Company asked me to bring pay stub to interview..

Mishra

Just to add to the field of data... I've also never been asked to provide a pay stub.

RobertKaucher

A company can ask you to provide any information that they wish so long as it is not regarding a protected class (religion, age, gender, etc). This is not an uncommon request for a potential employer to make.

There are a couple of things that I would point out.

1. Providing a company with falsified documents for employment is grounds for dismissal if discovered. The risk of doing this is not worth the potential gain. If you do this for a job that requires a security clearance... you're gonna' have a bad time.

2. The information that it gives the potential employer should not in any way change how you negotiate for your salary. At the most it may act as an initial anchor for the offer, but if you know how to negotiate salary it should not harm your ability to get the desired range you want.

No one is saying you have to accept the job. If they are not willing to pay you what you believe you are worth, then you don't want to work for them any way.

And for those who feel this is some sort of invasion of privacy, what in all honesty does this change? Can you explain why this is a deal breaker for you guys?

AwesomeGarrett

The reason I would not go along with it because its just an interview. If they made an offer and we are moving forward I'd be OK with it. If we have not gotten to a technical interview and they are asking for this information already, I'm not OK with that.

Mostly because I don't have to provide it. Isn't that why I signed away most of my rights for the background check?

Plantwiz

At this point in time, a request such as the above would be a deal breaker for me simply because it is an integrity issue. If they cannot believe that I am working or where I have worked, my paystub (if I were provided one) has nothing to do with the hiring process, but it says a lot to me about them. I suppose my counter may be, "sure, may I have the pay scale for the type of position I am looking to accept along with the past payroll for current and former employees in similar and supporting roles for that position, just to know that you pay what you say you'll pay?"

It is interesting to me about those who would provide this without too much hesitation. Gives me something to think about!


Just saying, I'm not for it, but it is not because of paranoia. It's an integrity issue. If I cannot believe you and you cannot believe me, then we should not have a relationship.

However, this makes me wonder how many folks have already been fraudulent in their claims forcing larger companies to take this route as a means to weed out people??

RobertKaucher

AwesomeGarrett wrote: »

Mostly because I don't have to provide it. Isn't that why I signed away most of my rights for the background check?

That just doesn't seem like a reason to completely disqualify an employer to me. Don't get me wrong. I certainly would consider this a red flag and it would make me start to ask very specific questions regarding how and what they value in their employees and how they express this in the company culture. I have been burnt in the past by taking 'that job I never should have taken'. So I know where you are coming from, but I don't see why that request by itself would be enough to make you make you give up on the employer. A refusal to do as asked and then expecting the process to go on would just set an oppositional tone, so I am kind of assuming you'd just cut the entire process off. Is that incorrect?

Just trying to get to the heart of the matter...

GoodBishop

I think what's really important is to know what you're worth in the marketplace, and don't accept less than that (and make sure they are aware of what you're worth - directly or indirectly).

I once turned down an offer for sr. security engineer and a sizable bump in pay because I knew that I was worth more - and a month later, I got a job that met what I was worth.

For this situation, for your interview, I would bring a blacked out copy of your paystub, and a actual copy of your paystub, but only give them the blacked out copy. Have the full version in your back pocket, but even then, you should be able to negotiate based on what you're worth, not on your prior history. If they insist on the full version, ask them why. If they have a good reason, then that's fine. If you detect some shadyness like they are going to base their offer on your prior salary, don't even negotiate from there.

Also, focus on showing that you're a great fit and can do awesome things for them first, then talk salary. Unless of course you think they'll lowball you so low that it's not worth even having a conversation.

Gorby

Thanks for the responses guys I'm in suprised to read that there are such differing opinions about this. I was feeling as though it was underhanded move to pay only slightly above what I make and don't feel comfortable bringing in a paystub when I didn't even get a potential offer. I was also worried about going to a bad enviroment and being burned like RobertKaucher said by "taking that job I never should have taken. I'm currently in that position with my current job actually so I'm trying to make sure I find a good culture most importantly but a good long term opportunity as well.

I confirmed the interview for Monday but I asked the manager about the policy and why he needed it. He stated that HR uses the stub for employment & salary verification and to negotiate a fair rate...which sounded like lowball to me. After going over the roles and responsibilities we discussed what I was looking for and he didn't seems to object to me request, so we will see on Monday what happens.

For those who did give the employer thier pay stub information, did the employer try to lowball you by only giving a small increase above your current salary?

lol on photoshopping a paystub..the job isn't a clearance job so I could....

Plantwiz

lol on photoshopping a paystub..the job isn't a clearance job so I could....

I trust you meant this as a joke, but NEVER lie or deceive for a job...it WILL bite you down the road.
(I worked with a guy who was a 'dork' (lack of better term) and he left to accept a new job. Failed to disclose that his daughter called the police on him for 'child abuse' and that it was dropped. His new employer found out about this six months after he was working there and fired him for failing to disclose he was arrested. Didn't matter that the situation was false, nor that he never was charged, but the fact that he never admitted it forced him to be fired).

petedude

networker050184 wrote: »

From my understanding this is simply an HR requirement for employment verification and has little to nothing to do with the pay band for the position you are applying to. I think people here get a little too paranoid that people are out to screw them.

