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

261–270 of 281 posts

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#261

Post by scarface74 »

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 feel like my company values me. But they are not paying me what I’m worth”

If that suns up your sentiment, do you not see a problem with that?

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#262

Post by scarface74 »

kcplate wrote: post #234
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…

I am pretty sure you missed the entire point of their comment. The commenter was not speaking about their own current comp, but the current comp vs quality vs entitlement within their direct reports. It’s hard to look at low quality employees making large salaries as a leader and not be dismayed, disappointed, and discouraged when the entitlement and whining happens. A lot of employees act like children and that is n…

> It’s hard to look at low quality employees making large salaries as a leader and not be dismayed, disappointed, and discouraged when the entitlement and whining happens

I’m “entitled” to my market worth. I feel not an ounce of sympathy for parent poster. He has accepted what the company is paying him.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#263

Post by O__________O »

least wrote: post #259
O__________O wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> 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…

>> You cannot use the word you're defining inside the definition of it.

Reasoning to me is a belief, as such, it’s possible to be loyal or for that matter, non-loyal to reasoning. For example, beliefs of religious fundamentalists in my opinion are based on the word of god, not reasoning. Further, even when it would be easier to bend my reasoning to fit narrative that’s better for myself, I strive to reason objectively regardless of its impact on myself. To me, that’s loyalty that’s not born of force, manipulative tactics, and is a valid example of loyalty without error. In the not to distant past, people were killed for their belief in reasoning over the word of god, even today it still happens.

>> 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.

Taken to an extreme, top level military personnel cheating is potentially national security threat and even at enlisted level, systemic amounts of adultery, given it’s a crime under UCMJ, create an environment that’s only likely to produce similar illegal behavior and culture of covertly enabling it.

As I said in my original comment, in my experience these issues are common among all militaries, and I am not aware of a solution. That said, in my opinion, it is an issue, like the increased levels of suicide within military that if addressed would have a significant impact on a military being more fit for combat that those who have been unable to address these issues.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#264

Post by moralestapia »

ryandrake wrote: post #232
moralestapia wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Negotiation works when some company specifically wants you . If you're one of the other 99% of hires you're going to be placed at some salary which has been already budgeted and approved for your position. There's some leeway there but it's not more than a single digit percentage, although I agree with patio11 and others saying that an extra 5-10K/year just for asking politely is not a bad deal.

So, basically what you're saying is that the "Negotiate harder, bro" advice only really works for 1% of the world. So why is it always trotted out as the solution? I know HN is full of these Captains of Industry who merely glance at their bosses with an upturned eyebrow, and get $100K of RSUs thrown at them, but for the rest of the workforce, here's what negotiation looks like: [Me] Hi, I'd like a raise. [Co] Nope. […

I never said you couldn't go somewhere else, that's actually the advice to follow when you reached your ceiling wherever you are (and you have an offer ofc).

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#265

Post by ajsnigrutin »

medo-bear wrote: post #202
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> were acquired without incurring personal costs, while in terms of their use, inheritance and even trading there were practically no differences between the holders of tenancy rights to state/socially owned housing and private owners’ (Petrović 2004, 270). I have no idea where the author got this... this was maybe(!) true for very high ranking party members, but for normal people, there was no inheritance and tradin…

so i know also from personal experience that inheritance existed. when my grandfather (certainly not some high ranking party member) passed away in the mid 80s the rights to the apartment went to my grandmother. she was in retirement at the time. my uncle also lived with her at the time. he was a university student. besides having this social apartment my grandfather and my grandmother also built a house in a village…

So, she lived in the apartment, and stayed there after he died?

Or did she live in another apartment, and when he died, she got his, better(?) apartment?

If someone dies and you get to stay in an apartment, that's not inheritance, just continuing to rent that apartment.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#266

Post by phpisthebest »

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #238
phpisthebest wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have no way of knowing that, nor does the employer. Maybe I have health issues, maybe I want to go back to school myself to get a more advanced degree, maybe I need more for Retirement because I will not have any kids to take care of me when I am old, maybe 100000 other things However NONE of that is relevant to my wages, my wages and my co-workers wages should be set Solely and Exclusively to the value we bring…

> wages should be set Solely and Exclusively to the value we bring to the organization This isn't true now and has never been true. Otherwise frontline workers would make a lot more and CEOs would make a lot less. Wages already have skewed dynamics based on a bunch of arbitrary reasons. Saying that people with kids should get a bit more salary I don't think is that much more controversial than saying a permanent empl…

>>This isn't true now and has never been true. Otherwise frontline workers would make a lot more and CEOs would make a lot less.

