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

When new hires get paid more, top performers resign first

hbr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–225 of 225 posts

Re: When new hires get paid more, top performers resign first

#221

Post by musicale »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #217
musicale wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it good to know how underpaid you actually are relative to your coworkers? If your colleagues are being paid less than you are for the same work, shouldn't they direct their ire at the company rather than you? I am 99% convinced that pay secrecy primarily benefits employers and management at the expense of most employees. It creates an asymmetric information environment that makes it difficult for employees to…

>Isn't it good to know how underpaid you actually are relative to your coworkers? If your colleagues are being paid less than you are for the same work, shouldn't they direct their ire at the company rather than you? You would think that, but imagine you are making less than someone who does less work than you, or is clearly less skilled. Although you might initially blame the company, you may grow to resent your cow…

Suppose at the end of 1 year you found out that your coworkers were being paid twice your salary for the same work.

Now suppose after 5 years you found out that coworkers were being paid twice your salary for the same work, and had been for years.

It seems to me that you want to find this out sooner rather than later.

Re: When new hires get paid more, top performers resign first

#222

Post by wakawaka28 »

musicale wrote: post #221
wakawaka28 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Isn't it good to know how underpaid you actually are relative to your coworkers? If your colleagues are being paid less than you are for the same work, shouldn't they direct their ire at the company rather than you? You would think that, but imagine you are making less than someone who does less work than you, or is clearly less skilled. Although you might initially blame the company, you may grow to resent your cow…

Suppose at the end of 1 year you found out that your coworkers were being paid twice your salary for the same work. Now suppose after 5 years you found out that coworkers were being paid twice your salary for the same work, and had been for years. It seems to me that you want to find this out sooner rather than later.

Yes I see what you mean now. Of course it would be important to know that sooner rather than later. But I suspect if you are paid that little, you would know it from industry averages. But awareness of how screwed over you are is not going to make you happy. If you can be paid that much less than the next guy and not know it from industry averages, you should probably be able to guess it.

At one job where I was perhaps making 70% of what my coworkers did, and I found out a couple of years before I was able to leave. It did upset me a lot. I knew I was underpaid before that because of how other companies paid, but knowing specifics definitely rubbed salt in the wound. I suppose knowing specifics might be a necessary evil but I think back then it might have been better to not know. On the other hand, that experience set me down a path that eventually worked out ok, so I can't really say I wish I didn't know.

Re: When new hires get paid more, top performers resign first

#223

Post by JohnFen »

bevekspldnw wrote: post #188
JohnFen wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that it's a matter of priorities. I am not interested in making the most money I possibly can, I'm interested in doing the most interesting work that I possibly can. I have even taken jobs where I was paid well below market rates because the work itself was interesting enough to me or taught me a skill that I really wanted to learn. As long as I'm being paid at least an amount that I consider fair, it doesn't…

I don’t care about money, that’s not my personal issue. I’ll happy to pay my bills, have good food on my table, and have a roof over my head. It’s the feeling that I’ve been hoodwinked that I refuse to tolerate.

If I'm making less than someone else doing the same job, I don't feel that I've been hoodwinked. I negotiated a rate that I found acceptable, and so did they. Nobody was deceived.

Re: When new hires get paid more, top performers resign first

#224

Post by RussianCow »

JohnFen wrote: post #223
bevekspldnw wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t care about money, that’s not my personal issue. I’ll happy to pay my bills, have good food on my table, and have a roof over my head. It’s the feeling that I’ve been hoodwinked that I refuse to tolerate.

If I'm making less than someone else doing the same job, I don't feel that I've been hoodwinked. I negotiated a rate that I found acceptable, and so did they. Nobody was deceived.

I'm curious if you would feel the same if all products were bought and sold this way? Let's say you bought a new TV and you negotiated a price of $3. Then your friend tells you that she bought the same TV on the same day from the same store for $1k. Wouldn't you feel cheated? If so, how is that any different?

Re: When new hires get paid more, top performers resign first

#225

Post by HumblyTossed »

Saulivar wrote: post #90

There was an article at Forbes that said employees who stay with the company for more than 2 years are underpaid by as much as 50%. So why do they stay for so long? Humans are resistant to change. Speaking of myself, when I was working as a programmer, finding a new job meant going through endless interviews with leetcode tests even though I had 15 years experience. Turns out it was Joel Spolsky who invented that pra…

> So why do they stay for so long?

Sad thing is because it might actually be interesting work.

Post reply on HN