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean the guys in black suits aren't circling your house! :: chuckle ::

I've heard of companies asking for this. I think it's not so much to "screw" anyone as it is to establish a more literal baseline for negotiation. This way, they have proof of how much you're making and it sets up a verifiable starting point (or rules a candidate out based on salary). With your paystub, they know how much is the probable minimum you (or most folks in your situation) will accept. If they want you badly, then can figure out what to offer. If they want to lowball, the paystub helps them guess how much less they can "get away with". Having the paystub also lets them figure out if there are any immediate cash perks, bonuses or reimbursements you're receiving and how much health insurance is costing you.

I'll add my two cents-- if you like the company/job/whatever, play along. If not, say thanks and move on.

Gorby

Plantwiz wrote: »

I trust you meant this as a joke, but NEVER lie or deceive for a job...it WILL bite you down the road.
(I worked with a guy who was a 'dork' (lack of better term) and he left to accept a new job. Failed to disclose that his daughter called the police on him for 'child abuse' and that it was dropped. His new employer found out about this six months after he was working there and fired him for failing to disclose he was arrested. Didn't matter that the situation was false, nor that he never was charged, but the fact that he never admitted it forced him to be fired).

I was a joke, I would never do that and risk being fired. I was just imagining bring a fake stub to the interview with 20K more..lol.

Danielm7

Gorby wrote: »

I confirmed the interview for Monday but I asked the manager about the policy and why he needed it. He stated that HR uses the stub for employment & salary verification and to negotiate a fair rate...which sounded like lowball to me.

Yep, and there you go. I don't see how proving your last income has anything to do with "a fair rate." In my mind fair rate is what your market value is, what the business has the budget for and how much they'll value you as an employee. Not 2K more than your last job.

Gorby

REMOVED UNNECESSARY QUOTED REPLY FROM PREVIOUS POST

That's what I'm afraid of...if they offer me only 2K more and waste my time going to the interview. Even though there's more to it then money, I still think it would be an insult to just look at my current income and just use that instead of the market value, experience and certifications. I will find out Monday..

clouder

Good luck! Worst case scenario is you just get some interview practice, which is never bad.

jibbajabba

If a company insists, I would potentially say the same I do with references ... "Will provide upon offer" ...

You also get contracts based on passing background checks so may as well do the same with things like pay stubs.

Gorby wrote: »

I was a joke,

Don't be too hard on yourself

networker050184

Gorby wrote: »

For those who did give the employer thier pay stub information, did the employer try to lowball you by only giving a small increase above your current salary?

Nope, I've had to give a pay stub for pretty much every job I've had and always had nice bumps in pay. As I said almost double my salary once. Maybe it is just an industry thing. I've worked mostly for large service providers and it's pretty standard operating procedure.

kohr-ah

Gorby wrote: »

For those who did give the employer thier pay stub information, did the employer try to lowball you by only giving a small increase above your current salary?

Nope. I have had to give mine in this current job and the new one I am starting. I received a good increase for my current one and this new one even better. Actually got way more than I thought I was going to.

srabiee

Plantwiz wrote: »

I trust you meant this as a joke, but NEVER lie or deceive for a job...it WILL bite you down the road.
(I worked with a guy who was a 'dork' (lack of better term) and he left to accept a new job. Failed to disclose that his daughter called the police on him for 'child abuse' and that it was dropped. His new employer found out about this six months after he was working there and fired him for failing to disclose he was arrested. Didn't matter that the situation was false, nor that he never was charged, but the fact that he never admitted it forced him to be fired).

Wait....what? If the charges were dropped, then he doesn't have a criminal record. He should NOT have to report such an incident.

Think of it this way. Let's say a minority was tackled by police, roughed up, and arrested for burglary. It was later found that it was a case of mistaken identity (happens all the time) and the felony charges were dropped. Should he have to report that incident to employers? NO!

A university student falsely accused and arrested on r@pe charges (there have been several in the news in the past few years). Police and prosecutor later find that the "victim" fabricated the story. Charges are dropped. Should that student then have to tell all future employers "I was arrested for r@pe once but the charges were dropped."

.......... c'mon.

If what you are saying is true and they fired the 'dork' guy for an incident related to dropped charges, he has definite grounds to sue them.

I'm a civil libertarian and personal privacy is extremely important to me. I wouldn't stand for this type of thing.

goldenlight

Any employer that ask for a pay stub is an automatic flag.. Personally I would bail..

