Support NeoGAF

[DrFaustPhD]

When you get promoted you take on additional responsibilities, and you get a salary increase.

If that relative margin isn't maintained when you increase the baseline, you're going to get a lot of people that are now being underpaid relative to the new standard, because you've wiped out a great deal of what they've worked to achieve through their career progression.

But it seems like he made the decision because he felt too many of his employees were severely under-paid and not making what he thought they deserved.

I totally understand your point (and anyone in that position is absolutely justified in feeling stiffed) but its just not a straight forward scenario

 

[Corronchilejano]

I sought to clarify for you.

Uncertainity doesn't necesarily mean "getting fucked." It's pretty clear his biggest problem was the lawsuit by his own brother.

 

[OrlanisWorks]

Do something good and the world around you destroys you for it.

People want things as fair as possible. I want that too. Too bad fairness is a pipedream because we are still human beings: childish, emotional, hypocritical creatures. Jealousy keeps socialist efforts in the dirt. "If they want something, they have to work for it!" But what do you do when you can't even find the opportunity to work for what you want? Without being able to put aside the jealousy, we're a stick in the mud.

Doing little good deeds mean shit. Might as well replace a dead tree while the forest is still on fire from a napalm bombing.

/rant

 

[KingGondo]

It's impossible not to even if higher education is free purely because we have X amount of years in this universe and people are using those years to go to school.

It's also part of the reason why we need to move to a guaranteed income for all vs trying to fix shit based on wage raises.

Think about how much more diverse (across all demographics) higher education would be if it was free.

As it is, the high cost of higher ed seems to simply compound income inequality.

 

[Vanillalite]

There is no however, you're just butt hurt that some one else life is equivalent in value to yours because of your arbitrary belief your life is worth more than the person who didn't go to college.

Human life has intrinsic value and as such everyone should be granted a guaranteed income.

That is what should be argued. Not the job vs job wage bullshit in this thread.

 

[entremet]

Salary stuff will always be controversial.

Envy and jealousy tend to muck things up sadly.

 

[Keio]

Envy is the belief system of the mediocre.

I really think the opposition to raising wages like this comes from people realizing they have just gotten lucky at some point. But as transparency and accountability increase, we will face a system where actual performance will become a much more bigger driver of compensation.

Then the impact of formal training will become a tough question: how many degrees add value, how many don't?

I think this guy's approach is interesting. Is loyalty a bigger driver of performance than simple dog-eat-dog?

 

[purvispisgah]

What about not getting fired, or the satisfaction of doing a good job, or not letting your fellow coworkers down?

I do think this ignores the concept of responsibility within a working environment. On large, sprawling projects there are people that are in charge of multiple departments that have managers that are overseeing the work of individuals that might be just creating drafts all day. It makes sense that these different roles would be valued differently, and that we would use money as the mechanism to distribute the stored value.

Maybe if people didn't have to scrounge, borrow, and torture themselves to achieve a modicum of financial security in our society we'd do jobs that are better suited to our skills and interests rather than aiming for a certain pay grade to rise above the peons.

I think the biggest issue is that children somehow manage to go to school for 12(!) years and come out of that experience with so few skills that they struggle to show value that employers would be interested in. That feels impossible to me, and seems like a much bigger issue than wages. Frankly, I feel like we are ignoring the larger issues regarding education when we focus so much on current employees' salaries (or lack thereof).

 

[Vanillalite]

Think about how much more diverse (across all demographics) higher education would be if it was free.

As it is, the high cost of higher ed seems to simply compound income inequality.

It does, but even if it's free it still means the person that chooses to go vs the person that doesn't is a difference. Plus even people who go end up having vastly different experiences based upon which school and major they go to.

You are NEVER gonna solve that aspect regardless of the cost.

 

[subrock]

I would gladly let the janitor make the same money as I do. Demanding that they make less is a selfish as fuck move. Wouldn't it be nice if you could go out for drinks with your coworkers and not have to leave the people that can't afford it behind?

