The one-salary experiment, ten years in • Hacker News Board

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#251

Post by dangerface » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 1:42 PM UTC

lawn wrote: post #219

What happens when a skilled and very hard worker gets the same raise as someone who's not as skilled and not working very hard? For example if the skilled one solves the hard problems the less skilled one cannot solve. And if the lazy one spends a bunch of time on facebook. It isn't about the salary in absolute terms. It's about recognition and to be appreciated for the good work he's doing. But instead he gets the l…

A team of equally skilled and motivated people is bad as it can not achieve more than any individual in the team, the less skilled and less motivated should be removed.

A team works best when its different people with different skills and different motivations as they can achieve more than the sum of their parts.

The developer feels they are the one making the product and brining in the money for the business, obviously they contribute more than the janitor.

The janitor feels they contribute more as they shove their hand down a toilet to unblock it while the developer sits in a comfy chair on facebook.

How do you quantify the contribution of two different jobs? Salary is often used to justify contribution but generally based on supply vs demand it has little to do with contribution.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#252

Post by moftz » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 1:46 PM UTC

naasking wrote: post #74

readingnews wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I worked at your firm. I once worked at a place and saved them millions in one year. At the yearly review, they said "well, that was some good work". That was the entire review. When I said "how about giving me an extra 1k a year (a bit less than others who had been there for a while were getting) I was told we had no extra cash. Well... wow, I just saved you like 1.5 million dollars. I am not asking for that,…

I think it's standard in this industry that you only advance by moving to another company. You can even move back after awhile and they'll suddenly be able to afford you at a much higher rate.

It seems like there is all the money in the world to hire new people but almost nothing for anything other than a cost of living raise.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#253

Post by wsy » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 1:51 PM UTC

virgilp wrote: post #152

user5994461 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a myth spread out by recruiters. They do not get paid when the developer doesn't change job. They'll say anything to get you to leave. Truth is, counter offers happen and work out. When it's about compensation, not toxic workplace/coworker, or relocating elsewhere to live with your wife/children.

A former manager - and friend - of mine told me that, when switching jobs, former employer made a handsome counter-offer, I think basically doubling his compensation; it was more than he got at the new gig. His reaction? "Now I also feel insulted. So that's how much I was worth to you, but you waited for me to leave before adjusting my pay?" It strikes me as a reasonable attitude, and one that I've adopted too. I don…

A work contract is a simple supplier-consumer relationship. You are the supplier, and you essentially set the rate at which you offer your work hours.

When someone suddenly offers you the double rate, you should not feel insulted, but you should realize that need to work on rate negotiation skills. Then, if both offers are equally fine with respect to non-compensation aspects, simply take the higher offer.

Suppose you are willing to pay $4 for a coffee, and the café around the corner sells it for $2. Would you voluntarily pay $4?

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#254

Post by neogodless » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 1:58 PM UTC

Ma8ee wrote: post #112

neogodless wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't see the WLB acronym in the article. Something like "whole-life benefits?" ETA: Just remembered "work-life balance." Gotcha!

I really wish people could stop using so many acronyms in general. Even though it usually is possible to guess, or in worst case google, the meaning, it always slow me down. I didn’t immediately understand WLB and I don’t remember seeing ETA meaning anything else that Estimated Time of Arrival before. It just doesn’t take that long to write out the whole words.

Oh crap, the irony. As you probably figured out, ETA => "edited to add."

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#255

Post by nintendo95 » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 2:04 PM UTC

rayvd wrote: post #148

snovv_crash wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Housing is going up way above the 2% mark.

CPI includes housing already.

housing, healthcare, food, clothing. How the CPI works is that necessities are mixed with nice to haves. Like large TVs and smartphones. LCD TVs price is down, smartphones price is down (and they will include things like size of the TV or speed of the smartphone to proof it's cheaper even when it isn't). Healthcare prices are tremendously up, food prices are up, yes housing prices are up, they have been going up for 10 years. And the salaries are the same. CPI is an useless metric. If my health insurance was 500 bucks and is 1300 bucks, childcare was 1,100 usd and is 1,500 usd -- what do I care about LCD TV being down? Or being able to get 5 times faster smartphone for the same price compared to 3 years ago?

In the USA the middle class and white collar (middle upper class) now too -- are getting poorer by the year.