Neither one of those statements follow each other. You may belive, and in some cases you may be correct that a CEO is of less value than frontline workers, but the prevailing narrative I see across the internet that workers bring "all the value" is also false

>Wages already have skewed dynamics based on a bunch of arbitrary reasons.

They are not really that arbitrary, pricing for wages are set largely by 3 factors

1. Market Demand for a given role 2. Number of people available to fill a given role 3. Amount of revenue a company can generate from a given role

Wage pricing is a balance of all 3 factors,

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#267

Post by kcplate »

scarface74 wrote: post #262
kcplate wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am pretty sure you missed the entire point of their comment. The commenter was not speaking about their own current comp, but the current comp vs quality vs entitlement within their direct reports. It’s hard to look at low quality employees making large salaries as a leader and not be dismayed, disappointed, and discouraged when the entitlement and whining happens. A lot of employees act like children and that is n…

> It’s hard to look at low quality employees making large salaries as a leader and not be dismayed, disappointed, and discouraged when the entitlement and whining happens I’m “entitled” to my market worth. I feel not an ounce of sympathy for parent poster. He has accepted what the company is paying him.

> I’m “entitled” to my market worth.

Sure, but your employer will have the expectation that you will provide market value for that compensation that they provide you. If you are well paid and do underwhelming work compared to coworkers who are paid less but provide exceptional work, your leadership will take notice of that. They will and should expect more from you because your better lower paid coworkers are moving the value/$ bar expectations for you.

Literally the worst reputation you could have among your leadership is that of a “market worth” paid underperformer. Folks like that are the easy choice when the RIF conversations starts happening. When RIFs aren’t happening, folks like that are going to catch every shit job a manager can throw at them.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#268

Post by medo-bear »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #265
medo-bear wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so i know also from personal experience that inheritance existed. when my grandfather (certainly not some high ranking party member) passed away in the mid 80s the rights to the apartment went to my grandmother. she was in retirement at the time. my uncle also lived with her at the time. he was a university student. besides having this social apartment my grandfather and my grandmother also built a house in a village…

So, she lived in the apartment, and stayed there after he died? Or did she live in another apartment, and when he died, she got his, better(?) apartment? If someone dies and you get to stay in an apartment, that's not inheritance, just continuing to rent that apartment.

you said that once the owner dies the dwelling goes back to the state. in fact i dont know of any case of a family being kicked out of home after the principal holder died

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#269

Post by refurb »

shapefrog wrote: post #147
refurb wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I once had a boss tell a coworker "It's better to be lower in the pay band for your role because your raises are bigger". Can you imagine how stupid that comment is?

That is middle management tier thinking, unless you are one of the real deep thinkers at their level, you wouldnt understand.

The best part is I'm getting downvoted for calling it out. Apparently some people actually bought into it.

Re: Survey of workers’ views on salary transparency

#270

Post by benreesman »

subsuxbjes wrote: post #48
benreesman wrote: post #15

Very few engineers are within a constant factor of one another. One person has the same title as another but everyone knows that person A does person B’s job in the shower. This is why serious companies use low key stock options or RSUs to pay person A 1000x more than person B. This stuff is hard, it’s all a gradient right? But Meta just whacked 10+ percent of staff in the biggest tech layoff ever and the street resp…

So morale of your story is that you're the pro and all the TypeScript (read frontend) developers are not as good as you?

I cut my teeth as an engineer on front end. I ended up writing a web browser and contributing to a JS VM.

There’s a parent around it floating around somewhere.

And I never said I was the “pro”, I said that our industry doesn’t adequately acknowledge the difference between “pros” and “dabblers”.

Which is why Therac 25 can happen.

Honestly, as politely as possible, know before you speak.

Post reply on HN