191–200 of 388 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The workaround is to formally give good performers a different job title with accompanying higher pay.
Or have discretionary bonuses
The meat is page 5 under "The changes the proposal would bring". Highlights: * Job-seekers would have a right to information about the pay range of posts they apply for * Employers would be prohibited from asking about an applicant's pay history * Employees would have a right to ask their employer for sex-disaggregated information on the average pay of other workers doing the same work or work of equal value. * Emplo…
How does making salary public and not asking about applicants pay history work? If you tell them your title and employer, can't they just look up what you probably got paid?
Anyway it doesn't really matter; you apply for a job, if you don't meet the criteria, that's fine. But if you DO meet the criteria but pay you a little more than your previous job, but less than others with the same job, that's going to be tackled by this legislation.
The best they can do is that instead of underpaying you, they will say "You did not pass the interview process for this job".
Not every employee in role X is as good as every other employee in role X. The better ones deserve higher pay, which creates an incentive for the others to up their game so that they, too, can earn more. Why try harder if it's run like romper room?
The meat is page 5 under "The changes the proposal would bring". Highlights: * Job-seekers would have a right to information about the pay range of posts they apply for * Employers would be prohibited from asking about an applicant's pay history * Employees would have a right to ask their employer for sex-disaggregated information on the average pay of other workers doing the same work or work of equal value. * Emplo…
despite pay gap shown time and time again to be fiction, government monkeys are still dancing to that out of key tune.
I mean once this legislation passes, it'll be impossible (hopefully) for a pay gap to exist for the same job - assuming equal hours worked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Employees would have a right to ask their employer for sex-disaggregated information on the average pay of other workers doing the same work or work of equal value. This is literally impossible in anything other than rote manual labour. Even then, I'm not convinced this is possible.
Err, no it's not, big engineering firms (google, facebook, etc) have formalized job titles and 'ranks' and provide a clear path for advancement - and they publish pay ranges for those titles/ranks.
They do? I'd love to see that if you have a link.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Individual personal salary is private information protected by law (at least in our country). Starting salary range in job offers is public, that's not enugh information.
Salaries might be private here, but taxes sure aren't. A recruiter could feasibly walk into the local tax office and ask to see my taxable income for 2020.
I look forward to when every human interaction is finally regulated in law, and we're still not happy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is weird because it's such an easy question to answer. "Performance management isn't an exact science and if everyone knew everyone else's pay, it would be total chaos and nothing would get done."
"Performance management isn't an exact science and if everyone knew everyone else's pay, it would be total chaos and nothing would get done." How's that work for the GS structure then? Or for union jobs in various sectors? The only reason chaos would ensure is if there were extensive unexplainable and unfair practices.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is weird because it's such an easy question to answer. "Performance management isn't an exact science and if everyone knew everyone else's pay, it would be total chaos and nothing would get done."
"Performance management isn't an exact science and if everyone knew everyone else's pay, it would be total chaos and nothing would get done." How's that work for the GS structure then? Or for union jobs in various sectors? The only reason chaos would ensure is if there were extensive unexplainable and unfair practices.
In plenty of companies I have worked for, you pay quite a lot more than you want for a particular hire not necessarily because they are worth it but because you are desperate and they are nearly good enough. You generally don't get away with putting people's salaries down if they don't perform and if you did, they might leave ending with you being back in the mess.
This might be magnified in smaller companies but it could easily squew salary figures and depending on their sex, it could also make the figures look really wrong.
This might be "unfair" by one definition but it definitely happens and is one reason why it is hard to be transparent about wages. It can also create resentment if others knew that someone was overpaid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Employers would be prohibited from asking about an applicant's pay history Aw, that was one of the fun moments when getting my current job. I moved from private sector to public sector and they're like "You understand that the previous pay you listed is more than our boss's boss, the director of our entire org unit gets paid right?". Yes, yes I do. Which is why when you asked at interview "Why do you want this role…
The reality is that not everyone brings equal value to an org. Some are rockstars and others are meh. It’s natural, and you should be incentivized to improve.
I agree. But that's not incompatible with transparent pay. If this other person is producing more value and getting paid more, great. But show me how that value is twice my own. Those measurements should be going on in performance reviews. Largely, nobody cares to do this in a just way. It's basically just opinions, which are easily biased.