applicable statute.

Third-party recruiters: Staffing agencies and executive search firms act as agents of the employer under most state statutes, meaning salary history inquiries made by a recruiter on behalf of a client employer may be attributed to that employer for enforcement purposes. This intersects with standards governing executive and senior-level hiring and seasonal and temporary worker hiring, where third-party intermediaries are common.

Internal transfers and promotions: Some statutes apply only to external applicants; others extend to internal candidates moving into new roles. California's Labor Code § 432.3 covers applicants for employment, and guidance from the California Department of Industrial Relations confirms internal applicants are included.

Federal contractors: The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) has issued guidance tying pay equity analysis to contractor compliance reviews. Federal contractors navigating hiring standards for federal contractors should integrate salary history restriction compliance into their broader affirmative action program reviews.

Decision boundaries

Determining whether a salary history restriction applies to a given hire involves four sequential assessments:

  1. Jurisdiction identification — Establish every state and municipality that may claim jurisdiction based on the applicant's location, the role's work location, or the employer's place of business.
  2. Statute type classification — Determine whether each applicable jurisdiction enforces an inquiry ban, a reliance ban, or both.
  3. Employer size thresholds — Certain statutes exempt employers below a headcount threshold (e.g., employers with fewer than 4 employees under some municipal codes). Verify the precise threshold against the current statutory text.
  4. Role type carve-outs — Some statutes exempt internal applicants, rehires, or roles governed by a collective bargaining agreement with a fixed pay scale.

Where restrictions apply, compensation-setting methodology shifts entirely to job analysis and market data. The relationship between job analysis outputs and lawful pay-band construction is addressed under job analysis and hiring standards and minimum qualifications in hiring. Salary history restrictions also intersect with adverse impact analysis: if pay-band anchoring still produces demographically skewed offers, the employer may face liability under disparate impact theories addressed at adverse impact and hiring standards.

For employers conducting a broad compliance review across all pre-offer requirements — including background check standards, pre-employment testing standards, and credit check standards in hiring — salary history inquiry compliance should be integrated into a consolidated intake-process audit rather than managed as an isolated policy. The full scope of hiring-related compliance obligations is referenced at the hiring standards home.

References

📜 3 regulatory citations referenced  ·  🔍 Monitored by ANA Regulatory Watch  ·  View update log

Explore This Site

Services & Options Key Dimensions and Scopes of Hiring Standards FAQ Hiring Standards: Frequently Asked Questions Overview Hiring Standards: What It Is and Why It Matters