0:00

Today's

0:00

episode is brought to you by

0:02

Slack.

0:04

Welcome to scam this. New

0:07

York City became the latest job market

0:10

to introduce salary transparency,

0:13

and this could have big ripple effects

0:15

for job seekers and workers across

0:17

the country. We're breaking down

0:19

this new law and what it means for you

0:22

wherever you work. This new

0:24

transparency is going to make it that much

0:26

easier for job seekers to know that they are gonna

0:28

get paid their worth and to walk away

0:30

if they find out that, okay. I'm just not

0:32

in

0:32

their budget right now.

0:35

We've also got the context on the week's

0:38

other major headlines from this

0:40

print court signaling it might scrap

0:42

affirmative action. This

0:44

is going to be a decision that in some

0:46

way disrupts the former

0:48

president about being

0:51

able to consider rates and a holistic

0:53

process. To a wild

0:55

week for the federal reserve and

0:58

Twitter. And

1:00

to wrap things up, we're turning the mic

1:02

over to you to hear what's on your

1:04

mind ahead of election day.

1:07

We are here to make you smarter, and the news

1:10

less overwhelming. I'm Alex

1:12

Carr. Let's skim this.

1:18

Let's start with some headlines from

1:20

the week's news and give you

1:22

some context on why they matter.

1:25

First up, the Fed has announced

1:28

yet another interest rate hike.

1:30

Okay? But you also saw the

1:32

Fed you're seeing a bit of a slowdown, maybe

1:34

down the road. If this feels a little bit like

1:36

deja vu to you, guess what it is.

1:39

That's right. On Wednesday, the Fed

1:41

raised interest rates by point seventy

1:43

five percent for the fourth time this

1:45

year, marking the sixth

1:47

time they've raised rates in twenty twenty

1:49

two. Reminder, this

1:52

is all a part of their ongoing effort

1:54

to curb a sky high inflation rate

1:56

in the US. We is currently

1:58

hovering around eight point

1:59

two percent.

2:01

We know what you're thinking. When is

2:03

enough gonna be enough? and

2:06

the Fed knows it too. On

2:08

Wednesday, Fed Chair Jerome Powell emphasized

2:10

he's aware that it's gonna take a while

2:12

before prices actually start to come down,

2:15

but that the group has a job to do,

2:18

and they'll keep rates till it's

2:20

done. And

2:22

we should point out, one sector

2:24

has been hit extra hard by the Fed's

2:26

rate hikes. The housing industry For

2:29

context, housing has traditionally

2:32

been a pretty volatile sector. But

2:34

right now, it seems to be bearing

2:36

the brunt of a slowing economy. Home

2:39

sales have dropped almost twenty percent

2:42

from last year, and home prices

2:44

aren't going up, which is bad news

2:46

for sellers. And

2:49

for buyers, mortgage rates hit seven

2:51

percent for the first time in twenty

2:53

years. So buying is

2:55

actually way less affordable.

2:59

builders seeing that drop in demand

3:01

are just building less supply.

3:04

So for a lot of us, that dream

3:07

home or even a starter

3:09

home is out of reach for now.

3:14

For our next headline, an update

3:16

on the home invasion targeting house speaker

3:19

Nancy Pelosi. So according

3:21

to authorities, a man accused of breaking into

3:23

her home and attacking her husband, wanted

3:25

to interrogate Nancy

3:26

Pelosi, believing she was telling

3:29

lies. Nancy

3:30

Pelosi's husband, Paul Pelosi,

3:32

remains an intense of care

3:34

after a home intruder him with

3:36

a hammer last week in San Francisco.

3:39

The intruder, a forty two year old

3:41

man, entered Pelosi's home with

3:43

the intention of kidnapping and violently

3:45

assaulting the speaker and said he was

3:48

on a suicide mission. The

3:50

man also named several other targets,

3:53

including prominent state and federal

3:55

politicians and their families.

3:58

US security cameras actually

4:01

the break but nobody was

4:03

monitoring them at the time. The

4:06

Department of has charged Pelosi

4:08

and Truter with attempted homicide, attempted

4:10

kidnapping of a federal official, and

4:13

assault. He's facing

4:15

more felony charges at the state level

4:17

and is currently being held without

4:19

bail. This attack

4:21

has also reignited concerns about

4:23

political violence and lawmaker's safety.

4:26

And law enforcement leaders on Capitol Hill

4:28

said this week they're looking to beef

4:30

up protections for members of Congress as a

4:32

result. The capital

4:34

police said that threats against election

4:36

officials went up one hundred and seven

4:38

percent between twenty twenty and twenty

4:40

twenty one. And they've also said

4:42

that they're expecting that number to increase

4:45

even more by the end of this year.

