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

Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

resumebuilder.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 281 posts

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#251

Post by 0xRusty »

lowercased wrote: post #225
valdiorn wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everybody just wants wants wants and act like children when they don't get. Wow, what an immature attitude YOU have. Of course everyone "wants wants wants". You're displaying that attitude right now. You're feeling hurt about not getting more, because you want more. That's normal. That's OK. If someone offered to bump my salary to a million pounds for no reason, of course I'd take it. You should probably try asking…

> If your contribution to the company is deemed to be worth the money, you'll get it. I've rarely seen individual contributions able to be evaluated 'fairly' at any scale. Your skills may be top notch, but you were focused on a project that was killed after 10 months because.... budget cuts? Bad management? Your contribution to the company in that case can be seen as a net negative, but it's largely out of your contr…

Trouble is I LOVE my job and the company I'm in. I know our processes like the back of my hand (I designed half of them) and feel very valued and enjoy it all. I don't want to leave just to get money. I just also dont see why people coming in to "junior" roles are paid $50k more than I was on at that level of experience just a few years ago (I understand inflation, this is something else). It's nuts.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#252

Post by nathias »

butterNaN wrote: post #183
nathias wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for socialism (which is the ethos of the statement) of course its a third party that determines your needs and any third party has a conflict

It is not "of course" a third party at all. Socialism is not "when the government does stuff".

I'm all for blockchain socialism, but I doubt it will be called that ...

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#253

Post by knorker »

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #235
knorker wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know? Maybe I have a gambling debt to the mob. If I do then I need that money MUCH more than the co-worker with multiple kids. In both scenarios we put ourselves in that position. Maybe I have a health problem, and live in the US. Maybe I'm taking care of aging parents. Maybe I have a crippling mortgage. Too big a house. Live downtown, etc… etc… "You have no dependents and responsibilities so I'll pay you…

I think its obvious that not all needs are equal, but some in your list are legit, imo. Taking care of elderly parents -> you probably should get more money Health problem in the US -> you probably should get more money Crippling mortgage. This one depends a bit. Does your job require you to work at a specific location, and the location has a high cost of living. Then yes, you should get more money. Think of the "no…

Well, i strongly disagree with all of that.

Or at least that it should affect what your employer gives you.

It's straight up discrimination, and some of it (e.g. based on parental status) usually illegal.

Taking care of the sick, elderly, and children is a social issue, and belongs with the state. Not by illegal arbitrary discrimination.

Also imagine how humiliating it would be for someone failing to conceive to see insult to injury that they don't get a bonus but their team mate does.

Paying someone less for doing more work (i.e. not picking up from daycare) is incredibly disrespectful and demotivating.

I hear all the time that someone asks for more money because they just got a new house. Like... What? Your employer is now responsible for you choosing to live beyond your means?

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#254

Post by out-of-ideas »

phpisthebest wrote: post #12

I once had employer tell me that because I was single with no kids I did not "need" as much income as a co-worker with multiple kids... I noped out of that employment quickly

i've been told the same in tech; also biased towards being "young with no debt" - any excuse to not get a raise. best solution in this case is to leave.

my first thoughts: hey maybe musky boi should try pay-transparency at twitter to get more to quit; what's another 1/7th and then saying no to the others that ask to the already all time low morale?

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#255

Post by greedo »

shapefrog wrote: post #151
digitalsushi wrote: post #138

I'm getting really old cause I am starting to see this from both sides If you found out your cube neighbor is out-earning you and you do the same work, you (probably) are safer when the next wave of layoffs comes around. That little disparity can feel like a giant shield. This is the most anti-worker thing I have ever typed. I hate myself for sharing how I rationalize this.

Funily enough I have sat at the table and it went down the opposite. The underpaid lifer, with tons of internal knowledge was thrown out over the shiny new grifter who convinced them they were the second coming and they threw money at. There was also a lot of confirmation bias as they were sure the story was true.

And there's also inherent bias in terms of who the hiring manager was for each employee. Our team had a director change a few years ago, and everyone he has hired has been treated far better than the original crew, regardless of work output.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#256

Post by TchoBeer »

kcplate wrote: post #248
valdiorn wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your staff is acting like spoiled bratty children, you talk to them. If they don't adjust, you fire them. If you can't fire them because they're hard to replace, guess what; they have more value than you attributed to them, and were probably RIGHT to complain and insist on better pay. Just like your employer tries to extract maximum value for minimum pay out of you, so should you extract maximum pay for minimum in…

The problem isn’t firing them, firing people is actually pretty easy—-it’s having to manage them up to that point where you determine that termination is the appropriate solution. Whether or not they have value or hard to replace doesn’t excuse them from having the responsibility of civil behavior. Where is being valuable an appropriate excuse for being an asshole acceptable anywhere in society?

