41–50 of 281 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that's generally seen as one of the major problems with Marxism.
The other was, working as little as possible, because you got paid the same, no matter what. Source: lived in a socialist country
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not really based on location. It's based on competition. Location is one of the factors in salary competition.
I understand the words, but not the meaning, sorry! Can you elaborate on what you mean? Like for example, companies outsource to third world countries all the time due to lower pay, how is that not based on location?
Rather, no one would work for you in CapitalCity at SmallTown salaries.
(One of the reasons is the higher cost of living, but that isnt what keeps the salary high, it's that there's no labour supply at SmallTown salaries.)
The angst over these laws is, IMO, blown way out of proportion. The only thing I can think is the real underlying issue is that there must be massive pay disparities in some industries…
I once had employer tell me that because I was single with no kids I did not "need" as much income as a co-worker with multiple kids... I noped out of that employment quickly
I mean this is the same as cost of living adjusted salaries. Same work, less pay just based on geographical location.
I once had employer tell me that because I was single with no kids I did not "need" as much income as a co-worker with multiple kids... I noped out of that employment quickly
Long time ago when I was young, naive and even more stupid than I am now, I have, by chance, found out how much my younger co-worker, who just joined our team, earned. By chance I mean, it came up in the form life insurance he took, which, at our place, was a standard double salary. My co-worker had less experience, less credentials; he was doing less than I was doing, because he just joined us.
I was incensed and I did everything wrong including sending email to my boss asking effectively 'the fuck'. My boss, not being an idiot, started documenting the interaction with first question being:'How did you get this information and did you happen to access something you are not supposed to?' As you can imagine, it kinda spiraled downwards from there, which included me having a longer conversation with boss's boss.
Eventually, I quit, but if I were to do it again. I would urge everyone to take a deep breath, get an offer and then talk to the bosses to throw the 'more money for co-worker' as a cherry on top.
Anything else is counterproductive.
Very few engineers are within a constant factor of one another. One person has the same title as another but everyone knows that person A does person B’s job in the shower. This is why serious companies use low key stock options or RSUs to pay person A 1000x more than person B. This stuff is hard, it’s all a gradient right? But Meta just whacked 10+ percent of staff in the biggest tech layoff ever and the street resp…
It doesn't inspire much faith in article's author when its title is: 1 in 20 workers will quit if transparency laws reveal they are paid less than co-workers and that is expanded lower down to be: 4% will quit if revealed co-workers earn more money Maybe it's all otherwise true and accurate, but it raises a warning flag for me about how good their methodology might be.
I might be missing something, but what's the difference between those two statements? I suppose that given the first sentence, you could argue that the number of would-be quitters would be different if they learned their coworkers earned more money through means other than transparency laws, but I'm guessing that's not what you're alluding to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" [0] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_to_his_abi...
The ethos of the credo is egalitarian, not restrictive. So in this particular case, "the need" is not being satisfied. The person defines what they need, not some third party who has obvious conflict of interest in down-estimating the needs.
