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

91–100 of 300 posts

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#91

Post by foogazi »

spaetzleesser wrote: post #68
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…

"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 h…

> The consequence of sharing salaries is not equity but people being able to negotiate better so most likely average salaries will go up.

The people that already negotiate have no incentive to share salaries

The people that can’t negotiate won’t be able to just ask for a higher number

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#92

Post by woodruffw »

scottLobster wrote: post #85
woodruffw wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm almost certain my pay is different from my colleagues, but I've bargained like hell to get it. When I was hired, every time we've been acquired. I'm no executive either, I'm just a developer with a proven history of give-a-damn. Whether or not pay discrepancies can be fair, this doesn't sound like a case of them being fair. What happens to your (hypothetical) colleague who gives just as much of a damn as you do…

I'd argue your first example is actually fair. Someone who has trouble negotiating in professional circles is going to have issues far beyond the workplace, if nothing else they're going to get repeatably screwed buying a car, and they should work on that. Why shouldn't the more aggressive, more strategic people earn more on average? I'd argue they give more of a damn by definition. The ability to project social forc…

> Why shouldn't the more aggressive, more strategic people earn more on average? I'd argue they give more of a damn by definition. The ability to project social force is a positive trait if used well, and can directly benefit the work if turned in that direction.

One potential reason: being aggressive and strategic, as qualities, are orthogonal to one's skills. They're just as good signals for being an abusive manager or manipulator as they are for "giving a damn."

We've also gone and conflated "aggressive during salary negotiations" with "(positively) aggressive in one's job." It's not clear to me that these are the same things, particularly in the context of economic need and privation: I'm more likely to be aggressive and confident in my job once I know that I can afford groceries and rent. The "I" there is me, personally.

In sum: the qualities that make someone a good negotiator in the context of obtaining a job are not necessarily positive qualities within the context of the job itself. Conflating the two eliminates an entire cohort of qualified people who may possess those traits but lack the systemic comfort to risk demonstrating them.

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#93

Post by foogazi »

scottLobster wrote: post #85
woodruffw wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm almost certain my pay is different from my colleagues, but I've bargained like hell to get it. When I was hired, every time we've been acquired. I'm no executive either, I'm just a developer with a proven history of give-a-damn. Whether or not pay discrepancies can be fair, this doesn't sound like a case of them being fair. What happens to your (hypothetical) colleague who gives just as much of a damn as you do…

I'd argue your first example is actually fair. Someone who has trouble negotiating in professional circles is going to have issues far beyond the workplace, if nothing else they're going to get repeatably screwed buying a car, and they should work on that. Why shouldn't the more aggressive, more strategic people earn more on average? I'd argue they give more of a damn by definition. The ability to project social forc…

> but seeing the difference certainly made her push for a promotion that she eventually got.

Wonder if a different colleague making 10k less had shared salary if she would still have pushed for the promotion ?

Is there a lesson here?

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#94

Post by bonestormii_ »

intended wrote: post #51
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…

Sadly your pay has little to do with merit, and more to do with perception, connections, face time and ability to handle office issues better than your cohort. It may well be, if not more likely to be, the other way round - you could be a GOOD performer, but since you can't or don't gork office politics, you are underpaid or even not at the level of challenge and seniority you should be.

> "gork office politics"

Hehe.

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#95

Post by donatj »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #58
donatj wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortune favors the bold.

Therein lies the problem. Math is made by mathematicians, not by Karens whose mothers attend parties thrown by Ghislaine Maxwell. Sometimes you think that's what's behind the secular stagnation.

In this specific example, I very much see the point of a Math class for those not actively pursuing a heavily mathematics-embedded career is just the exposure to ideas. Being a stickler for total competency does nothing to encourage exposure; I'd almost argue there's room to grade the two groups on separate scales.

Do I remember the formulas or operations from my higher levels math classes? Largely no. Do I think they were a worthwhile endeavor? Absolutely, I was profoundly affected.

The long-term value of classes for those who largely won't use the skill in the future is the mind opening exposure, not the competency we test for.

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#96

Post by foogazi »

sdoering wrote: post #86
woodruffw wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm almost certain my pay is different from my colleagues, but I've bargained like hell to get it. When I was hired, every time we've been acquired. I'm no executive either, I'm just a developer with a proven history of give-a-damn. Whether or not pay discrepancies can be fair, this doesn't sound like a case of them being fair. What happens to your (hypothetical) colleague who gives just as much of a damn as you do…

I have fought for raises of colleagues who were more introverted or just didn't feel as comfortable going into the pit and haggling for an appropriate raise. I saw the wage gap increase because they sometimes just didn't know how far ahead others were in terms of wage. Keeping individual wages a secret ultimately benefits the employer as they can use the knowledge disparity to their advantage. I even know of argument…

> I even know of arguments that a new father doesn't need to receive a relevant raise as he is extremely unlikely to switch jobs due to the newborn.

This is a good one for new fathers - be prepared

Re: Blizzard workers share salaries in revolt over wage disparities

#97

Post by xpe »

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…

> They're not distributing welfare checks, they're a business.

This is a false dichotomy. I see this kind of language frequently in discussions. In my experience, it does not tend to invite more thinking. On the contrary, it tends to polarize and discourage discussion of other options.

So, please, let's move away from overly simplistic arguments. So instead of false dichotomy, let's explore a range of options.

Consider this proposal: First, reduce the CEO's compensation (call it C) by multiplying by X (where 0 One would hope [2] that companies operating in a relatively free and somewhat capitalist system like the US would directly or indirectly explore the values of X in order to find better and worse results.

As for me, I would bet there are values of X that lead to better outcomes for both the company and the satisfaction of its employees.

I would be interested in models and studies that examine this question. Would anyone like to share some they have read?

[1] Some (e.g. libertarians) might call this a "redistribution" and look at it with a negative light. I suggest calling it an "allocation" because I think of it as an optimization problem. The goal is not to maximize CEO pay. The goal is to maximize company success and overall employee satisfaction. (We might define success as (i) profit or (ii) or accomplishing some mission.)

[2] I say "hope" but I do not expect it. There are many market failures and organizational factors that may get in the way.

Post reply on HN