Don't believe me? See why Trump won.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#256

Post by war1025 » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 2:07 PM UTC

lelima wrote: post #218

war1025 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in a very similar situation at the end of last year. Young kids and a work life balance that couldn't be beat. Had a couple expenses pop up that aggravated my irritation at being underpaid to the point that I looked for a different job. Calculated out how much I thought I'd need to offset the work-life balance bit, and went out and got an offer for that amount. Actually accepted the offer but my employer said t…

Thanks for Sharing your story, now my question is, how to ask for a raise? -just, I want a raise will do?

I basically said, "Hey, I got this offer that is 50% more than what you're paying me, and I plan to take it." At that point I won whichever way things went down.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#257

Post by mkane848 » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

lawn wrote: post #219

What happens when a skilled and very hard worker gets the same raise as someone who's not as skilled and not working very hard? For example if the skilled one solves the hard problems the less skilled one cannot solve. And if the lazy one spends a bunch of time on facebook. It isn't about the salary in absolute terms. It's about recognition and to be appreciated for the good work he's doing. But instead he gets the l…

This hurt to read, got hosed on my last performance review/raise because my supervisor threw me under the bus for things he never voiced as issues when HIS boss started asking questions he didn't know the answer to (because I do all the work).

Got the same raise/bonus as someone he referred to as "retarded", so I've been working on #1 because I've already caught myself doing #2 because even after voicing concerns and trying to fix communication issues, management hasn't changed at all.

The shitty part about #2 is that a lot of times you don't catch yourself doing it at first. It starts off as just having a bad productivity day, then you stop caring about busting your ass for a deadline because it's never recognized, then you stop trying to chase after people to answer your emails despite getting told that, rather than programming, I need to reply faster...Slippery slope of apathy. I think I liked my job at some point.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#258

Post by varjag » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

eitland wrote: post #250

varjag wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your salary information in Norway is not public and never was. Your taxes paid were public until 2007. Tax paid on the same income can vary up to 2x depending on your personal situation so really it was very approximate. Since 2008 you can still request personal tax data on anyone, but not anonymously.

> Your salary information in Norway is not public and never was. While technically true "taxable income" or something was public as well. For most people in ordinary positions that would give you a reasonable idea. (It would however include everything reported in one lump sum so if you had multiple jobs and/or other taxable income that would show up as well.)

I believe the taxable income also depended on things like skatteklasse you had, one-time tax deductions (e.g. for newly arrived foreign workers), BSU, parental/guardianship deductions etc. So sure, while it would give you a rough idea, using that to compare yourself with coworkers was not trivial.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#259

Post by eitland » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 2:27 PM UTC

varjag wrote: post #258

eitland wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your salary information in Norway is not public and never was. While technically true "taxable income" or something was public as well. For most people in ordinary positions that would give you a reasonable idea. (It would however include everything reported in one lump sum so if you had multiple jobs and/or other taxable income that would show up as well.)

I believe the taxable income also depended on things like skatteklasse you had, one-time tax deductions (e.g. for newly arrived foreign workers), BSU, parental/guardianship deductions etc. So sure, while it would give you a rough idea, using that to compare yourself with coworkers was not trivial.

Yes, agree.

This wasn't an exact science, but you could get an idea if you were underpaid compared to your colleagues.

On the flip side, when I was younger and tried to refuse to say my current salary the recruiter would point out they would find it anyways, so it wasn't always and advantage.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#260

Post by fsloth » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 2:33 PM UTC

reallydontask wrote: post #235

fsloth wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Compensation is usually only part of why someone decided to leave." Bullshit. When you have a family to feed and loans to pay compensation absolutely is a critical part of why someone might decide to leave. Any employer who tries to shame employees into accepting lower compensation than what the market offers by appealing into loyalty or misplaced honor are absolutely just trying to screw the employee over. Best emp…

I think the issue is that feeling underpaid is an issue that grows in importance with time as your spending power decreases and your hard work is not rewarded so that at some point it doesn't matter any more what the company offers. If you are doing interesting work, are treated well and keep getting regular raises then it's going to be a lot harder to want to leave even if you might be underpaid according to market…

Ah, yes, I was a bit too harsh. If you are already financially comfortable then the compensation surely matters less.