 

[soleil]

Again this false belief that money is the sole or primary motivation of anyone with an ambition.

I never said it was the "sole" motivation, but to argue that the lack of prominent pay isn't a deterrent to investing the time, stress, effort, and educational cost of the high levels of education necessary to achieve the dream is downright naive.

You're falsely equating a necessary condition with a "motivator." I'm arguing the higher pay is necessary. I'm not arguing it's the motivator.

For example: You wouldn't date a girl who constantly smells like B.O., so you will indeed avoid girls who smell like B.O. But that doesn't mean that the scent of a girl with good hygiene is the "sole or primary" motivator of you dating a girl. It's simply a necessary condition.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

I agree on a macro scale because of inflation.

I just hate seeing people denigrated because they don't do work that society sees as "valuable." Be happy for those who are fortunate enough to get paid enough to not worry about it.

I have zero issues if this is how society decided to function and everyone knew what they were getting into well before they made career choices. In this isolated instance though I am just throwing it out there that I dont really fucking understand why people are baffled that employees who just had the whole rule book flipped on them out of no where are feeling some type of way. I understand exactly why they feel upset. You dont even need to agree with them to get why they find it annoying.

 

[HariKari]

Nobody who dreams of being an astronaut dreams about being an astronaut for the Paycheck...

Most people aren't going to be astronauts. If you want to have an abundance of talent available, you can't have low pay in an industry with high educational requirements.

 

[DrFaustPhD]

I don't seem to see where in the NYT article that it says he lost his "largest" clients because of a perceived political move. The article states: "a few customers, dismayed by what they viewed as a political statement, withdrew their business."

The CEO knew the timeline for new clients earning him money and knew expansion would be necessary and knew expansion would require fresh hires and knew these fresh hires would earn the salary he promised in his NYT article and knew said article is the reason he would get an influx of new clients..



The selective bolding to paint a narrative that the CEO is in trouble solely due to the ills and greed of other companies disapproving of his decision is the problem. I sought to clarify for you.

You're right, my brain mixed information of him losing clients and losing his 2 of his most valued employees.

And yes, there are many elements he should have thought through more carefully.

Regardless, it is still sad that he lost many clients due to unfounded assumptions that prices would rise and beliefs that it was a political statement. Regardless of how big a factor PR played, he at least tried to do something noble even though it was not well thought out enough.

 

[kirblar]

What about not getting fired, or the satisfaction of doing a good job, or not letting your fellow coworkers down?

Doesn't matter- it's all the same amount of money. Why would I do more work that I don't want to?

 

[lednerg]

So basically nothing was unsustainable about the policy, there's just a bunch of assholes

Spoiler

Republicans

who are trying to ruin it for everybody. That's just great.

 

[BamfMeat]

You certainly would mind. Nobody goes through fucking 4-8 years of engineering study to make the same amount of money as an assistant.

What about someone who didn't go to school and got to where they are because they got lucky and were recognized for the talent they had and chosen accordingly?

I make more than these two people -

https://studyabroad.asu.edu/index.cfm?FuseAction=StaffMain.StaffDetails&Staff_ID=155516

https://studyabroad.asu.edu/index.cfm?FuseAction=StaffMain.StaffDetails&Staff_ID=60450

They have significantly higher credentials than I do - the first has a doctorate, the second a masters. I make, on average, 30K more than all the people in that office. I have no formal education and have a few certifications. Some of the positions in that office *require* a masters degree - and they all pay less than what I make.

They're not doing the same work, however they still have significantly higher creds than I do AND they're in management positions (I'm not quite a grunt but not far from it).

Yes, some people DO go through 4-8+ years of study to make the same as some assistants.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

I dunno what jobs you have applied for but pay scales exist for experience and even within the exact same job description people get paid significantly more if they have more experience even with everything else being equal.

What you are linking also has supply and demand aspects to it. Its gaf, I was not going to get into full on economics and scales and grades of pay and market. I was making a general statement and wasnt basing it off moral capacity. In general, more education, more market skills means more pay. In general an engineer has more of that than their assistant.

