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

A Company Copes With Backlash Against the Raise That Roared

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 280 posts

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

#161

Post by Spooky23 »

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…

How do you know how valuable you are? Or how much more valuable you are than the receptionist.

My assistant is ridiculously valuable. She's a multiplier for the team. Her presence means invoices get paid, visitor logistics are taken care of, contracts get renewed, the office is in order. I don't control her pay, but every hour she is present easily saves me a quarter hour, and probably saves my direct reports a similar amount of time.

Essentially that role for me is manufacturing an asset that I cannot buy -- time. If I could control her salary, I would double it.

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

#162

Post by ori_b »

morgante wrote: post #151
icebraining wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So some people would get paid more, and you'd switch to a more balanced lifestyle? I'm struggling to see the downsides :)

> 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?

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

#163

Post by ArkyBeagle »

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 just lack the part of my imagination that makes me care what anybody else makes. So far as I am concerned, it's simply not important.

I'd love to talk to somebody overpaid by three orders of magnitude but only to find out how it happened, in a "The Man Who Would Be King" sort of way. The world is far too arbitrary and random for anything like that to have too much meaning.

Indeed, someone in the office next to me in a dying company went on to harvest quite a bit of stock options - I spoke with her husband years after. She was definitely worth it, but it's still like the opposite of a tree falling on you.

The second rule is that what I make is important, but only to me and no you can't find out. Consistency has its limits.

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

#164

Post by ArkyBeagle »

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/…

I expect many simply do not. It's a lot of work having money. Athletes don't have a whole lot of control over their time.

There is a Ken Burns film about Mark Twain, who went broke trying to fund a printing process ahead of its time in the manner of a bad gambler. It's heartbreaking.

Bob Wills went broke on a failed entertainment venture, but made it good at considerable personal cost.

"Life entails a parcel of risk" - Mr. Merriwether, "Little Big Man".

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

#165

Post by ArkyBeagle »

goldenchrome wrote: post #30

I think this is half the problem for the backlash: "“What’s their incentive to hustle if you pay them so much?” Ms. Brajcich said they asked." It relies on the assumption that the only motivation people would have to work, is that they will be homeless if they don't. I think the idea that you can work towards something bigger than you is a foreign concept to the majority of people.

It probably is. I wonder if people get addicted to fear.

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

#166

Post by ArkyBeagle »

guan wrote: post #147
goldenchrome wrote: post #30

I think this is half the problem for the backlash: "“What’s their incentive to hustle if you pay them so much?” Ms. Brajcich said they asked." It relies on the assumption that the only motivation people would have to work, is that they will be homeless if they don't. I think the idea that you can work towards something bigger than you is a foreign concept to the majority of people.

If you are being overpaid (in some sense), you might work harder than before because you have more to lose if you get fired. Any alternative job would most likely come with lower pay.

But in life, you can play to defend what you have or you can play to move into something else. It's unusual for a good offense to also be a good defense, regardless of any cliches.

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

#167

Post by ArkyBeagle »

a3voices wrote: post #40
goldenchrome wrote: post #30

I think this is half the problem for the backlash: "“What’s their incentive to hustle if you pay them so much?” Ms. Brajcich said they asked." It relies on the assumption that the only motivation people would have to work, is that they will be homeless if they don't. I think the idea that you can work towards something bigger than you is a foreign concept to the majority of people.

Also some people like to work mainly for lifestyle reasons, not for some greater purpose.

Given the drubbing that "greater purpose" has been given in the last 100 years, no wonder.

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

#168

Post by ArkyBeagle »

dopamean wrote: post #2

Am I crazy for thinking it seems naive to not anticipate that current employees may not take kindly to people who earn half as much as them getting bumped up to their salaries?

Am I crazy to think nobody should actually care? By that, I mean the cost of caring about it is probably much higher than the cost of not caring about it.

I wonder if on the grave marker of humanity it will not read "THEY CARED TOO MUCH ABOUT SOCIAL SIGNALLING". The Universe is far too personal (and, curiously impersonal at the same time ) to care about whether other people are "winning". They'll get theirs, you'll get yours.

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

#169

Post by littletimmy »

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 is well-fed?" Repulsive and sickening. How about observing how well they perform before bringing in your Ayn Rand propaganda. This sort of thought must be eradicated from the American mindset.

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

#170

Post by pm24601 »

Ensorceled wrote: post #31
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.

As somebody who often makes more than my peers because I work harder and longer hours, I understand this logic perfectly. In some respects they ARE taking my money ... the company now has less money to distribute based upon merit. Also, I would immediately become a 9-5 employee and enjoy my weekends like my now equally paid peers.

And you would be replaced by people that would regard your (former) pay as a huge salary increase.

Don't be so certain that the company will be sad to see you leave. The people who replace you might be even better than you.

Post reply on HN