The opening statement of the Competition Act states:
To provide for the establishment of a Competition Commission responsible for the investigation, control and evaluation of restrictive practices, abuse of dominant position, and mergers;
Restrictive and Abusive
Is Mitchell Restricting Worker Rights?
Mitchell is unresponsive to questions. Is this responsible conduct, should the public trust Nurturing Futures’ leadership?
Conventional legal advice is to ignore our questions as there simply are no answers to justify this conduct. Each recruitment firm using pay secrecy and demanding current wage information knows that what they are doing is unlawful, but the lack of law enforcement means they need fear no consequences.
Talk about power
The Competition Act describes consumers, owners (employers) and worker interests as equal. This means neither of the three market groups can dominate another, that their is a balance of power.
For example, workers cannot demand wages resulting in massive price increases for consumers as this could end the business. In the same way, employers and shareholders cannot force workers to accept low wages in order to maximise profits.
To be lawful, Nurturing Futures must compete fairly in markets yet they demand rival employer wage information from job seekers.
This confidential information places them at an unfair market advantage over both rival firms and candidates. The only party to benefit from such disclosures are the prospecting employers who can use the information to poach talent and price-fix wages.
When Nurturing Futures knows the compensation packages competitor firms offer, what will they do with it? After numerous emails and LinkedIn comments, she failed to respond.
If a CEO is unwilling to clarify her public conduct, does that suggest anything about her business ethics, acumen and the people she hires?
- ethics: that she has none?
- acumen: that her credentials are questionable and she lacks intellectual tenacity to substantiate her professional conduct in the public domain?
- her hires: willing to violate the law and be led by someone with the above traits?
Job Advert Pay Secrecy
Mitchell’s Nurturing Futures consistently adopts pay secrecy in recruitment adverts. Pay secrecy is when no salary ranges are included resulting in job applicants applying for positions without knowing how much is on offer and if the application is worth their while.
What do you think?
- Does Nurturing Futures restrict job seekers wage negotiation ability by demanding current wage information?
- Does Nurturing Futures restrict a fair competition for talent among firms when they spy on compensation packages without fear of reprisal?
- Do job applicants have the right to pursue better economic opportunity and higher pay? Must they be restricted?
- Is Nurturing Futures abusing their market position by forcing candidates to submit sensitive, competitive and confidential wage information that can be used against them in a breach of trust?
- Does Nurturing Futures abuse their market position by adopting pay secrecy in market signals (adverts) and extorting wage information from unwilling job seekers?