Minimum wage and pay scales is how people judge if they feel they are being well paid. If minimum wage for no experience is $15 and you make $16 in a high demand market you are going to feel underpaid. I dont feel that is a tough concept.

Just because we disagree, doesn't mean the concept is "tough" for me

Pay scales based on experience exist within one position. They don't cross over into others. For example if Microsoft hires an engineer and a human resources rep, a five year difference in experience between them is not going to equate to a 5-year-percentage increase on the pay scale. It doesn't make sense to compare them because they're filling completely different roles and their positions are valued differently by the company.

Pay scales exist because companies view experience as an indicator of competency. The more competent you are, the less likely you are to screw up (or the more productive you will be). They put a price on that likelihood and compensate you accordingly.

So if they determine that your pay is $70,000 with your 10 years of experience based on how easy it is to hire someone to replace you and how important your productivity is to the company, and they pay $70,000 to an administrative clerk with 3 years of experience, there's literally no obligation for them to compare your experience and knowledge level -- only how much it would cost to replace you.

 

[Hazmat]

If you're working somewhere, and a lot of your coworkers (and subordinates) get a sizable raise and you get nothing, and you aren't at least updating your resume and sending it out then you're a fucking fool. Good on this guy for increasing salaries, but losing people above the threshold for not raising theirs was a forgone conclusion.

 

[drawkcaB]

Leah Brajcich, who oversees sales at Gravity, fielded complaints from several customers who accused her boss of communist or socialist sympathies that would drive up their own employees’ wages and others who felt it was a public relations stunt.

So higher wages is socialism. Neat, I had no idea.

 

[fuzzyset]

I never said it was the "sole" motivation, but to argue that the lack of prominent pay isn't a deterrent to investing the time, stress, effort, and educational cost of the high levels of education necessary to achieve the dream is downright naive.

You're false equating a necessary condition with a "motivator." I'm arguing the higher pay is necessary. I'm not arguing it's the motivator.

For example: You wouldn't date a girl who constantly smells like B.O., so you will indeed avoid girls who smell like B.O. But that doesn'y mean that a the good smells of a girl with good hygiene are the "sole or primary" motivator of you dating a girl. It's simply a necessary condition.

People here have such a romantic view of certain careers. People are vastly underestimating the impact of ego, social cache, and money in career choices. I'm in an engineering PhD program. Let me tell you all this anecdote: if the salary of a PhD graduate was the same as a grad student, no one I know would be in this program. Everyone I've talked to says "you just gotta deal with the shitty grad school life and then you're golden".

 

[soleil]

People here have such a romantic view of certain careers. People are vastly underestimating the impact of ego, social cache, and money in career choices. I'm in an engineering PhD program. Let me tell you all this anecdote: if the salary of a PhD graduate was the same as a grad student, no one I know would be in this program. Everyone I've talked to says "you just gotta deal with the shitty grad school life and then you're golden".

Agreed completely. I also just want to add that there's also non-ego, utilitarian reasons to pay more for workers who invest more time and money (education costs) in themselves.

 

[metalslimer]

I can understand where the senior employees are coming from but you also have to ask the question are they living comfortably on the current salary? If so I can't feel bad that other people's lives were improved and they didn't get more money

Honestly the biggest problem is the large amount of education it takes to get a higher ranking job. If we could solve the student debt problem it would be less of a big deal

 

[Aureon]

It's nice how some people are applying macro consequences to a micro problem, to be able to coat their "I am more important than mere janitors, and if janitors can't afford a family due to my need to feel important, SO BE IT"

 

[rokkerkory]

this guy prob got kicked around a lot in high school

 

[Melon Husk]

So basically nothing was unsustainable about the policy, there's just a bunch of assholes

Spoiler

Republicans

who are trying to ruin it for everybody. That's just great.