4:48

This renewed focus on security also

4:50

comes just days before the midterm

4:52

elections. And the

4:54

FBI, the Department of Homeland Security,

4:57

and the National Counterterrorism Center

4:59

all issued bulletins last week, saying

5:02

they're expecting more political violence

5:04

around election day. In

5:06

a speech Wednesday, president Biden

5:08

weighed in, warning This

5:10

violence against Democrats,

5:13

republicans, and non partisan

5:15

officials just doing their

5:17

jobs are the consequence

5:20

of lies, toll for power

5:22

and profit We have

5:24

to confront those lies

5:25

with the truth. The

5:27

very future of our nation depends on

5:30

it. We must with

5:32

one overwhelming unified

5:34

voice speak

5:36

as a country and say

5:38

there's no place, no place

5:40

for voter intimidation or political

5:43

violence in America.

5:45

For

5:46

our final headline, we're checking in

5:48

on how things are going at Twitter

5:50

because it's been a very

5:52

eventful week. Elon Musk

5:54

is officially taking control of

5:56

Twitter completing his forty four billion

5:58

dollar takeover of the social media

5:59

giant. Elon Musk has arrived at

6:02

Twitter San Francisco Office says the

6:04

top advertising firm is

6:06

pausing all of its ads on

6:08

Twitter.

6:08

Elon Musk, the new owner of Twitter used

6:10

his newly acquired company today to tweet

6:12

some questionable content. That has

6:14

some wondering what the future holds for

6:16

the social media platform. Last

6:19

week, Elon Musk and Twitter officially

6:22

sealed the deal. And Musk

6:24

first entered the Twitter office's holding

6:26

an actual sync. As

6:28

in, let that sync in that I'm

6:30

in charge now. I guess we've

6:32

got to admire the dedication to the none,

6:35

but I'm still kind of cringing. Musk

6:38

also updated his Twitter bio to

6:40

chief Twitter and started starring up

6:42

controversy in media Italy. Within

6:45

the first few hours of his takeover,

6:47

top executives were fired. The stock

6:49

was delisted from public exchanges,

6:52

and Musk actually does solved the company's

6:54

board, making him the sole

6:56

director. He has now reportedly

6:59

been working on plans to lay off twenty

7:01

five percent of the company. That's

7:03

an estimated seven thousand employees

7:05

in the coming days. Besides

7:07

the impact of Twitter's work for, The

7:09

chief Twitter is also influencing what

7:11

content circulates on the platform.

7:14

Moscow said he wanted to focus more on

7:16

free speech and content deregulation. As

7:19

for how that's working out so far,

7:22

well, researchers found a quote,

7:24

immediate, visible, and measurable

7:26

spike in hate speech on the platform in

7:29

past few days alone. And

7:31

Musk also spread questionable content

7:33

in his own feed over the weekend,

7:35

tweeting out misinformation related to the

7:37

attack on Paul

7:38

Pelosi.

7:40

Musk also has other changes

7:42

in store, including reportedly bringing

7:45

back wine. which for the kids listening

7:47

is kind of like the

7:48

OG TikTok. And

7:50

he also wants to start charging people

7:52

to have a verified Twitter account.

7:56

Hang for that blue check mark sounds

7:58

like NBD but some

7:59

experts say it could lead to more

8:02

impersonations or misinformation on

8:04

the platform.

8:24

This

8:24

week, the Supreme Court heard

8:26

two landmark cases that involve

8:29

affirmative action in higher education.

8:31

For decades, US colleges

8:34

and universities have been legally

8:36

allowed to consider an applicant's race as

8:38

part of the admissions process.

8:40

which has helped ensure more diversity on campuses,

8:43

but that could be changing soon.

8:47

Because based on everything we heard

8:49

from the justices this week, it

8:51

seems like Scottus could rule

8:53

against colleges and universities considering

8:55

race and admissions. and

8:57

overturned precedent that's been part of

8:59

American life for years.

9:01

We probably won't get their official

9:04

ruling until next summer, but

9:06

we were able to learn a lot about how

9:08

this new court is thinking about the

9:10

law.

9:10

To help

9:12

break down some of the legalese And

9:14

the potential ripple effects, we

9:16

called up Sima Mohopatra. She's

9:19

the MD Anderson Foundation, endowed

9:21

professor in health law at Southern

9:23

Methodist University. city.

9:27

Seema,

9:29

can you skim the two cases for

9:31

me that were talking about? I think there's one

9:34

involving UNC and then one

9:36

involving Harvard? Yes.

9:38

So both of the cases were brought by

9:40

a group called students for

9:41

Fair admissions trends. We will hear argument

9:44

first this morning in case twenty 1707

9:47

students for fair admissions versus the

9:49

University of North Carolina. And

9:50

now against UNC, what

9:53

they say is that UNC's admissions

9:55

policies because they consider

9:57

race in their admissions that

9:59

this violates the equal protection

10:01

clause of the fourteenth amendment.

