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

Open Salaries: Outcomes

blog.lunarlogic.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 225 posts

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#101

Post by jonlucc »

mason55 wrote: post #89
marme wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no two employees with the exact same job title should have more than 10% difference in pay. If someone is making 40% more than others with same title then they should be promoted to higher title and if they dont deserve that title then why is the company paying them so much. It is one thing to want to minimize salary costs but another to disrespect employees with absurdly low salary.

Doesn't the Peter Principle come into play here? What if we do the same job but I do it twice as fast? That doesn't mean I'd be a good fit for the next level up, it might just mean I'm really good at doing this specific job very quickly.

Where I work, there are 4 levels of my job, none of which are management. That is to say that someone can work an entire career as a research associate and take on more responsibility, but not be forced up the org chart. This is very important because I look to the people in the higher levels for a lot of help (both organizational and technical), but we can do much of the same lab work.

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#102

Post by andrei_says_ »

brianwawok wrote: post #54
st3v3r wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a top performer, you can also see that the company is not paying you at the top of people they're paying.

But I am not sure you need transparency for this? Can usually get close to ranges if you ask a few coworker friends and/or interview around.

Have you actually tried asking coworkers for their salaries?

My experience is that this is a taboo topic.

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#103

Post by givinguflac »

0xmohit wrote: post #56
szynszyliszys wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I can give it to you since I work for Lunar Logic. How it looked: everyone felt a bit anxious and not 100% sure if it will be the good decision, but we decided to go for open salaries anyway (it was a collective decision after a series of long discussions of a whole company, not a decision at the top). When the salaries list was released, everyone took a look and there was no disaster. Most of the salaries felt j…

By being transparent, you force yourself to be less irrational. Irrationality is the square root of all evil.

I see what you did there

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#104

Post by givinguflac »

brianwawok wrote: post #36
aantix wrote: post #32

If you're any good at your job, you should avoid these open companies like the plague. Don't piss away your leverage..

This got downvoted, and the tone is a bit harsh.. but it does speak a bit of truth. What happens to the guy in open salary co who is legit 50% better than everyone else? Do his peers vote to give him 50% more money? Or does it settle on sort of a union style pay scale, where everyone with the same # of years of work makes the same money (which is great for the worst performances, and terrible for the best performers)

Transparent doesn't have to mean homogeneous.

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#105

Post by andrei_says_ »

lumberjack wrote: post #70
brianwawok wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This got downvoted, and the tone is a bit harsh.. but it does speak a bit of truth. What happens to the guy in open salary co who is legit 50% better than everyone else? Do his peers vote to give him 50% more money? Or does it settle on sort of a union style pay scale, where everyone with the same # of years of work makes the same money (which is great for the worst performances, and terrible for the best performers)

>What happens to the guy in open salary co who is legit 50% better than everyone else? The GP is right in that, that person doesn't have much choice but to move on. I don't have experience with open salaries but I do have experience with collective agreements and seniority. They aren't meant to take into consideration the "super stars". That's not what they are meant to do. Seniority and collective agreements do suck…

Is that "50 better than everyone else" measurable? If it is, then the higher salary along with the criteria and specific performance measures could be a good incentive for the rest of the employees to improve.

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#106

Post by vkou »

aantix wrote: post #32

If you're any good at your job, you should avoid these open companies like the plague. Don't piss away your leverage..

So, when a couple of thousand engineers at Google put their salaries in a spreadsheet, all the good people should have jumped ship?

You're also implying that salary is a function of performance. This is an incredible claim to make.

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#107

Post by brianwawok »

andrei_says_ wrote: post #102
brianwawok wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I am not sure you need transparency for this? Can usually get close to ranges if you ask a few coworker friends and/or interview around.

Have you actually tried asking coworkers for their salaries? My experience is that this is a taboo topic.

Yes. Several times I have participated in a "throw salary facedown on the table, and we flip them all up together".

Companies hate it, as it gives you more bargaining power.

Has to be with people you at least sorta like though, can't go demand it from some 12 cubes over.

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#108

Post by brianwawok »

givinguflac wrote: post #104
brianwawok wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This got downvoted, and the tone is a bit harsh.. but it does speak a bit of truth. What happens to the guy in open salary co who is legit 50% better than everyone else? Do his peers vote to give him 50% more money? Or does it settle on sort of a union style pay scale, where everyone with the same # of years of work makes the same money (which is great for the worst performances, and terrible for the best performers)

Transparent doesn't have to mean homogeneous.

Okay so show me a company with both transparency and big differences in salary between workers at the same job.

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#109

Post by civilian »

ransom1538 wrote: post #50
eyelidlessness wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it change your mind knowing that it was not imposed from a position of power? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12806739

Really? Or were some scared of being singled out? I have managed teams, asking 40 people a question will get you 40 different answers. But in this case they were all for it? Lies.

You'd make a good conspiracy theorist. You question & disbelieve everything even when faced with reasonable evidence.

Yes, maybe we don't actually know all the intricacies of what's going on, but you're just being a crank.

Re: Open Salaries: Outcomes

#110

Post by rifung »

aantix wrote: post #32

If you're any good at your job, you should avoid these open companies like the plague. Don't piss away your leverage..

> If you're any good at your job, you should avoid these open companies like the plague

I think you mean if you're any good at negotiating salary since doing a good job does not equate with higher pay in most companies.

Also, even if that were true, there shouldn't be any issues because you would just get promoted to a higher position, in which case you'd be paid more anyway.

It seems like there's only an issue if you think you're that much better than everyone else but nobody else feels the same way.

Post reply on HN