I came to comment a news story and got sociology and econ connect-the-dots. Love it.

Spoiler

Don't be that guy who paints all his enemies red and himself in blue

It's nice how some people are applying macro consequences to a micro problem, to be able to coat their "I am more important than mere janitors, and if janitors can't afford a family due to my need to feel important, SO BE IT"

Hey, people are selfish. It's human nature. That's why you need governance.

 

[Christopher]

USA is allergic to socialism.

Wait - his own brother filed a lawsuit?

Who the fuck wants socialism

 

[Eppy Thatcher]

Again this false belief that money is the sole or primary motivation of anyone with an ambition.

This right here so hard. I feel like i'm taking crazy pills reading some of these replies and it really truly saddens me to realize how many people put in so much time and money and everything else for college and continued education and everything else for a career that they don't love just so they could get paid.

Pretty fuckin sad. No wonder our world is such shit.

And to respond to the Astronaut comment up above... no. Absolutely fucking not. Nobody who even becomes a pilot does it because of a paycheck incentive. You dream of flying. And flying is what you love. Ask ANYONE who's been up into the stars if they would do that shit for minimum wage and i fucking promise you they would say yes.

 

[victreeb3l]

What's more important

- Employees who can barely afford to live a comfortable life being given more (I know we're not talking about poverty here)
- Employees who already make plenty getting even more to make them feel like their hard work allows them to be superior to other people

All the implications this might have for how the business does and what it does for the new employees is all interesting, and it'd be cool to see whether it succeeds overall or fails, but at the basic level I've got a problem with people who want to earn more than other people because they worked hard. If the only thing keeping you happy with your place in life is that there are other people who aren't making as much money than you, then you're selfish and entitled. You can say all you want about 'but I put in all this work!' - there are other rewards to being good at what you do than money, and someone else in the world making the same, slightly less or more than you shouldn't be something you spend significant time worrying about. It's competitive nonsense, the mindset of a big baby.

How about this. You've got two job offers,

1. 80,000 a year, the office secretary makes 25, 000 a year
2. 80,000 a year, the office secretary makes 70,000 a year

You mean to tell me some of you would go for the place where the secretary makes 25, just so you can feel rewarded for all that hard studying? Fuck it.

Well its not that clear cut. If the secretary has been working that position for a long time and is great at it, then I dont really care. If its a fresh grad and my job requires more experience and skill, then yes I would definitely ask for a helluva lot more money. I would think a company that has the ability to pay such high entry level salaries would value my experience a lot more.

I dont want others to have a shitty salary. Everyone deserves a good, comfortable wage. But if the work I do is more stressful, while taking on a lot more responsibility and requires a lot of experience, I would definitely want to be compensated a lot. Otherwise why would I even bother doing all that work in the first place? I would feel undervalued at that company.

 

[Slavik81]

You certainly would mind. Nobody goes through fucking 4-8 years of engineering study to make the same amount of money as an assistant.

I would, because engineering work is much more interesting than assistant work. Besides, an engineer with any sort of experience would be making more than 70k.

Though, you are probably right that if everyone was paid the same that many fewer people would bother with education. Even if the degree were free, that's 4+ years of wages ($280,000) given up.

 

[tzhu07]

I can definitely understand why some of the long-standing employees left.

Let's say before the salary change, Engineer was making twice the salary as Assistant.

If Assistant suddenly gets a raise to $70K, then Engineer wants $140K to maintain the same perceived relative worth within the company.

 

[DrFaustPhD]

Doesn't matter- it's all the same amount of money. Why would I do more work that I don't want to?

Well... this is assuming a person is in a job they don't like and have little respect for their coworkers or employers. I'm not saying the "everyone gets paid the same" model can work, but to say money is the only incentive, or assuming that everyone dislikes their job or workplace is ridiculous.

