San Francisco Bans Employers From Asking Job Applicants About Salary History, 26 States Considering Similar Legislation
Time 2 Minute Read

San Francisco is the latest jurisdiction to pass a law that prohibits employers from inquiring about prior salary history during hiring. New York City, Boston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and New Orleans already have similar laws, and in a concerning trend for employers, 26 states are currently considering such legislation.

The San Francisco city ordinance went into effect on July 1, 2017, and restricts employers from (1) considering an applicant’s salary history in determining whether to make an offer of employment or the amount of salary to offer; (2) inquiring about salary history; (3) retaliating against an applicant that declines to provide salary history; and (4) releasing a current or former employee’s salary history to a prospective employer without written authorization. Notably, the restrictions in the San Francisco ordinance, like similar laws in New York City and New Orleans, prohibit an employer from conducting a search of publicly available records to obtain salary history information.

Importantly, these laws do permit employers to (1) consider an applicant’s salary history if the applicant voluntarily discloses such information and (2) discuss an applicant’s salary expectations as it relates to their current employment, including unvested equity, deferred compensation or a bonus that an applicant would lose by virtue of leaving current employment.

Laws prohibiting employers from asking about salary history are aimed at reducing the gender pay gap, with hopes of encouraging employers to determine salary based on other factors, such as merit, experience and the market, rather than perpetuate pay disparities by paying an applicant based on past compensation.

To ensure compliance and get ahead of this latest “pay equity” trend, employers should consult with counsel to carefully assess their hiring process and evaluate how new salary history legislation may impact their business.

  • Partner

    Amber’s national practice assists clients with traditional labor relations and litigation, employment advice and counseling, and complex employment litigation. Amber is Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by the Texas ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 2 Minute Read

California has introduced Assembly Bill 2244, proposing a pioneering “California Certified” labeling standard for foods not classified as ultra-processed. The bill relies on forthcoming regulatory definitions and imposes retail placement requirements for qualifying products. As California continues to advance UPF regulation, this initiative is expected to shape food law trends nationwide.

Time 1 Minute Read

As reported on the Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives blog, SB 574 is a California bill that would set specific duties for attorneys who use generative artificial intelligence and would restrict how arbitrators may use such tools in decision-making.

Time 1 Minute Read

The California Consumer Privacy Act continues to drive significant enforcement activity—particularly when minors’ data is involved. In a recent action, the California Privacy Protection Agency imposed a $1.1 million fine on youth sports platform PlayOn Sports for alleged violations involving student data and inadequate opt-out mechanisms. The case highlights growing regulatory scrutiny around how companies collect, share, and provide transparency about personal information—especially when schools and students are involved. 

Time 2 Minute Read

On March 3, 2026, the CalPrivacy announced its first enforcement action involving student privacy, requiring PlayOn Sports to pay a $1.10 million fine for alleged violations of the CCPA’s opt-out rights and requirements.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page