10:03

And they argue that

10:05

UNC can have a diverseoon

10:07

body without considering race

10:09

at all. against Harvard, the

10:11

group is challenging Harvard's

10:13

admissions policies and saying that

10:15

it violates Title VI of the

10:17

Civil Rights Act, which

10:19

basically bars entities that receive

10:21

any kind of federal funding from discriminating on

10:23

the basis of race. And they say

10:26

that because Harvard's admissions policies

10:29

have Asian American applicants

10:31

less likely to be admitted than

10:33

those from other races. they

10:35

say that violates Title VI.

10:38

Both of these cases were

10:41

lost by the student's prepared missions

10:43

and the federal courts and the lower ports

10:46

rejected the

10:46

group's arguments,

10:47

but the fact that the supreme

10:50

court even took these cases

10:52

signaled that the supreme was ready to

10:54

make a change in affirmative

10:56

action policy. And so

10:59

we have had these kinds of

11:01

policies since two

11:03

thousand three, there was a case called

11:05

the Bruder case, and

11:07

that was when the Supreme Court

11:09

first said that University of Michigan

11:11

law school could consider a race in

11:13

its admissions process. And

11:16

the majority opinion there was written

11:18

by Justice O'Connor, and she

11:20

said that in twenty five years,

11:22

that's not gonna be needed anymore,

11:24

which twenty five years from two thousand

11:26

three is twenty twenty eight. but

11:29

it looks like the justices might

11:31

want to roll this

11:33

back even before twenty twenty

11:35

eight. I'm curious

11:37

what stood out to you in oral

11:39

arguments and if you heard

11:41

anything surprising from the justices.

11:44

I don't know if it was surprising. It

11:46

was what I expected in

11:48

terms of the conservative justices

11:50

on the court. seemingly

11:52

skeptical about affirmative

11:54

action. Just as Thomas

11:56

asked a couple of times what

11:59

diversity means.

11:59

I've heard the word diversity

12:02

quite a few times, and I don't have a clue

12:04

what it means. It

12:06

seems to mean everything

12:08

for everyone. and

12:10

we had a lot of the conservative

12:12

justices basically

12:15

questioning how entities of

12:17

higher education, like universities, how

12:19

they consider race

12:21

and how long they're going to be considering race

12:23

as part of their admissions process. And

12:25

the reason that they kept asking about

12:27

diversity is because that's what the president

12:29

of the Supreme Court is that

12:32

you can consider race

12:34

as one part of a holistic process

12:36

in order to achieve diversity.

12:40

And the liberal justices in

12:42

the court, I thought the best argument

12:44

that was made THERE WAS BY

12:47

JUSTICE JACKSON. Reporter: THERE ARE forty

12:49

FACTORS ABOUT ALL SORT OF THINGS

12:51

THAT THE ADMISSIONS OFFICE IS

12:53

LOOKING AT AND YOU HAVEN'T demonstrated

12:55

or shown one situation in

12:58

which all they look at is race. And

13:00

she basically had a very

13:02

I think, telling hypothetical So let me ask

13:04

you another question because I take it that

13:05

your position is that UNC

13:08

is allowed to consider

13:11

other non race based

13:13

personal characteristics of individual

13:15

applicants. She

13:15

said, well, if we have a student

13:17

that had, like, five generations of

13:21

family members that attended

13:23

UNC and says UNC is really

13:25

an important part of my identity.

13:27

That would be okay under

13:29

the position of students for fair admissions,

13:32

but it wouldn't be okay for a

13:34

black student to say, I

13:36

am of fifth generation North

13:38

Carolina and And until

13:40

recently, my relatives were

13:42

not even able to attend

13:44

UNC because they were slaves.

13:46

her point was that we have

13:48

an equal protection problem

13:50

where one group that is

13:52

privileged with this legacy is able to

13:54

consider their background but one

13:56

group is not. And it

13:59

seems like in

13:59

particular, justices, Barrett,

14:02

Alito, Roberts, to a certain

14:04

extent, were repeatedly pushing

14:06

for asking the lawyers

14:08

about alternatives to

14:11

affirmative action. I think they reference

14:13

something called race neutral

14:14

alternatives. maybe there will be

14:16

an incentive for the university to in fact

14:18

truly pursue race neutral alternatives.

14:21

Right. I'm just making sure what qualifies

14:23

as race neutral in the first place? Was that

14:25

race neutral or not? Can

14:26

you kind of explain to me what that

14:28

back and forth was about and why

14:30

the conservative justices seem

14:32

so focused on it? The

14:33

conservative justices were trying to

14:36

suggest that there might be

14:38

ways to have a diverse student

14:40

body without considering

14:42

race. And so they

14:44

suggested perhaps looking at kind of

14:46

low income first generation

14:48

type of status looking at

14:50

providing

14:50

financial aid and that

14:53

this kind of being color

14:55

blind can still achieve

14:57

diversity. And so

14:59

I think that we can expect that

15:01

this is going to be a decision that

15:03

in some way disrupts the

15:05

former president about

15:07

being able to consider rates in

15:10

a holistic process as one

15:12

of the many factors.

