A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared • Hacker News Board

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#171

Post by mrkurt » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 4:36 AM UTC

scarmig wrote: post #89

a3voices wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. They're expensive because there's not enough high rises that would provide tons more housing space.

Which has more high rises: Buffalo or NYC? I'd argue you're mostly getting cause and effect backwards: places end up with lots of high rises because they're the most economically productive localities. Obviously at the margin another high rise will lower prices a bit , but the rate at which we'd be able to build them in SF sans restrictions would at most keep prices stable year-on-year. Which isn't nothing, but it's…

There are lots of places either similarly, or more dense than San Francisco with housing people can buy on an $80k salary. All of these places allow for higher density housing. Sure SF is way behind the curve at this point, but it's a bit silly to argue that "policy debt" is a reason policy changes wouldn't do much.

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#172

Post by pm24601 » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 4:37 AM UTC

run4yourlives2 wrote: post #95

jameshush wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know what you're saying, but I've never understood this logic personally. How does someone else earning more money hurt you? It's not like a person doing better than you is taking your money.

>How does someone else earning more money hurt you? It's not that simple. The employees were already working under conditions that job/person a was worth 2x and job/person b was worth 3x. That was established and everyone was content (or reasonably so). All of a sudden, someone declared that job/person a is worth 3x too, with no corresponding change to the output or expectations of either job. Job/Person b, having be…

> If you suggest all of a sudden that I'm not any more valuable than the receptionist hired last month, you should rightly expect that I'd be a little pissed.

Then leave.

Seriously. If you are so upset then leave.

But when interviewing, you might want to come up with a different reason for leaving the job. The interviewer might not be so understanding.

Update: wow, a downvote. :-) I welcome the downvotes.

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#173

Post by pm24601 » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 4:39 AM UTC

omonra wrote: post #49

austenallred wrote: post #27

While I have no idea whether this will work (or if it's a good idea), the most interesting part of all of this, to me, is the backlash from people calling it "unbridled Socialism." I'm still not sure how a CEO of a profitable company electing to pay his employees more becomes a political debate. If it fails, perhaps it's a failed experiment in Capitalism? It's not like anyone is forcing the business owner to do this.…

I'll try to explain. People call it socialism because a starting salary of 70k is likely to be uneconomic. Ie the cost of the employee is set above their value to the company. This is done at the expense of other stakeholders (ie management and investors, possibly other employees who would be paid less). That's kinda the basic premise of socialism - whereby an employee's salary is dissociated from the economic benefi…

> Ie the cost of the employee is set above their value to the company.

My salary has never been set by my value to the company - it has been set by my ability to negotiate.

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#174

Post by pm24601 » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 4:41 AM UTC

a3voices wrote: post #66

swyman wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people care about things other than what's immediately in front of their faces on a day-to-day basis

True but paying people more than necessary in a lot of ways contradicts his role as CEO.

That's his call on what's best for his company.

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#175

Post by pm24601 » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 4:49 AM UTC

For all the people complaining.

Please remember this:

1. It is his company; not yours.

2. He doesn't have to check with you

3. He pays the consequences of any bad decisions; not you.

4. He reaps the benefits; not you.

5. Your (and my) opinion does not matter.

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#176

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 4:52 AM UTC

ori_b wrote: post #162

morgante wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you'd switch to a more balanced lifestyle? Don't force your value system on others. I personally am happiest when I'm working 70-80 hours a week and appreciate being compensated for my hard work. Just because that doesn't describe you doesn't mean I should be forced to attain an artificial "balance."

So, other people make more, and you'd make yourself unhappy in retaliation?

[deleted]

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#177

Post by bsder » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 5:03 AM UTC

jetskindo wrote: post #23

This reminds me of a few months ago when gas price was down to a mere $2.00 . It was wonderful for the public, but all I heard on TV is how bad it was for the economy. We shouldn't let this be the norm, these employees complaining or those who quit are angry that their "inferior" coworkers are getting the same wages.

> This reminds me of a few months ago when gas price was down to a mere $2.00 . It was wonderful for the public, but all I heard on TV is how bad it was for the economy.

WTF? Low gas prices are almost uniformly good for the economy. The only companies it isn't good for are oil companies. And they make so damn much money no matter what that it really doesn't hurt them very much.

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#178

Post by plonh » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 5:08 AM UTC

jkestner wrote: post #157

morgante wrote: post #155

I hope some academics are doing a study on this, as it's an almost prefect real-world example of efficiency wages.[1] I wouldn't be surprised if they see large increases in productivity amongst downmarket employees, as they now have an extremely strong incentive to kick ass at their job (any other job they could get would pay significantly less). That being said, I also sympathize with the workers who were making $70…

I've always wondered how pro athletes in their weird economy deal with this issue. With salary caps, max contracts and scarcity there are all sorts of constraints that change from year to year, and a superstar on a max contract signed a few years ago can be making less than a merely good player who just signed a contract. (One of the rare cases where one's actually voiced displeasure: http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/…

They make a lifetime supply of money each year, and plenty from non-league sources (endorsements, etc). Their energy is better spent learning how to manage the money they have, than fighting over who gets paid more of it.

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#179

Post by api_or_ipa » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 5:13 AM UTC

littletimmy wrote: post #169

The most repulsive thing to read here is the reaction of some of the customers. “What’s their incentive to hustle if you pay them so much?” Really? Do you ask that same question when a CEO gets millions of dollar in bonus? Nah, the CEOs simply "deserve" it. The employees though, they must hustle. Roughly transposed to the 17th century, that statement reads "What's the incentive for this n * to pick more cotton if he…

> How about observing how well they perform before bringing in your Ayn Rand propaganda.

While I agree with the rest of your post, your portrayal of Ms. Rand's work is woefully inaccurate. No where do I recall she wrote of demeaning blacks, suppressing wages and preventing the equal participation of all capable people in a common market.

Rand was very clear that racism and discrimination hindered the free market by preventing, under threat of violence, the equality of all in participating in market transactions and deals.

It's a shame Atlas Shrugged is so long, because I think most people would be far more humbled by what she wrote compared to what people think she wrote about.

Re: A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

#180

Post by _delirium » Sat, Aug 01, 2015, 5:29 AM UTC

prostoalex wrote: post #145

jameshush wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know what you're saying, but I've never understood this logic personally. How does someone else earning more money hurt you? It's not like a person doing better than you is taking your money.

I think this was researched in numerous psychology studies. All else being equal, people were happier earning $70,000 knowing that their peers earned $50,000, and unhappier earning $90,000 knowing that their peers earned $110,000. I am likely wrong on exact numbers, but studies are well-known enough to be quoted in "Fooled by Randomness", "Predictably Irrational" and some other pop-psych titles.

The sudden change is another factor: if people had "always" been making much more similar incomes, or if the company gradually/quietly narrowed pay spreads over time, the results may be different than a sudden change from large pay disparities to much smaller ones. Some of it in my opinion is quite cultural, not purely psychological, based on background expectations of what wage spreads "should" be.

When I used to work in Denmark, I noticed expats were often much more annoyed about the (approximate) wage equality than Danes were. I was making $80k or so, and most people I knew were making in the $70k-$100k range, doing jobs ranging from professor to software developer. Meanwhile, a typical full-time restaurant waiter or construction worker might make around $50-60k. So, we had higher incomes, but not by a huge margin, certainly less than the spread would be in the US. Many expats found this grossly unfair, that despite them having a high-status and supposedly high-end job, they were still in approximately the same socioeconomic class as basically any other worker. They considered themselves underpaid, and the other workers overpaid. But most Danes didn't really see an issue, and considered the Danish wage spreads to be normal.