I work in a good work environment, when I see my coworkers - whom I like - working hard, it makes me want to work harder too. The fact that my bosses actually put forth an effort to make it a good work environment also makes me want to work harder. Just as myself and other people at the place I work have stepped outside of their normal duties to do other types of projects, not because of a promise of more money, but because its opening opportunities to focus more on the type of work they want to do. I know for a fact I could make more money doing exactly what I'm doing, but the fact that I have respect for the people I work with makes my want to try harder.

 

[Sky Chief]

Markets reach equilibriums and the equilibriums are usually not fair. When you upset the equilibrium that causes a number of ripple effects until a new equilibrium is reached. Basically, it sucks but you can't fix wage inequality by just giving lower earners more money because some people will have superior skills and contribute more and therefore always be relatively more valuable. In the long run inflation will wipe out any short term gains anyway. Basically, the only way to fix inequality is to increase the practical skills of the lowest earners and this is far easier said than done.

 

[unholyrevenger72]

Most people aren't going to be astronauts. If you want to have an abundance of talent available, you can't have low pay in an industry with high educational requirements.

Don't know what world you live in, but we live in a high education low pay world, unless you reach the 1%.

 

[fanboi]

Jesus this thread is depressing. Can't you just be happy for your fellow colleagues and stop thinking in dollars?

If you have the mindset that the most important thing is money for a job, then I would argue that you need to reconsidered your priorities.

 

[unholyrevenger72]

Markets reach equilibriums and the equilibriums are usually not fair. When you upset the equilibrium that causes a number of ripple effects until a new equilibrium is reached. Basically, it sucks but you can't fix wage inequality by just giving lower earners more money because some people will have superior skills and contribute more and therefore always be relatively more valuable. In the long run inflation will wipe out any short term gains anyway. Basically, the only way to fix inequality is to increase the practical skills of the lowest earners and this is far easier said than done.

You curb inflation by regulating the cost of living.

 

[Rad-]

Of course money is one of the main reasons to work. I have held dozens of development talks with my employees and when I ask what motivates them to work, at least 50% of people answer money first. And the rest are usually the more shy types that just don't want to say it out loud but are obviously thinking it.

I want to know what are these work places where people don't care that much about money and just work because it's fun for everyone!

 

[Melon Husk]

I would, because engineering work is much more interesting than assistant work. Besides, an engineer with any sort of experience would be making more than 70k.

Though, you are probably right that if everyone was paid the same that many fewer people would bother with education. Even if the degree were free, that's 4+ years of wages ($280,000) given up.

Suppose the engineer would make 90k and the assistant would make 70k. You would get paid 20k / year nevertheless, studying for a diploma or just lying in a coma. Studies take 4 years.

Pick now.

 

[Kreed]

If the statement conflicts with fairness, then the statement needs to be adjusted.

I think his employees are smarter than allowing their CEO to dick with their future careers to make an instant statement instead of ensuring that statement happens properly.

Not arguing that compensation couldn't have been handled better, just that they shouldn't feel like they are being undervalued by salary increases to the point of quitting if they felt things were fair/they were happy for years prior to the salary increases, especially when the CEO is putting his own salary into this plan.

 

[soleil]

Not arguing that compensation couldn't have been handled better, just that they shouldn't feel like they are being undervalued by salary increases to the point of quitting if they felt things were fair/they were happy for years prior to the salary increases, especially when the CEO is putting his own salary into this plan.

Before the salary increases, there's room for good faith that they were valued appropriately in proportion to other people, in accordance with the time and effort they put into an education. After the salary increases, and without a significant one for themselves, there's no more room for such good faith that they are being valued appropriately.

 

[DrFaustPhD]

Not arguing that compensation couldn't have been handled better, just that they shouldn't feel like they are being undervalued by salary increases to the point of quitting if they felt things were fair/they were happy for years prior to the salary increases, especially when the CEO is putting his own salary into this plan.

I think this is a fair point, especially since the increase came from his own salary, to supplement the income of employees that he felt weren't making a fair living wage. If he was diving into the companies war chest, that'd be a different scenario, but it came from his own personal income.