15:16

what

15:17

are you taking away from how

15:20

this court views or

15:22

doesn't view precedent?

15:24

It

15:24

definitely seems that they are

15:26

not

15:27

looking at being

15:30

bound by their old

15:32

precedent,

15:32

which was probably

15:35

precedent that was created by a more

15:37

balanced court. And there

15:39

seems

15:39

to be a bold way of proceeding

15:42

with

15:42

overturning cases. And

15:45

really, starry desirces is a

15:48

concept. Courts are bound by their old

15:50

president, and that's how our legal system,

15:52

of common law system works, is that

15:54

the courts are interpreting their past

15:56

decisions, not making new law.

15:59

but it does

15:59

appear that the court is

16:02

making new law. We could have seen that in

16:04

the job's opinion, that basically

16:07

obliterated both Roe versus Wade

16:09

and Planned Parenthood versus KC,

16:11

and we will likely see

16:13

that now with an affirmative action.

16:18

My last question for you

16:21

is, what could be the wider

16:23

impacts of this decision? I'm

16:25

thinking about things like maybe workplace

16:27

diversity or other

16:29

precedents that could

16:30

potentially be revisited. I

16:33

think there's

16:33

a lot on the table

16:34

now. we see that

16:37

this court is skeptical

16:39

of the benefits of diversity,

16:41

frankly. You know, and that we need to even

16:43

name race. So I think in a lot

16:45

of jurisprudence where we have

16:48

race as an issue, including

16:50

kind of employment discrimination, I

16:52

think we really have a whole host of

16:55

cases and potential cases that could be

16:57

broad because right now it might

16:59

be kind of open season

17:01

on precedent. You know, we like to think of

17:03

law as stable and

17:05

having some sort of

17:07

logic and the constitution behind

17:09

it, this court makes me question

17:10

that a little bit.

17:14

Sima, thank

17:16

you so much. Thank

17:21

you

17:33

New

17:33

York City, one

17:34

of America's biggest job

17:37

markets just joined Colorado,

17:39

Nevada, Connecticut, and

17:41

Washington in implementing a law that

17:43

requires employers to

17:45

disclose how much they're willing to pay

17:47

for open positions. You've

17:49

probably heard people talking about

17:51

it as salary transparency.

17:54

And here's what this latest law means

17:56

for companies and workers.

17:57

Companies

18:01

that have at least four employees, one

18:03

of who must work in New York City, are

18:05

now required to share a good

18:07

faith pay range for job openings.

18:11

Roughly four million private sector

18:13

employees will reportedly be

18:15

affected. Since the law covers not

18:17

only full time employees, but

18:19

also part timers, contractors,

18:21

freelancers, and some remote

18:23

workers as well. And

18:25

there's a reason why this kind of legislation

18:27

has become more popular in

18:30

states. Lawmakers are often

18:32

interested in seeing policies around

18:34

paid transparency

18:34

reduce pay discrimination. So

18:37

sort of

18:38

having more eyes on the choices

18:40

that employers make is

18:43

intended to mitigate their

18:45

ability to pay unequal or

18:47

unjust wages, especially to women and

18:49

minorities. That's Zoe Collin.

18:52

One of two experts you'll be hearing

18:54

from on this topic. She's an

18:56

assistant professor at Harvard Business

18:58

School, and she's done research on the effects

19:00

of salary transparency in

19:02

the workplace. And like she just said, lawmakers

19:04

have been pushing for salary transparency

19:06

laws to help close pay

19:08

inequities.

19:09

You probably

19:12

don't need a reminder on this, but

19:14

people are not paid equally

19:16

at work. In twenty twenty, women earned

19:19

eighty four percent of what their male

19:21

colleagues did. For black

19:23

women, that number was even

19:25

lower. at fifty

19:26

eight percent.

19:28

So the

19:28

hope is that salary transparency

19:30

will level the playing field for disadvantaged

19:33

groups. and allow them to

19:35

demand the same pay as their white male

19:37

colleagues. It's expected

19:39

that people who discover

19:41

that they're underpaid go to the employer and

19:44

ask for a raise. This

19:46

information can be thought

19:48

of as a signal about what the

19:50

employer is willing to pay for the work

19:52

you're providing. And if you

19:54

knew that your employer were willing to pay a

19:56

higher price for the same work that you were

19:58

doing, for someone doing something very

20:00

similar, then that would give you an indication that if you asked for

20:02

more, probably that employer would

20:04

accept it before telling you to go and find

20:06

a different job.

20:08

And according to Colin,

20:10

the data backs that up.

20:12

Her research found that salary

20:14

transparency and job postings

20:16

can create better pay scenarios for

20:19

workers because it forces

20:21

businesses to become more competitive.

