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

The boss who put everyone on 70K

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 381 posts

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#151

Post by chrisseaton »

reificator wrote: post #134
chrisseaton wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the amateur/professional use is a bit different, because nobody is an amateur call centre worker. > But regardless: which people in a typical company would be the professionals? People with protected titles (Lawyers, etc)? How do e.g. Engineers fit in? People who's careers would traditionally have been part of learned societies that you had to profess vows to get into, and then careers that have grown up arou…

> I think the amateur/professional use is a bit different, because nobody is an amateur call centre worker. There are political volunteer call center workers aiding the campaign of their favored candidate.

I really don’t think that’s what the amateur/professional distinction means. You’re taking it a bit literally.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#152

Post by lonelappde »

epanchin wrote: post #119
MetalGuru wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of my favorites from the first article: “Gravity’s 2014 profit was $2.2 million, Price adds. At private companies with sales like Gravity’s total revenue, salary and bonus for the top quartile of CEOs is $710,000, according to Chief Executive magazine’s annual compensation survey. At companies with sales like Gravity’s net revenue, the top quartile pay falls to about $373,000. At companies with a similar number…

If you’ve gone from earning 40k and struggling, to earning 70k, do you care what the CEO’s motives are? It’s been 5 years, or $150k each, and there’s been no apparent bad news. What more do you need? Have you changed in the last 5 years?

The bad news is from his brother/shareholder who claims he was deprived of his share of profit by CEO diverting funds to his own wage, and from his ex wife who approves extensive physical abuse.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#154

Post by K0nserv »

benibela wrote: post #97
angarg12 wrote: post #47

> "When money is not at the forefront of your mind when you're doing your job, it allows you to be more passionate about what motivates you," she says. I spent the first several years of my career working in academia for a poverty level wage. I can confirm from my own experience that when you worry about not being able to pay rent and all the bills, it's very difficult to be productive, much less in a job that requir…

On the other hand, having money makes me less productive, since I spend more time caring about the stock market. Like yesterday alone my long ETF lost 2000€ worth, and I bought a short ETF for balance, which went up 200€. Should have bought the short ETF earlier, but I was at work. Here I am actually losing money by going to work

I'd recommend you read Fooled By Randomness[0], it contains many good lessons that sounds like you'd benefit from.

0:

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#155

Post by chrisseaton »

bumby wrote: post #139
chrisseaton wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would call center staff, receptionists etc not be professionals Are you just asking what a 'professional' is? As in you're not a native speaker? The etymology is from 'someone who has professed vows' and traditionally means someone who's part of some kind of learned society. In the past it was classes like doctors, lawyers, religious ministers. Over the industrial revolution it began to include engineers. Engineers…

> The etymology is from 'someone who has professed vows' To a certain extent, I think you are guilty of relaxing the definition just as you accuse the OP of doing. Strictly defined “professional engineers” are licensed and do take those vows of ethical behavior. However, the vast majority of people claiming an engineer title do not meet this criteria. While somewhat pedantic, it does carry legal meaning. Some states…

I think I covered that when I said it was relaxing over time and professions which used to require membership I’d learned societies don’t and that software engineering was at the extreme of this.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#156

Post by arayh »

While I admittedly do not know any of the inside details, but if you read up on some of the "Glass Door" reviews on Gravity Payments, you'll see a trend of reviews commenting on the cult-like behaviour of the company. I'd suggest doing your own research on companies you apply to before you get mesmerized by their media publicity.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#157

Post by lotsofpulp »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #138

Anyone who was worked a job where low wages are paid (either as a worker receiving low wages or in a managerial position) knows that there is an extremely tangible effect on work quality and productivity. Workers who feel they aren't being fairly compensated for their labor don't work as hard. They don't show as much attention to detail. They don't have any loyalty to their employers, who they perceive as exploiting…

> Its no surprise to me that paying workers a living wage (or even something close) results in measurable benefits for a business, in a variety of ways (not to mention immeasurably improving the lives of employees).

Not if their work doesn’t really differentiate the product. I have all the research I need about products from the internet, so I don’t need a store employee to sell me anything. Same with many other low paying positions. They are low paying because customers aren’t valuing the extra benefits of a non plug and play staff.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#158

Post by _qwfv »

Mikhail_Edoshin wrote: post #93
smitty1e wrote: post #56

It's an excellent story. But what works in a group smaller than Dunbar's Number[1] may not quite scale up. Don't let that Politician Obfuscating Near You (PONY) con you into believing otherwise. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number

Indeed. There are roughly three ways to convince people to keep the discipline needed for the collaborative work: force them, interest them economically, or have them believing the cause. Slavery, capitalism, and monastery. Real systems usually are mixes. E.g. Soviet system is largely slavery plus some bits of capitalism and a lot of propaganda to cover the monastery aspect. Or a capitalist company with a visionary l…

What about worker coops? Not capitalist, but not necessarily driven by believing in a cause.

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#159

Post by ailideex »

angarg12 wrote: post #47

> "When money is not at the forefront of your mind when you're doing your job, it allows you to be more passionate about what motivates you," she says. I spent the first several years of my career working in academia for a poverty level wage. I can confirm from my own experience that when you worry about not being able to pay rent and all the bills, it's very difficult to be productive, much less in a job that requir…

> I can confirm from my own experience that when you worry about not being able to pay rent and all the bills, it's very difficult to be productive, much less in a job that requires any kind of focus or creative thinking.

Who was paying you and could you not go do something else for money?

Re: The boss who put everyone on 70K

#160

Post by bumby »

chrisseaton wrote: post #155
bumby wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The etymology is from 'someone who has professed vows' To a certain extent, I think you are guilty of relaxing the definition just as you accuse the OP of doing. Strictly defined “professional engineers” are licensed and do take those vows of ethical behavior. However, the vast majority of people claiming an engineer title do not meet this criteria. While somewhat pedantic, it does carry legal meaning. Some states…

I think I covered that when I said it was relaxing over time and professions which used to require membership I’d learned societies don’t and that software engineering was at the extreme of this.

You did, my point was more along the lines of it’s subjective use and how it blurs the lines, so I suppose we’re saying the same thing. To a certain extent, the perverting of the terminology seems to be used to garner prestige or status rather than any of the original purpose. If subjectivity extends far enough, it’s hard for me to say the OP was using the term “professional” incorrectly. In that case, it’s hard to make the case that your subjective definition is right and theirs is wrong or vice versa
Post reply on HN