Basically everywhere, unfortunately.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#257

Post by O__________O »

least wrote: post #233
O__________O wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loyalty would not require enlistment contracts that generally last eight years as an active duty member, a reservist, or individual ready reservist — which if broken might result in jail time. Just imagine how “loyal” employees, marriages, etc would be if there only choice was to sign similar contracts. As for the battlefield, there is not duty to country, only those you’re in direct line of command with. Better hope…

I'll take this response as a "No, I've never served in the military." You've also not substantiated your claims about how the military cultivates a culture of 'cheating.' At least give an example of what loyalty means to you, because it's certainly not going along with the actual definition of it, which does not require any sort of just cause or rational thought attached to it. > The “drilling” you referred to is mor…

>> What even is loyalty to you?

To me, loyalty to reasoning regardless of outcome.

>> You've also not substantiated your claims about how the military cultivates a culture of cheating.

Here’s a paper that showed veterans report extramarital sexual relationships at 2x the rate of nonveterans:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0192513X1246051...

How else might you explain such a significant difference in rate of cheating beyond it being part of the culture? Beyond that, under UCMJ adultery is a crime, even if retired, yet what percentage of active duty and veterans are charged? How frequently are those aware of adultery in military subject to UCMJ actions?

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#258

Post by lowercased »

0xRusty wrote: post #251
lowercased wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If your contribution to the company is deemed to be worth the money, you'll get it. I've rarely seen individual contributions able to be evaluated 'fairly' at any scale. Your skills may be top notch, but you were focused on a project that was killed after 10 months because.... budget cuts? Bad management? Your contribution to the company in that case can be seen as a net negative, but it's largely out of your contr…

Trouble is I LOVE my job and the company I'm in. I know our processes like the back of my hand (I designed half of them) and feel very valued and enjoy it all. I don't want to leave just to get money. I just also dont see why people coming in to "junior" roles are paid $50k more than I was on at that level of experience just a few years ago (I understand inflation, this is something else). It's nuts.

I totally get it. I understand you love the job. It doesn't love you. It's a one-way relationship. Keep that in mind. The $ amounts are a bit inflation, and partially just because there's just a huge amount of money circulating around. Many depts and companies measure themselves on headcount, so hiring more people - even at inflated rates - gives them something measurable.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#259

Post by least »

O__________O wrote: post #257
least wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll take this response as a "No, I've never served in the military." You've also not substantiated your claims about how the military cultivates a culture of 'cheating.' At least give an example of what loyalty means to you, because it's certainly not going along with the actual definition of it, which does not require any sort of just cause or rational thought attached to it. > The “drilling” you referred to is mor…

>> What even is loyalty to you? To me, loyalty to reasoning regardless of outcome. >> You've also not substantiated your claims about how the military cultivates a culture of cheating. Here’s a paper that showed veterans report extramarital sexual relationships at 2x the rate of nonveterans: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0192513X1246051... How else might you explain such a significant difference in rat…

> To me, loyalty to reasoning regardless of outcome.

You cannot use the word you're defining inside the definition of it. In my best effort to interpret what you mean, I'd assume you mean that people only be loyal to reason? That's a fine ideal to have but it's got nothing to do with loyalty, which has to do with a person's consistent allegiance towards something. A person can be loyal to one thing and not loyal to another.

> How else might you explain such a significant difference in rate of cheating beyond it being part of the culture?

You would explain it as they do in the paper you linked, which is that there are many extenuating circumstances surrounding veteran marriages that make it more vulnerable to higher rates of adultery. That the cheating is a reflection of the self selecting population that trends towards joining the military rather than the military (the institution) doing anything to encourage that behavior. But it also carries several caveats, like how the results of their analyses cannot be generalized towards the current veteran population, which is significantly different from their data, which dates back to 1992.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#260

Post by shanusmagnus »

harimau777 wrote: post #226
shanusmagnus wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just wait till you see the comp in the glorious socialist utopia, you're gonna love that I bet.

I think that a lot of people would be happy with America moving to the mix of social programs, taxation, and salary that Sweden or Norway have.

Surely. The point is all these systems have tradeoffs. I'm guessing OP would find things to be disappointed in there, too, as have many of the people who actually live in those places.

edit: especially when it comes to comp, which was how this started. The left hand (as it were) criticizing comp in tech, and the right complaining about capitalism, is my favorite part.

Post reply on HN