Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

nityesh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 624 posts

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#381

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #373
aeternum wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the marketplace failed to provide both affordable milk and the ability for dairy farmers to make a living. So the price is both two low and too high? This is not a failure of the marketplace (aka price discovery), this is the U.S. deciding that cheap milk and overproduction is in the nation's best interest and we should socialize some of the production costs. There are logical (milk as a staple product and avoidanc…

A subsidy to a private corporation is not "socializing" production costs. Socialization is putting goods under social control. This is literally the opposite -- providing benefits to private interests. Even if the end has the appearance of being for the social good, in reality this has more to do with the power of the private dairy lobby than any pricing concerns about availability of milk. That dairy producer's lobb…

"Socializing costs" is a widely used term to describe the phenomenon of the public taking on private costs for some real or perceived benefit.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#382

Post by nybble41 »

bumby wrote: post #295
TeMPOraL wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if and when we'll see remote unions appearing. Forming a group and going on strike is easy - perhaps easier - in a remote setting. Picketing offices could be done by overloading the company VPN, and DDoSing the company Exchange server would be the equivalent of a harder "picketing inside the plant, preventing work" strike.

> overloading the company VPN, and DDoSing the company This is illegal in most countries, no? I don't believe picketing is illegal as long as certain conditions are met (not blocking egress, etc.)

Yes, DDoS would be illegal in most countries. Picketing in the sense of peaceably assembling on public property outside the business and not harassing innocent bystanders or blocking egress or ingress of workers, customers, or suppliers would generally be fine. The online equivalent would probably be something like posting your complaints on social media.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#383

Post by necrotic_comp »

ponker wrote: post #362
necrotic_comp wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why there needs to be teeth to the laws that limit pay inequality within a firm ; if the CEO of the firm can only make X amount the median or mean (whichever is lower) salary of any person who does work for a firm (including contractors!) then we can hopefully push back on this cost of living BS. Basically, the work is worth something and if we do the work, we should be paid a reasonable amount, regardless of…

Why does an (American who earns $100K)'s right to earn $200K take precedence over a (Libyan who earns $20K)'s right to earn $40K?

The point is that within the firm, there can't be that much disparity in pay - if the CEO wants to make several million dollars a year, he needs to justify that by paying his employees an appropriate amount.

If we're talking knowledge work, the work product is the work product, and it doesn't matter where it's generated - the person in Libya has as much right to earn $200k as the American.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#384

Post by wkearney99 »

proverbialbunny wrote: post #286
sremani wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Software Developers will follow the path of the Autoworkers of the 60s, once a high paid and esteemed profession which becomes a menial job with average pay. It is not that far either, I bet Software Developers do not have beyond 7 years for this to take shape and of course, those massive layoffs are just around the corner when remote works becomes the standard.

Kids today are being taught to program in elementary school.

Mmmm, not all kids, and not all 'kinds' of programming. Yes, they're being made more aware that programming exists and is necessary, but that's not the same as "being taught to program".

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#385

Post by [deleted] »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #112

> You should expect "equal pay for equal work" at your new remote job So naive. In an ideal, utopian world? Maybe it would work this way. Maybe. In reality, your compensation is a function of your negotiating power. Some people, in fact, manage to get the same pay even when working remote, because they're "highly employable". Others don't. And let me add: I almost agree that remote work shouldn't necessarily command…

[deleted]

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#386

Post by pc86 »

whoknew1122 wrote: post #363
renewiltord wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies can't stop you from unionizing. They can choose not to accept the collective agreement and they can hire permanent replacement for strikers. As for whether anyone should have a problem, you're welcome to have a problem. It's a free country. Whether that will lead to an outcome you desire is independent, though.

> "Companies can't stop you from unionizing." de jure != de facto Companies are legally prohibited from stopping unionization in the US. But that's not how it works in reality. Most people work in an 'at-will' states. This means a company can terminate employees at any time. Want to unionize? Have at it. All an employer needs to do is find is some company policy a person is violating (and trust me, EVERYONE is violat…

So what is your suggestion then

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#388

Post by Nasrudith »

KittenInABox wrote: post #275
bumby wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right that it's a broad generalization, but I would disagree that a lot of the same rhetoric isn't applied to corporations or governments. I should have been more specific to say 'unions with bad reputations are often culpable for those stereotypes'

I will be honest I've never seen an across the board "but that's a corporation, we don't want anything to do with that" to corporations the way that's done with unions at least on HN. No one's languishing a " is a corporation? I don't know, look at nestle and its human rights abuses. I don't think we should support ". FWIW I don't think unions are a silver bullet. I'm just pointing out that if you look at it from a n…

It is probably becausd think companies and especially corporations have proven themselves too effective essentially for that in the pragmatic sense. Regardless of the many objections and insults to them in the generic, and claims made about the utopian alternatives and costs as better corporations and their byproducts are implicitly accepted as the most practical option even by their foes. As a category they are /never/ treated as an underdog in a comparison to any other entity and avoiding involvement in either goods or working for them is essentially treated as a luxury.

Of course the comparison doesn't quite work because unions are not standalone entities - they are linked to government or companies. If they were independent the labor organizations would be guilds.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#389

Post by nybble41 »

refurb wrote: post #239
echelon wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm certainly not pro-union in tech, but this is something that could hasten its arrival. Just because I'm in Atlanta doesn't make me inherently worth less than my peers in SF.

You’re not paid based on “worth”. You’re paid based on the intersection of how badly the company needs someone (demand) and how many people out there do what they need (supply). If suddenly the supply expands from the Bay Area to all of the US, that changes the equation. Don’t forget that guy in Atlanta who is equally as talented as you, but willing to work for 20% less than you make.

> You’re not paid based on “worth”.

Supply and demand ultimately determine the wages, assuming the job is filled at all, but what you're "worth" to the employer does serve as an absolute upper limit on what you can expect to be paid. If no one is willing to take the job at that price then no one will be employed and the job will simply go undone.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#390

Post by pnutjam »

whimsicalism wrote: post #354
aeternum wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the marketplace failed to provide both affordable milk and the ability for dairy farmers to make a living. So the price is both two low and too high? This is not a failure of the marketplace (aka price discovery), this is the U.S. deciding that cheap milk and overproduction is in the nation's best interest and we should socialize some of the production costs. There are logical (milk as a staple product and avoidanc…

> not a marketplace failure. Remove the subsidies and the market would quickly find the higher price at which dairy farmers could produce milk profitably and consumers would purchase it. If it is in our societal interest to produce more milk so people can eat, and the market doesn't do so, requiring subsidy, then that is a failure of the market to meet society's need. You're conflating the failure of a marketplace to…

And people wonder why I don't consider economics a science. It's skience at best...
Post reply on HN