Define slight increase. I've never had an issue showing my payslip, and have never shied away from asking for 20-40% whenever I do a jump.

Executive search do ask for your current pay, not payslips because they are not processing your payroll. They ask because every client will tell them a range of salary they can afford for that role, and the agent gets a certain % of the salary, so it is in their interest to know your pay and fight for the best.

If you are talking about C levels, they do not ask for payslips because senior management packages tend to be on contract basis and is negotiated per total compensation which can differ year on year.

The so-called offering higher than market is a total con. We currently pay slightly above market because we are based regionally so our 'market' is skewed towards the high side, but even so there are competitors around us that is willing to fight and pay for the same talent pool, thus we end up paying very similar across the board.

Consultants like Hay, Mercer, Towers and McLagan publishes salary surveys yearly that informs one of the current median market and you establish your pay position from there. When you say market, market relative to what?

Well, shouldn't the question then be, how much of an increase will motivate you to jump? If you think you want a 30% to make the trip worthwhile, ask for that and stand your ground. If they are not willing to offer that, don't go.

I had a 30% jump going into one of the top FI's middle of last year and about 25% jump 6 months after going into my current role, again in another top FI. I don't think my case is anything out of the ordinary nor have I found that brand name mattered much especially when you are skillset and expertise that they need rather the other way around.

I'd kill to join a 'cool' company like say, Google, but if they offer me a 10% jump I'd say screw them.

A variety of reasons, I wouldn't act as if it is not being used to anchor an offer to the candidate. You will find if you refuse to disclose it, it should not be an issue though it might annoy the hiring manager but otherwise, there should be no repercussions from thethe company practice point of view.

Perhaps my take is wrong, but I'd rather have my pay decision in my hands, thus I look at what I'd have to do in the new role, the skill I'm bringing to the table and hardship I face moving across company and decide on the salary I want. If they can't match it, there is no point in furthering anything.

There is a broader issue to this. In a scenario where a person who has been earning 20k at his peak, but due to some reason took up a job that pays 15k, will his next job benchmark him as earning 20k or 15k, assuming he is transparent about his past salaries?

Practical explanations appreciated rather than rhetorical nonsense.

Going by your rationale, would a person who choose to take a break from the workforce would then have to start from minimum wage since he was willing to settle for zero pay?