LarryDaMan

srabiee wrote: »

Wait....what? If the charges were dropped, then he doesn't have a criminal record. He should NOT have to report such an incident. Think of it this way. Let's say a minority was tackled by police, roughed up, and arrested for burglary. It was later found that it was a case of mistaken identity (happens all the time) and the felony charges were dropped. Should he have to report that incident to employers? NO! A university student falsely accused and arrested on r@pe charges (there have been several in the news in the past few years). Police and prosecutor later find that the "victim" fabricated the story. Charges are dropped. Should that student then have to tell all future employers "I was arrested for r@pe once but the charges were dropped." .......... c'mon. If what you are saying is true and they fired the 'dork' guy for an incident related to dropped charges, he has definite grounds to sue them. I'm a civil libertarian and personal privacy is extremely important to me. I wouldn't stand for this type of thing.

Hey civil libertarian, you are missing the point. He got fired for non-disclosure, not the incident itself. Some positions (especially ones requiring a security clearance) require disclosure of all arrests even if charges have been acquitted, dropped, or expunged. This does not mean that they can or will hold it against you necessarily, but it allows the company to know and to evaluate. This isn't a privacy issue. These are public records. Charges sometimes get dropped because the defendant refused to participate in prosecution or charges can get dropped because of a procedural or paperwork issues. Just because charges were dropped doesn't automatically mean the person is innocent or trustworthy (maybe they are).

If you owned a company and had major potential liabilities, wouldn't you want to know?

jibbajabba

srabiee wrote: »

Wait....what? If the charges were dropped, then he doesn't have a criminal record. He should NOT have to report such an incident..

Indeed - otherwise imagine you just want to screw someone over - you could accuse someone of nonsense, just for the fun of it, making sure he can't get a job.

LarryDaMan wrote: »

require disclosure of all arrests even if charges have been acquitted, dropped, or expunged.

Oh boy - don't see that ever be abused

srabiee

LarryDaMan wrote: »

Hey civil libertarian, you are missing the point.

Thanks for being an ass when addressing my post, first of all.

LarryDaMan wrote: »

This does not mean that they can or will hold it against you necessarily, but it allows the company to know and to evaluate.

What fantasy land do you live in?

LarryDaMan wrote: »

Charges sometimes get dropped because the defendant refused to participate in prosecution or charges can get dropped because of a procedural or paperwork issues. Just because charges were dropped doesn't automatically mean the person is innocent or trustworthy (maybe they are).

Guilty until proven innocent, and even then, still sort of guilty....? Seems like your perception is skewed in the opposite direction as mine.

Let's just agree to disagree and move on with the topic.

networker050184

Let's keep it professional or don't post at all.

LarryDaMan

srabiee wrote: »

Thanks for being an ass when addressing my post, first of all.

Wasn't meaning to be an ass, was just playing devil's advocate. I can see it both ways. As person charged but not convicted, it would seem unfair. As a business owner with major responsibilities/potential liabilities, I'd want to know if someone has an arrest history. These things are public records, and can easily be found through a simple background check anyway.

srabiee

REMOVED UNNECESSARY QUOTED REPLY FROM PREVIOUS POST

In that case I apologize for my demeanor.

I can also see both sides as well. But I just can't imagine having to lose out on job opportunities and be perpetually "punished" for something related to a police mistake, false allegations, etc. I don't believe that an employer would be able to be unbiased in such situations, and I feel it would still always negatively affect the person. Once the allegations related to the dropped charges are brought up during the interview process, I feel it is human nature that the perception of the individual being interviewed would be negatively affected. This would be a real tragedy if the charges were related to something that the person had no involvement in and was truly innocent from the beginning. Having something like that loom over you and follow you from interview to interview would be a nightmare, and would potentially be detrimental to your entire life/career.

I guess the real question is the legality of such disclosure. I would imagine this varies between state to state, but admittedly I do not know. And as you mentioned before, security clearance adds another aspect to consider in this.

Gorby

Just to update, After HR told me they require to see my pay stub for "salary verification" I went ahead and showed them just to see what they would do. HR still wanted to lowball by offering only around $1500 above my current salary which isn't going to work with me. Counting on the longer commute and having to pay for my own parking, I didn't think it was worth the opportunity.

tjh87

Sorry it didn't work out. I really do think that whole situation was a little shady. The fact that they are trying to use your current salary to gauge your worth in a new position and new company is poor business in my opinion. If they don't know how to gauge the worth of the position and your worth, then it probably isn't a company I would want to work for anyway.

danny069

I would report that company, and tell others to stay away from them.

keenon

definitely pass the warning out. I would not even consider a job that wants a pay stub as i know its a low ball attempt in progress

srabiee

REMOVED UNNECESSARY QUOTED REPLY FROM PREVIOUS POST

Yep, same here. I wouldn't even agree to the interview if I found out they did something like that.

WafflesAndRootbeer

networker050184 wrote: »

From my understanding this is simply an HR requirement for employment verification and has little to nothing to do with the pay band for the position you are applying to. I think people here get a little too paranoid that people are out to screw them.

The standard procedure for employment verification is to contact the HR folks and officially inquire. They will confirm or deny employment and are forbidden from sharing any other information including salary except under certain circumstances.