Requesting copies of W-2 from a candidate before extending an offer

Seems a little hard core but, would think OK if voluntarily provided. I have heard of prospective employers asking for proof of current salary, rare but have heard of it. Although it was usually just a copy of a recent pay stub.

This company is too hung up on details from the past. The position should be focused on how the applicant can help the company in the future. Not a company I would want to work for.

I'm not sure how long you have been employed but providing copies of W-2s since you started employment seems inappropriate unless you somehow gave them salary information that is in conflict with the position. As a CFO and head of HR, I always decline to provide salary information to a employer who is inquiring about a current or past employee. I would offer to give them your most recent W-2 after receipt of the job offer.

I think this issue exposes a more important and (to me) undesirable position taken by employers looking to hire financial, IT, and administrative employees. The concept being presented by this type employer is that they want a person to fill a position just like the one they left doing the same thing that was done before, but I don't want them to get a raise. ??

This sort of cuts off right at the beginning of the job any efforts to improve the position and the pay. It is almost like asking the employer to provide a reference letter from the person previously doing the job inorder to see if the new job can be done at the rate you were previously being paid. What if the job is an "impossible" job without changes ??

On the other hand - what if the applicant wasn't worth what they were being paid previously, I think baseball teams would have a problem dealing with this approach.

Jim Finn

I also would not provide this type of information unless the company was willing to provide comments and references from the last 2 or 3 people who held the position. This even assumes the deal looked good enough to chase.
However, I just reviewed the comments on this and noticed two "Problems": 1. The original issue was that the company requested a full set of W2's for all years of employment. The IRS and Social Security have this info, and it is considered restricted and protected information. ?? What if they only want the information to negotiate with someone else ?? And 2. Someone made the comment that the company may be interested in whether the candidate had been there, done that etc, and assurance that the candidate performed a decent job at prior employment. How does a W2 confirm or provide assurances of either???

I am of the school that anyone who has the notion that the person providing references is any more capable than the person requiring a reference is a bit naive. As someone else commented - the W2 or a HR reference only supports that a person worked there and the dates (W2 also provides dollars).

If an offer has been extended, I would be more likely to provide only the most recent W2; However, since all jobs are temporary, I would want some solid information related to the company and the prior persons opinion of the work requirement (and of the person requesting the W2).

Most interviews ask about most recent compensation. Having to provide W2 allows the prospective employer an easy way of testing a candidates willingness to stretch the truth (or not). The last thing I would think most people want to do is hire a finance executive who is less than scrupulously honest.

An after the fact request is irrelevant if an offer based on company and competitve pay standards has been made and agreed to. The question of what level of compensation is desired had to come up during the interview process for targeting purposes. There needs to be a way to address a request like this without putting the offer at risk. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Asking for a W-2 from a candidate is a new one on me but sounds like an HR idea to give easy, i.e., non-thinking, rules to follow and to partially justify their jobs. One should hire an employee for the value he/she is expected to add to the enterprise and the appropriate salary is that which will persuade them to work for you. That is a judgment call on the part of the hiring company and requires thought, judgment, and risk-taking not a simple rule to follow. Past salaries as evidenced by W-2's should have absolutely no bearing on a job offer. W-2's cannot tell the value a person will add to a company or the appropriate salary to compensate that person. It is the past. One may take lower salaries at times for many reasons.

Unless in dire straits I think I would respectfully tell the company that my past W-2's have no bearing on this and don't understand the need. If they are at the offer point I'm sure the hiring manager is interested in getting the position filled now by a competent person, not in having every box of some form filled out. If they insist let them start the hiring process over and go work for the competitor who may have a more enlightened idea about hiring. They have revealed a great deal about their company culture.

On an amusing note, to verify the accuracy of their pay scale data, would they reciprocate and show you W-2’s of employees that will be in the same salary range as the pay grade in which they will assign you. Of course, not!

One way to look at this is as an impact of influences from other business cultures. It is not unusual to require this in other countries. The US is somewhat unique in that gender, race, marital status etc are explicitly off the table in discussions, so I've run into some feelings of personal discomfort when getting resumes for positions in Europe that gave me info right off the bat that I scrupulously avoid asking for.

While Americans consider personal finance "the last taboo", it is important to understand that not all cultures feel this way, and our business culture is adopting these and other novel approaches to judging a person's employment history. Title, company size, GPA...it's just another piece of the puzzle. It may feel awkward, but the company in question may not be doing this from a negative standpoint. They may just simply be adopting methods of making an informed judgment about potential hires.