The question of whether or not to include salary ranges on public job postings is age-old, with well-reasoned arguments both for and against. Legislation has settled the debate in 11 states and counting with pay transparency requirements specifically for external job postings.  Many employers in the remaining 39 states still wrestle with this question, trying to balance pros and cons while at the same time striving to achieve the primary goal of attracting qualified talent to the organization. Increasingly, though, job seekers themselves may be influencing this decision. 

Employers have often approached pay range disclosure cautiously, in part because compensation structures can vary significantly across tenure, hiring periods, and market conditions. In some organizations, long-tenured employees may be compensated differently than more recently hired employees due to factors such as annual increase limitations, market adjustments, or evolving labor market conditions. As a result, posted salary ranges can prompt employees to compare their compensation to current market rates or to colleagues in similar roles, leading to questions about internal pay alignment and equity.

Another common argument against disclosing pay is that applicants, equipped with knowledge of the range, may gravitate toward the top in their salary demands, regardless of corresponding qualifications.  Ultimately, that may lead to difficulty for employers in negotiating compensation across the full pay range, resulting in increased costs and unintended consequences like wage compression and “red-circling”, making future salary adjustments challenging.    

On the other hand, withholding pay information on postings has its own consequences, one of which is that qualified candidates may choose not to apply at all. A recent Monster survey found that 60% of respondents reported that they would not apply to a position that did not disclose the salary range. A common complaint among hiring managers is a lack of qualified applicants, yet the omission of pay information may be a key culprit in underwhelming posting responses.    

Even when opting to post salaries, employers should also be aware of the effect how the post may be perceived by potential applicants.  A recently noted trend is to post broad ranges that include low and high outliers, perhaps in an effort to mask the “true” range for reasons mentioned above. But a 2026 Cornell study found that wide pay ranges in job postings could deter women from applying, in part because of their tendency for higher risk aversion and a belief that more assertive negotiation will be necessary in order to achieve compensation at the higher end of the range.   

Another argument for including pay information is that it helps candidates determine if they are a good fit for the role.  One currently earning $80,000 per year will likely not apply for a position paying advertised to pay $50,000. Equipping candidates with information that will help them “self-select” out of the process can save significant time for both employers and candidates.    

For employers, there is often no single best answer.  Ultimately, they will need to balance posting efficacy with the associated risks. There are some approaches that help maximize the draw to the available applicant pool while at the same time reducing exposure.

Consider the following practices: 

• View posting pay as a competitive differentiator and post whenever feasible. A 2025 Indeed Hiring Lab study found that 68% of postings included pay information, so not including it may place employers at a disadvantage in attracting candidates who increasingly expect compensation transparency early in the hiring process.  
• Make targeted decisions about when and when not to post, acknowledging candidate preferences for transparency.
• Keep current on local and state-level pay transparency laws, particularly if you have employees in multiple states or who are working remotely. 
• Identify position categories where pay rates can “safely” be posted, such as hourly roles, where starting pay and subsequent progression is more often anchored in time-in-position.
• Disclose non-salary compensation such as health insurance eligibility, 401(k) employer matches, bonus percentages, and holiday allotment.  Highlight benefits that would be seen as attractive to candidates, such as tuition reimbursement or paid time off to volunteer.
• Train recruitment staff on how to handle corporate policies related to pay in postings and interview conversations.
• Finally, revisit the organization’s compensation structure. If you are unsure about the competitiveness of your pay rates or don’t have a defined process for setting and approving pay levels, a deeper evaluation is likely needed. 

Sources: APA PsycNet; HR Drive; Indeed; LinkedIn; Monster.com

Dan Van Slamrook leads ASE’s Staffing Services.  For more information about how ASE can help with your hiring needs, click here.