20:23

This paid transparency law looks close

20:26

to a paper I have about

20:28

salary benchmarks where

20:30

companies discover what it

20:32

is that other companies are actually

20:34

paying because the salary posting range is

20:36

basically making externally transparent

20:38

wages to new job applicants and

20:40

competing firms. And we do see that in those

20:42

cases, public external wage

20:44

information has had the

20:46

impact of pushing wages up

20:48

so creating more competitive pressure between

20:50

companies and also

20:53

equalizing wages of different employees

20:55

across firms.

20:57

So

20:58

this all sounds good for workers,

21:01

but how do businesses feel about

21:03

this? Well,

21:03

the conventional wisdom is that

21:06

companies want to keep their costs slow. And

21:07

without salary transparency, companies

21:10

can offer less money to job seekers from

21:12

the get go, or at least

21:14

not reveal their pay practices to

21:17

competitors. When salary

21:19

transparency is introduced, it can

21:21

force businesses to offer more money to

21:23

attract applicants. And

21:25

since the law went into effect

21:27

on Tuesday, some companies have basically

21:29

tried to do the bare minimum to

21:32

comply. For

21:34

example, The Wall Street Journal found that

21:36

the accounting and consulting firm price

21:39

waterhouseCoopers posted a job opening

21:41

with a salary range of one hundred and

21:43

fifty eight thousand dollars to four hundred

21:45

and thirty four thousand dollars. That's

21:47

just a casual two hundred

21:49

and seventy six thousand dollar

21:51

swing. And the

21:53

company can get away it because

21:55

the law only says that the estimate has

21:57

to be in good

21:59

faith. The law does not

22:01

provide guidelines for what the minimum has to be

22:03

and what the maximum has to be. in

22:05

reference to any other value. Now,

22:07

that means that employer could basically say

22:09

zero to infinity and give away no information

22:11

and be compliant with the law.

22:14

Other potential loopholes include using temporary

22:16

recruiters or

22:17

recruiting firms. And employers

22:19

can also avoid the law by simply

22:21

posting remote positions that

22:23

exclude New York City residents. That actually

22:26

happened in Colorado last year

22:28

after their paid transparency law went

22:30

into effect. But

22:33

for the most part, it seems like a lot

22:35

of businesses have started to

22:37

comply. Corporations like

22:39

JPMorgan Macy's and American Express

22:41

have all updated their job postings

22:43

to reflect realistic ish

22:45

salary ranges. And for

22:47

good reason, companies can face

22:49

up to a quarter million dollars in fines

22:51

if they don't. We'll

22:54

also point out Companies have already

22:57

started posting ranges for jobs

22:59

nationwide, not just in New

23:01

York City. Meaning, the ripple

23:03

effect of this one law in this

23:05

one place could be a lot

23:07

bigger. While

23:09

a lot of people have been focused on why

23:11

companies aren't fans of transparency,

23:13

There

23:13

are also major

23:15

benefits for businesses

23:17

too. Mandy Woodrow Santos is a

23:19

career coach and the host of the

23:21

podcast, Brown Envision. And

23:23

she told us that companies could see

23:25

higher employee satisfaction and

23:27

retention as a result of pay

23:29

transparency. When you see statistics

23:31

like ninety eight percent of

23:32

workers support salary

23:33

transparency, if you have

23:36

transparency around your pay within

23:38

your company, employers are gonna be a lot

23:40

happier to work for you. And

23:42

during a time when job seekers

23:44

have more choices than they've

23:46

ever had, do think that employers be thinking about how can we

23:48

retain our employees and maybe

23:50

salary transparency as one of those

23:52

ways. When I get excited

23:54

about especially as a former manager who saw

23:56

how sometimes randomly

23:58

companies would come up with

24:00

salary ranges for job

24:02

descriptions actually think there could be a cost

24:04

savings here if companies were forced

24:06

to put some thought, put

24:08

some data behind the salary

24:10

ranges for their roles and have it all

24:12

in one place so that

24:14

managers like me could feel confident

24:16

knowing that this is gonna be fair, it's gonna be

24:18

equitable, and there's a method to

24:19

the madness. Otherwise,

24:20

it can be really random.

24:24

So now

24:24

that we understand why this new

24:27

law is so busy. Let's talk about how you can

24:29

take advantage of salary transparency

24:31

to level up in your own

24:33

career. Starting with, if you're looking for

24:35

a job. you could actually

24:37

benefit from the new law firsthand. Before

24:40

it was this constant sense of when

24:42

do I ask about salary? If I ask about

24:44

salary too soon, will they be turned off

24:46

by me? What if I get to the end of

24:48

this interview process only to find out that

24:50

they are way, way, way, worth so

24:52

much more than what the job is willing to pay, and

24:55

then you feel like you've wasted your time.

24:57

This new transparency is going to make

24:59

it that much easier for job c to

25:01

know that they are gonna get paid their worth

25:03

and to walk away if they find out

25:05

that, okay, I'm just not in their budget right

25:07

now. Woodrow of

25:09

Santa's also reminded us that certain incentives aren't

25:11

included in the salary range and

25:13

that job seekers should feel empowered to

25:15

ask for more when it comes time to negotiate.

