I ask candidates their current salary and packages for good reason.

The employment market in the UK is fragmented, with one function being represented by different job titles and levels of seniority, while one job title may mean many different things.

A colloquial manufacturer in Suffolk will pay differently to a software company with remote workers, while Satellite towns will commonly pay less than Urban population centres.

Let's not forget that many employers can't afford top whack salaries, or even average one, but that doesn't stop them from being a good employer or having decent roles.

So when I talk to a candidate about their situation, which includes their overall package, I can help them assess where they objectively are in the market compared to their context and level of experience.

Sometimes they are underpaid, sometimes they are paid as expected, sometimes they are paid in the top percentile, sometimes they are overpaid.

Sometimes they have a 15% pension, sometimes commission, sometimes fixed bonus, sometimes a car. Sometimes they work from home 100% of the time and don't pay for commuting. Things that may not be available when moving for a higher salary only.

Everyone is different.

Understanding the total value of how they are rewarded, and the reality of what they should expect in moving jobs is a constructive start to any job search.

Especially if there's a situation where they are only interested in a higher salary, in which case they might seek that with their current employer.

Open and honest conversation about salary can be helpful with employers too.

How many times have I placed someone whose salary expectations are above the budget, and it's worked out because of transparency? Or the times I've heard of employers finding creative solutions to overcoming salary issues, because they were discussed at the outset?

Of course, it is unfair for an employer to offer a job at a salary based only on a candidate's previous earnings.

Any offer should only be on how that candidate will contribute, or we risk unfairness and inequality, which is exactly where this conversation started.

The problem is that many employers are naive or cynical when it comes to salary discussion, and that's why we hear talk of banning even asking about it.

But to do so punishes the good recruiters, employers and their candidates and reduces the opportunity for market insight.

Without dealing with the problem at root - systemic discrimination and unfair pay.

So perhaps the better task is to regularly look at, research and challenge how we come to pay new and existing staff, and in doing that close any unfair gap, which will only improve recruitment and retention.

Rather than ask another transactional question.