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

IKEA's retailer's solved global 'unhappy worker' crisis by raising salaries

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 226 posts

Re: IKEA's retailer's solved global 'unhappy worker' crisis by raising salaries

#31

Post by AndrewKemendo »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #11

Can someone explain to me why corporate management seems unable to grasp the concept of properly paying and providing benefits for their employees to increase retention and have more successful hiring? Like...is it actual incompetence? Or do they know it's the answer, but just don't want to do it? I just can't grasp why a manager would refuse to provide proper pay and benefits and then get a Surprised Pikachu face wh…

It’s not any more complicated than short term rent seeking from investors

That’s literally it

Investors hire managers that will ensure that investors remain the top priority for the lifecycle of the firm

To such an extent that they made up fake rules like the idea that corporate officers have a fiduciary requirement to investors like a mutual fund manager does

This is because the goal of financializing a company is to make it a narrowly focused high margin hedge fund

You can’t do that if labor has bargaining power for control of the firm

Re: IKEA's retailer's solved global 'unhappy worker' crisis by raising salaries

#32

Post by quietbritishjim »

grecy wrote: post #9
jp57 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subsidizing childcare is also "more money", but only for some workers. If the others don't notice or don't care that they're getting paid less for the same work that's great for the company. I am in favor of flexible work arrangements, and I have no idea if those have costs to the company, or how much more you'd need to pay the workers to accept the less flexible arrangements.

For the people that want the childcare, it’s better than more money, because it’s tax free

I suppose that depends on location. In the UK, it would count as a benefit in kind, and is taxable in exactly same way as regular income.

Re: IKEA's retailer's solved global 'unhappy worker' crisis by raising salaries

#33

Post by [deleted] »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #11

Can someone explain to me why corporate management seems unable to grasp the concept of properly paying and providing benefits for their employees to increase retention and have more successful hiring? Like...is it actual incompetence? Or do they know it's the answer, but just don't want to do it? I just can't grasp why a manager would refuse to provide proper pay and benefits and then get a Surprised Pikachu face wh…

[deleted]

Re: IKEA's retailer's solved global 'unhappy worker' crisis by raising salaries

#34

Post by djbusby »

WheatMillington wrote: post #16
Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #11

Can someone explain to me why corporate management seems unable to grasp the concept of properly paying and providing benefits for their employees to increase retention and have more successful hiring? Like...is it actual incompetence? Or do they know it's the answer, but just don't want to do it? I just can't grasp why a manager would refuse to provide proper pay and benefits and then get a Surprised Pikachu face wh…

Managers are balancing multiple competing issues. Yes staff happiness and retention is important, but there is going to be some staff turnover no matter what. At the same time budgets need to be managed - managers simply can't pay staff whatever they please, businesses need to be functional and profitable.

Some firms are very profitable and still pay many workers very low, eg: Amazon and Walmart. They have money to pay more but they just don't.

Re: IKEA's retailer's solved global 'unhappy worker' crisis by raising salaries

#36

Post by bell-cot »

golergka wrote: post #19
grecy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the people that want the childcare, it’s better than more money, because it’s tax free

Can company provide a choice for employees where they can either get facilities or a raise?

IANAL, but I'll bet the answer is "yes-ish, in most-ish circumstances and jurisdictions, if the company is willing to pay enough lawyers & taxes & stuff.

(If $Company is not big global retailer like IKEA, then things would probably be far simpler.)

Re: IKEA's retailer's solved global 'unhappy worker' crisis by raising salaries

#37

Post by QuarterReptile »

golergka wrote: post #19
grecy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the people that want the childcare, it’s better than more money, because it’s tax free

Can company provide a choice for employees where they can either get facilities or a raise?

In the US, and presumably elsewhere, no way. My wife tried to negotiate a higher salary in exchange for forgoing health insurance a few times, to no avail.

Re: IKEA's retailer's solved global 'unhappy worker' crisis by raising salaries

#38

Post by QuarterReptile »

39896880 wrote: post #29
from-nibly wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, because raising kids isn't contributing to society.

Contributing to the household income. It takes 2 incomes to live anywhere but BFE in the US.

[flagged]

Re: IKEA's retailer's solved global 'unhappy worker' crisis by raising salaries

#39

Post by sircastor »

petra wrote: post #17
Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #11

Can someone explain to me why corporate management seems unable to grasp the concept of properly paying and providing benefits for their employees to increase retention and have more successful hiring? Like...is it actual incompetence? Or do they know it's the answer, but just don't want to do it? I just can't grasp why a manager would refuse to provide proper pay and benefits and then get a Surprised Pikachu face wh…

When i worked in a small business,a factory, the boss, having a hard time getting people to work for hime(due to salary, benefits and work environment) explained it by "people just don't want to work". Why? Extroverts usually blame the world, introverts look for the reason in themselvs. Many managers are extroverts.

I think there’s an unacknowledged end to that phrase, being that “people just don’t want to work for unfair wages”

But of course employers don’t want to acknowledge that they’re being unfair in compensation. To them, the compensation is just, and therefore people are simply unwilling to work.

I think there is a degree of tolerance that’s shifted. A job is not a job, anymore. Healthcare is insanely expensive. Housing is insanely expensive. Raising kids is insanely expensive. What used to be a “good honest job” has transformed into maximum-value-extracted job.

And everyone is desperate to get as big a piece as they can to ensure their own survival.

Post reply on HN