25:18

Don't let that range stop you

25:20

from asking for those additional benefits like your

25:23

signing bonuses, your equity, and

25:25

even other things like unlimited PTO

25:27

or additional days off, remote working privileges. As

25:30

for people looking to

25:32

get a promotion or a raise internally,

25:35

Woodrow of Santos says use the data

25:37

from the open job postings whether

25:39

they're at your own company or postings in

25:41

the wider market to drive that

25:44

conversation. Use this as a

25:46

jumping off point to have that conversation

25:48

with your manager and say, hi, I've

25:50

noticed that this job is listed at this

25:52

salary range. I am near the

25:54

bottom of that range now. What can I

25:56

do so that I can start working my way up to

25:58

the top of that range? And that's gonna

26:01

give you a nice little point of leverage

26:03

and even more than that, just an opening for a

26:05

conversation. And PS,

26:07

if you live somewhere without a salary

26:10

transparency law, you can still take advantage

26:12

of this. Look up similar

26:14

roles and states with salary transparency

26:16

to get an estimate of how much you're worth

26:18

in your position, and use those

26:20

numbers to give yourself an edge

26:22

when asking for a promotion or

26:25

entering negotiations.

26:30

So it's safe to say salary transparency

26:32

laws are changing the game for

26:34

workers and companies.

26:37

Between MIC's law, already being in and

26:40

California, AKA, the fifth largest

26:42

economy in the world, sent to have

26:44

salary transparency starting in

26:46

January. Experts say it's

26:48

pretty much guaranteed more states are going

26:50

to follow suit. And while

26:52

these laws have primarily addressed

26:54

open roles and job postings, Colin

26:57

told us there's another step lawmakers

26:59

or businesses could take.

27:02

Salary transparency

27:03

within organized stations, AKA

27:05

knowing how much your colleagues,

27:08

your boss, and your boss's boss

27:10

are paid. That's

27:12

a step some advocates are pushing

27:14

forward to close the pay gap, while

27:16

others believe that might be a

27:18

bridge too far and could create

27:20

an uncomfortable dynamic at

27:22

work. But regardless of whether or not

27:24

internal transparency is the next

27:27

frontier, what drove Santos says, we

27:29

can all contribute to creating

27:31

a more work environment,

27:33

something she's learned by doing.

27:35

It took me a year to close

27:37

a fifteen thousand dollar wage

27:39

gap between two women on my team, one white,

27:41

one black, and that was just me pushing.

27:44

Now, I'm not

27:44

saying that with one email,

27:47

you can change an entire company. But

27:49

I do think if you feel comfortable and

27:51

confident and you wanna share your

27:53

own story of how you're working

27:55

to make things your company, I

27:57

do think that you should take that

27:59

chance. Why

28:00

not? Here

28:06

at the

28:07

SCIM, Slack is our digital HQ.

28:10

It brings our teams

28:12

tools and ideas together in one digital

28:14

space. And its built in features

28:16

help us be more collaborative,

28:18

efficient, and innovative. Take

28:21

cuddles. start one

28:23

whenever we need to have a desk to desk

28:25

style convo while working in

28:27

different physical places. So we can

28:29

share our screens Top things out and

28:31

get on the same page faster.

28:33

Get started with your digital h

28:35

q at Slack dot com slash

28:37

DHQ That's

28:39

spelled SLACK dot com

28:42

slash DHQ Slack,

28:44

where the future works.

28:48

It's no

28:52

secret that the way we work has

28:54

changed a lot over the last

28:57

few years. For us at the SCIM,

28:59

it's meant adapting to a hybrid

29:01

setup and finding new ways to

29:03

communicate across different teams

29:05

and time zones. Through

29:07

it all, Slack has helped us

29:09

preserve our company culture and get

29:11

stuff done. We think of

29:13

it as our digital HQ. And

29:15

over the next few weeks, we're teaming up with Slack to

29:17

give you a peek behind the

29:20

curtain and share real stories from

29:22

real skim age

29:23

cures.

29:25

Last week, we told you about our skimmer

29:28

feedback channel, where we tell each

29:30

other about what we hear from you,

29:32

our audience. Today, welcome

29:34

to one of our newest Slack channels.

29:36

It's called People

29:38

Leaders, and it's

29:39

a private space for all of us managers

29:41

here at the Skin to get

29:43

company updates and talk leadership best

29:46

practices. And I'm getting Molly to

29:48

join me in a huddle to tell us why it's

29:50

been so important

29:51

for us. Hey,

29:53

Molly. First off,

29:55

can you just tell us who you are and

29:57

why we started this Slack channel?

29:59

Yes. I

29:59

am Molly Rosen. I'm the vice president

30:02

of

30:02

people, which is our word for

30:04

HR, essentially, here at the SCIM.