 

[rjinaz]

Who the fuck wants socialism

*raises hand*

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Just because we disagree, doesn't mean the concept is "tough" for me

Pay scales based on experience exist within one position. They don't cross over into others. For example if Microsoft hires an engineer and a human resources rep, a five year difference in experience between them is not going to equate to a 5-year-percentage increase on the pay scale. It doesn't make sense to compare them because they're filling completely different roles and their positions are valued differently by the company.

Pay scales exist because companies view experience as an indicator of competency. The more competent you are, the less likely you are to screw up (or the more productive you will be). They put a price on that likelihood and compensate you accordingly.

So if they determine that your pay is $70,000 with your 10 years of experience based on how easy it is to hire someone to replace you and how important your productivity is to the company, and they pay $70,000 to an administrative clerk with 3 years of experience, there's literally no obligation for them to compare your experience and knowledge level -- only how much it would cost to replace you.

Its not even the fact we disagree, its that it is annoying which is my original statement which was about an engineer and their assistant is now turning into you giving me a talk about economics, scales of pay, credentials etc that I already know and dont apply to an "Engineer" and their "Assistant".

Again, I'm talking general because it's gaf and none of this literally has anything to do with the main point or the post I was responding to.

Poster said "If I was an engineer and had an assistant". I am an engineer and have an assistant. I think I have a valid opinion on the subject actually having experienced everything the dude was speculating on. That's why I commented. People were blowing it out of proportion like I would want the person I work with to make pennies to my c notes. The point is that the market as it is dictates you makes sacrifices so you can make gains. One of those gains is income. If people have to makes all these sacrifices and one of their gains is erased, how exactly is it surprising that they feel some type of way? Its not as though I couldn't slide into my assistants position, work less hours, have less responsility and make the same money. Its not just the pay and the work that make people annoyed. That is where I dont get people's higher than thou attitude about this.

 

[BamfMeat]

*raises hand*

/seconded

Seriously - the shit we're dealing with now is fucking asinine from top to bottom.

 

[Kreed]

Before the salary increases, there's room for good faith that they were valued appropriately in proportion to other people, in accordance with the time and effort they put into an education. After the salary increases, and without a significant one for themselves, there's no more room for such good faith that they are being valued appropriately.

Maybe if the CEO was still making a million+, but when he's taking it upon himself to make 70k too (possibly a lower salary than the 2 employees that quit), I think they could have a little more faith. At least longer than 3 months.

 

[Big-E]

I think this situation is a good test to weed out jerks from non-jerks. This guy didn't go to all his employees and say "Hey, you fucks earning 70k or more. You guys are all fucking stupid so I am going to be increasing the salary of the janitors to 70k as they are doing a better job then you." The people making 70k and over would not be making a shit ton more money working for someone else or at all. The only reason to leave would be perception and if you are that bothered that someone who works perhaps just as hard as you, but didn't have the chance or opportunity to go to college is making near the same as you are, than I am sorry to say you are pretty much an asshole.

 

[Condom]

It's really hilarious how human perception works. Those employees didn't lose any money but because those that were beneath them were brought up they felt as if they had been brought down.

Yup, what a bunch of idiots. Like seriously, they couldn't analyse their mindset for like a minute?

 

[Slayer-33]

The amount of cuntery in this country is unbelievable

Fucking selfish as fuck individual fuck you I got mine mentality

 

[Fusion Pizza]

Wow, suing your own brother, that's gonna be some awkward Thanksgiving conversation.

 

[Valnen]

Thats the problem with these drastic changes. The old guard will never accept it because they went their entire career on the old standard. You have to do it very slowly.

Let them not accept it. Let them throw a fit. They can cry all the way until they die of old age. Change needs to be forced on these people for the world to truly get better. We can't solve the problem of great wealth inequality with small, incremental change. It has to be drastic and forceful if anyone alive now is going to see it happen in their lifetimes.

It's time to stop letting the rich shit on the poor. History has shown that those with the incorrect beliefs need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future.