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

Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 300 posts

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#61

Post by 1123581321 »

ncallaway wrote: post #37
perl4ever wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only matters if someone is dumb enough to fire you and writes down somewhere "s/he was fired for discussing salaries". I can't remember the exact phrasing but years ago my boss said at the team meeting something about not discussing salaries, and someone said later "I don't think you can say that" and he was like "oh, ok". The message was delivered though.

Here's the thing, though. Wrongful termination lawsuits aren't "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". Most civil actions—including wrongful termination—need to show a "preponderance of evidence". That is, you need to convince a jury that the claim is more likely to be true than not true (e.g. 51%). So, assuming you have evidence of the chain of events: - Group shares salary openly - Employer says: "you cannot do that", s…

You would get that evidence from the employer in every case, whether or not the termination was a retaliation.

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#62

Post by topkai22 »

rosywoozlechan wrote: post #43
axaxs wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why all the hoops? Companies have shamed us into thinking sharing salaries is bad. It's not. People should share freely, in my opinion it benefits all parties except the company.

It doesn't benefit top earners to share salary information. If I'm making more money than everyone else and the consequences of sharing salaries is equity than it is in my rational self-interest to keep my salary hidden because I'm unlikely to get any kind of raise until equity is achieved whereas I may continue to get raises otherwise. You know what those top earners are going to do then? Quit. And then you end up w…

I think you’ve got it wrong, at least for large and profitable companies- driving up the average reported salary just accelerates wage growth overall, for all levels and performers as everyone asks for more pay. Conversely, driving down average reported wages causes wage stagnation.

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#63

Post by manigandham »

ncallaway wrote: post #37
perl4ever wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only matters if someone is dumb enough to fire you and writes down somewhere "s/he was fired for discussing salaries". I can't remember the exact phrasing but years ago my boss said at the team meeting something about not discussing salaries, and someone said later "I don't think you can say that" and he was like "oh, ok". The message was delivered though.

Here's the thing, though. Wrongful termination lawsuits aren't "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". Most civil actions—including wrongful termination—need to show a "preponderance of evidence". That is, you need to convince a jury that the claim is more likely to be true than not true (e.g. 51%). So, assuming you have evidence of the chain of events: - Group shares salary openly - Employer says: "you cannot do that", s…

Are you assuming a company that does that would not have evidence ready?

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#64

Post by jb775 »

IgorPartola wrote: post #5

Whenever the topic of sharing salary information comes up I always bring up the algorithm for figuring out the average salary for a group of people without anyone learning anyone else’s exact salary: Say you have 10 people sitting at a round table. Person 1 picks up a piece of paper and on it writes a sum of their salary + randInt(100_000, 10_000_000) remembering what the initial random number was. We can call this n…

If person 1 doesn't tell the group if they're adding their salary at the beginning or at the end, it would provide a little more security between person 1 and 2.

i.e. If the minimum rand # is known to be 100,000, and person 2 receives the number 150,000 and knows it includes the salary of person 1...they will know person 1 makes <= 50k

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#65

Post by tonitosou »

Pxtl wrote: post #57
tonitosou wrote: post #55

i dont understand why salaries should be same for a similar role. If I work twice as fast and with a better work quality than my collegue why shouldn't i get double his salary? are we in a communist country?

I work in healthcare where this is handled by job titles and it seems a lot healthier. Job title makes it clear that it's about greater responsibilities. "Why is Jeff paid more than me" "Because Jeff is senior dev and you're junior dev" is a much easier conversation to have, and everybody's job title is very visible.

im not sure. in a perfect society if the junior dev is better and works harder and bring more value to the company he should be better paid than his senior. it is capitalism and if a company is judget by its output an employee should too

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#66

Post by perl4ever »

ncallaway wrote: post #37
perl4ever wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only matters if someone is dumb enough to fire you and writes down somewhere "s/he was fired for discussing salaries". I can't remember the exact phrasing but years ago my boss said at the team meeting something about not discussing salaries, and someone said later "I don't think you can say that" and he was like "oh, ok". The message was delivered though.

Here's the thing, though. Wrongful termination lawsuits aren't "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". Most civil actions—including wrongful termination—need to show a "preponderance of evidence". That is, you need to convince a jury that the claim is more likely to be true than not true (e.g. 51%). So, assuming you have evidence of the chain of events: - Group shares salary openly - Employer says: "you cannot do that", s…

One thing to consider before defending your rights in court, is that it's going to be public record forever. The cost and the chance of losing might not even be your biggest concerns.

I don't know how many employers check that sort of thing, but I know that if you sue your landlord in NYC, no matter how justified, once it shows up in public records nobody will rent to you. I know this because I ran across court documents where the court matter-of-factly acknowledged it.

This sort of thing is why I think frivolous lawsuits are greatly exaggerated.

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#67

Post by CarbyAu »

I have previously mentioned that employees should be seen as significant investors in the business and should be treated as such.

Apart from "The job" work is not a mental and emotional void. You invest yourself. And it hurts when your investment is ignored or treated as lesser than another human.

Employee pay should be two parts: - salary as per usual - significant stock in the business. NB: significant. 50% of stock(non-voting, purely monetary) is for an "employee fund" and come dividend time it is shared equally among employees. People get their salary they can preen over. And company profits are tied to individual motivation.

Why should I care if the company does astoundingly well as opposed to being mediocre if I don't have a stake in the outcome?

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#68

Post by spaetzleesser »

rosywoozlechan wrote: post #43
axaxs wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why all the hoops? Companies have shamed us into thinking sharing salaries is bad. It's not. People should share freely, in my opinion it benefits all parties except the company.

It doesn't benefit top earners to share salary information. If I'm making more money than everyone else and the consequences of sharing salaries is equity than it is in my rational self-interest to keep my salary hidden because I'm unlikely to get any kind of raise until equity is achieved whereas I may continue to get raises otherwise. You know what those top earners are going to do then? Quit. And then you end up w…

"It doesn't benefit top earners to share salary information. If I'm making more money than everyone else and the consequences of sharing salaries is equity "

And we all are top earners, right? Statistics tell me most of us aren't. The consequence of sharing salaries is not equity but people being able to negotiate better so most likely average salaries will go up. CEO salaries have been public for a while now and I haven't seen them going down so top earners shouldn't worry. Instead they can negotiate better too.

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#69

Post by spaetzleesser »

axaxs wrote: post #52
rosywoozlechan wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't benefit top earners to share salary information. If I'm making more money than everyone else and the consequences of sharing salaries is equity than it is in my rational self-interest to keep my salary hidden because I'm unlikely to get any kind of raise until equity is achieved whereas I may continue to get raises otherwise. You know what those top earners are going to do then? Quit. And then you end up w…

The benefit to you, though small, is realizing you're a top earner and valued. And you wouldn't have known that had others not shared, which is a bit selfish. I'm not advocating for equity in pay. I am advocating against people being taken advantage of, which they are. No company is going to reduce your pay because person X wants a raise. If they did, quit?

Maybe that person is a top earner but I have seen it several times that people were told and believed that they were top earners but in reality they were right on the average curve for their position or below.
Post reply on HN