30:06

One of our goals this year

30:08

was to create a closer community

30:10

of people managers and provide opportunities

30:13

for them and us to connect and learn

30:15

from each other. And Slack is really the

30:17

only place where we can have all

30:19

of our, you know, forty plus people

30:21

managers engaging on a

30:23

regular basis. You know, I'm

30:24

actually more of a junior manager at this

30:27

company, and I definitely think that sometimes

30:29

it can feel uncomfortable maybe

30:31

ask a question about management

30:33

or managing styles in a

30:35

meeting or going over to someone and stopping

30:37

them in the office. And nice to just

30:40

have a formal company sanctioned

30:42

forum to be able to do that.

30:44

For sure. I mean, people management is

30:46

really hard. there are

30:47

skills that have to be learned, and

30:49

we felt this was an important addition

30:51

that provides that save

30:53

space to ask those honest questions and

30:56

discuss openly experiences and

30:58

challenges they're having maybe in

31:00

the moment.

31:00

I

31:03

actually talk to my own manager about this too.

31:06

Why it matters for us to have this space

31:08

and how we've been making use

31:10

of it?

31:10

I'm Gray Limbrish here. I lead the audio

31:13

team with the skin. I

31:14

think just honoring the fact that

31:16

as managers, we need a space to

31:18

talk to each other. to share

31:20

ideas, to all learn together is really

31:23

important.

31:23

And just acknowledging it with a Slack

31:25

channel is one great way to do

31:27

that. But it practically is

31:29

a really great space to be

31:31

able to see people in the company with whom

31:33

you have a lot in common. and talk

31:35

to them really easily, especially when we don't get

31:37

a ton of face to face time. We don't

31:39

have to have a workshop. We don't have to

31:41

have an off-site.

31:43

or even a special meeting in order to raise a

31:46

question or support one

31:48

another. It can be an everyday day

31:50

to

31:50

day occurrence. One thing that

31:52

stands out to me that was useful

31:55

was just I pinged a reminder

31:57

to everybody in the channel to follow-up on this

31:59

thing that we

31:59

had asked each other to do, which is update

32:02

our Slack profiles and remind our teams

32:04

to do that to include a lot of really

32:06

useful information, not just our name and

32:08

our title, but also

32:09

so a name pronouncing and our preferred

32:12

pronouns. Just kind of normalizing that

32:14

so that it is just

32:15

an easy calling

32:17

card to get to know folks and and people who do feel they need

32:19

to include a pronounceor or wanna include their

32:21

pronouns, don't feel like they're the

32:24

exception.

32:24

And this is very meta in that

32:26

Slack channel. Somebody screenshotted their

32:29

profile, shared it and was like, just like

32:31

this. So just a

32:32

reminder about something that was talked about got

32:35

shared,

32:35

and it's a really useful way to

32:37

share that kind of update.

32:38

I wanna ask

32:41

you both Molly and Graylyn, can

32:43

you tell me about a Slack feature you

32:45

can't live without?

32:46

I

32:47

think my favorite

32:50

is using the slackbot to

32:52

set a reminder to myself in a way of

32:54

almost marking a message as

32:56

unread, being able to remind myself

32:58

of a message that I might have seen and then know

33:00

I need to come back to. Super

33:02

helpful given the amount of messages I

33:04

get every day. besides

33:06

a guy

33:07

fierry emoji.

33:10

Honestly,

33:10

I think one of the best things

33:12

is searchability. So

33:14

being able to so easily be like, I

33:16

know we were talking about that one episode

33:19

from April. And I

33:21

know

33:21

that Alex sent a Slack about it.

33:23

I can, with a couple of clicks, pull up exactly

33:25

that conversation, be right there in a minute, and

33:27

jump back into it.

33:29

I love

33:29

it. Okay. Thanks everyone.

33:33

Next week, we're taking you to

33:35

a totally different corner of

33:37

our digital HQ. We are

33:39

talking to some of my colleagues on the editorial

33:42

team about how we come together on

33:44

Slack to write one of the hardest parts

33:46

of any web article. the

33:48

headline. Catch

33:49

you in the next huddle.

33:58

Whether

33:58

or not we've realized it,

33:59

politicians have had a huge impact on

34:02

our lives this year. In a

34:04

sweeping ruling that

34:04

overturned a half a century of

34:07

president five justices ended the right of American women to choose

34:09

abortion under the constitution. Happening right now,

34:11

the White House

34:12

has just unveiled a plan to how

34:15

people paying off their student loans.

34:18

The president has already approved a

34:20

major disaster declaration for Florida. And

34:22

today,

34:22

president Biden announced more military funding

34:25

for Ukraine. And

34:27

as Election Day

34:29

quickly approaches, we're making sure you have

34:31

all the tools you need to

34:33

vote with confidence. We're less

34:35

than one week out from

34:38

Election Day, and we wanted to

34:40

check-in on what you're thinking about as

34:42

you prepare to cast

34:44

your ballot. So today, we're gonna dive into some numbers

34:46

we got from a recent SCIM

34:48

audience survey. And we've

34:50

got some help from a data expert

34:52

and the author of the

34:54

survey at

34:54

SCIM HQ. My name

34:57

is Sophie Reese, and I am the

34:59

senior manager of consumer insights in UX

35:01

research here at the SCIM.

35:05

Sophie told us that ninety five

35:08

percent of the people who responded planned to

35:10

vote this year. But overall,

35:12

the vibes aren't

35:13

great. Skimmers on the

35:15

whole are really just satisfied

35:17

with the direction the

35:19

country is going in. they're

35:20

not happy because overall

35:22

things have gotten worse for

35:24

women.

35:24

And in general, the overarching

35:27

feeling is that

35:29

Personal safety is not that great. Right

35:32

now, economic security is hard to come

35:34

by. And there's a

35:35

larger sense that our representatives

35:38

are not really

35:39

sitting us anymore. In addition to

35:41

skimmers giving the government

35:43

low scores, Sophie also

35:44

told us that there's a growing number

35:47

of people who feel like neither party

35:49

really speaks to them. We're

35:51

seeing a

35:51

little bit more of a shift. There's been

35:53

an increase in the number of people who are

35:56

registered as independent and more millennial

35:58

women are not feeling

35:59

represented by

36:01

either party

36:03

and that

36:03

their electoral options

36:05

really are choosing the

36:07

lesser

36:07

of two evils. Really, they

36:10

wanna be looking at candidates

36:12

who have ideas

36:14

and platforms that isn't just

36:16

I wanna prevent something or

36:18

I'm here

36:19

for a single issue.

36:21

and

36:21

who really understand the

36:23

world that we

36:24

live in and the decisions that we

36:26

face as real women and

36:28

people with jobs and families and big concerns. But

36:32

that doesn't mean people are

36:33

staying home this November.

36:36

In fact, a lot of you called in to tell us what's motivating

36:38

you to cast your ballot. Like

36:43

Leslie from Texas, who brought up climate

36:45

change. Living in Central Texas a couple of

36:47

years ago, we lived through that freak

36:50

winter storm that ended up

36:52

killing texting, and

36:54

sparking a conversation about our grid, why our

36:57

equipment isn't weatherized, and of course, how

36:59

did a storm this severe even

37:01

head too hard area

37:04

anyway. Something that I really take

37:06

into heart as I approach

37:08

this upcoming election is what

37:10

are my local leaders doing to help

37:11

combat climate change? And do they even take

37:14

climate change seriously? Is

37:16

something that really does concern

37:19

me as I look towards starting a family and

37:21

what kind of plan I'm leaving

37:24

behind. Here's what Catelyn,

37:26

another

37:26

skimmer told

37:28

us. I am boating because

37:30

I am so upset with the

37:33

inflation, with

37:35

the spending with

37:37

the problems with the open

37:40

borders. We are facing

37:42

so many big problems in

37:45

our community. and seems like nobody is carrying,

37:47

so we need to vote.

37:49

We need to make our

37:51

voices work. And

37:54

here's what Jenny from Boston told us. In my area,

37:56

thankfully, people are really fired up

37:58

and ready to vote. Not only that,

38:02

people are fired up to participate and volunteer in

38:04

Canvas, and I'm seeing more energy

38:07

than ever before. I totally

38:10

understand why you might feel a

38:12

disaffected or even cynical about

38:14

voting. But I'd ask you to consider this.

38:16

Think about a loved one who would be negatively

38:18

impacted by your inaction,

38:20

by you not voting.

38:22

I'm just kind of

38:24

singing from the rooftops to

38:27

anyone who will listen to get everyone that they

38:29

know

38:29

out there to vote

38:32

as well.

38:34

So consider

38:34

this your official SCIM PSA to go

38:36

make your voice heard and get out

38:39

to vote. And if you or a

38:41

friend are looking for more resources

38:44

to study up ahead of election day. Head to the scheme dot

38:46

com slash midterms. We'll help you

38:48

build your ballot wherever you live.

38:53

Thanks for listening to Skim

38:55

this. This podcast was Scimby

38:57

Me, Alex Carr. along with

38:59

our producer, Will Livingston and our associate

39:02

producer, Blake Loomerwin. We

39:04

had additional help this week from Hannah Parker

39:07

and Alicia Key. This episode was engineered by

39:09

Ellie McPhehan and Andrew Callaway, and the Skim's head of

39:12

audio is Graelyn Brashear.

39:14

Skim this will be back in your feet again

39:16

next week.

39:18

Until then, check out the SCIM's other podcast.

39:20

It's called nine to five ish, and it's

39:22

where we talk all things career with our

39:24

founders Carly and Danielle. You

39:27

can find it wherever you're already listening to us.