Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned
-
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
Of course in the real world, no one wants that - if I do a better job than Joe - I should earn more than Joe.
Just increase rank, problem solved. Fortune 100s sometimes do this. Kodak did. Each "rank" had a set salary (or really close to one, tiny variances.) If you wanted more money, you had to be promoted.
But same difference, then it is just getting a "promotion" instead of a "raise"... rewording the same thing.
-
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
If I'm happy at the salary range I've requested - why should I be upset when I latter learn that harold makes more than I do?
If he does less and isn't as valuable to the company? It's natural for people to be upset that you get less for doing more.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
If I'm happy at the salary range I've requested - why should I be upset when I latter learn that harold makes more than I do?
If he does less and isn't as valuable to the company? It's natural for people to be upset that you get less for doing more.
against harold - the assumption is they do equal work. And sure they get less - but they were "totally" happy about their wage only until they found out that harold was making more - then, and only then, it became a problem.
-
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
If the goal is to pay everyone equally (and I'm not sure it is) then why not do what the military does and have a published salary table based on rank and time in service. Problem solved.
This makes it hard to account for the real world where no two jobs are actually alike very often. Two people with the same title might do wildly different things. So this might increase discrimination rather than lower it. Just in different ways. The people who work harder earn less, it promotes being lazy as there is no way to compensate for value.
In the military, which I think is a great example of dis-functionality, you have the additional problem that "all ranks are managers." Everyone in the military manages the people below them. In business, we know that "ranking" is generally bad and you want to avoid it. Someone who does twice the work might be a bad manager.
That doesn't mean that pay tiers can't be public and disassociated from managerial tiers, but it introduces problems that have to be overcome.
-
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@scottalanmiller said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
If I'm happy at the salary range I've requested - why should I be upset when I latter learn that harold makes more than I do?
If he does less and isn't as valuable to the company? It's natural for people to be upset that you get less for doing more.
against harold - the assumption is they do equal work. And sure they get less - but they were "totally" happy about their wage only until they found out that harold was making more - then, and only then, it became a problem.
That's because, like most things, both absolute and relative value have to be accounted for. If they weren't then the gender gap would not be an issue.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
If the goal is to pay everyone equally (and I'm not sure it is) then why not do what the military does and have a published salary table based on rank and time in service. Problem solved.
This makes it hard to account for the real world where no two jobs are actually alike very often. Two people with the same title might do wildly different things. So this might increase discrimination rather than lower it. Just in different ways. The people who work harder earn less, it promotes being lazy as there is no way to compensate for value.
In the military, which I think is a great example of dis-functionality, you have the additional problem that "all ranks are managers." Everyone in the military manages the people below them. In business, we know that "ranking" is generally bad and you want to avoid it. Someone who does twice the work might be a bad manager.
That doesn't mean that pay tiers can't be public and disassociated from managerial tiers, but it introduces problems that have to be overcome.
Now that whole manager thing - I completely agree with.
Sadly many companies don't have high enough technical tracks for awesome employees - instead those company force people to become managers in order to get into the higher pays and bonus structures. Maybe the Fortune 500 don't have this problem, but there are 10's of thousands of others companies that do.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@scottalanmiller said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
If I'm happy at the salary range I've requested - why should I be upset when I latter learn that harold makes more than I do?
If he does less and isn't as valuable to the company? It's natural for people to be upset that you get less for doing more.
against harold - the assumption is they do equal work. And sure they get less - but they were "totally" happy about their wage only until they found out that harold was making more - then, and only then, it became a problem.
That's because, like most things, both absolute and relative value have to be accounted for. If they weren't then the gender gap would not be an issue.
You claim that almost no two jobs are the same - then how can you truly came a gap at all?
-
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@scottalanmiller said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
If the goal is to pay everyone equally (and I'm not sure it is) then why not do what the military does and have a published salary table based on rank and time in service. Problem solved.
This makes it hard to account for the real world where no two jobs are actually alike very often. Two people with the same title might do wildly different things. So this might increase discrimination rather than lower it. Just in different ways. The people who work harder earn less, it promotes being lazy as there is no way to compensate for value.
In the military, which I think is a great example of dis-functionality, you have the additional problem that "all ranks are managers." Everyone in the military manages the people below them. In business, we know that "ranking" is generally bad and you want to avoid it. Someone who does twice the work might be a bad manager.
That doesn't mean that pay tiers can't be public and disassociated from managerial tiers, but it introduces problems that have to be overcome.
Now that whole manager thing - I completely agree with.
Sadly many companies don't have high enough technical tracks for awesome employees - instead those company force people to become managers in order to get into the higher pays and bonus structures. Maybe the Fortune 500 don't have this problem, but there are 10's of thousands of others companies that do.
In the F500, they often pay techs over managers, too. They don't have the manager glorification problems common to the SMB.
-
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@scottalanmiller said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@scottalanmiller said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@Dashrender said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
If I'm happy at the salary range I've requested - why should I be upset when I latter learn that harold makes more than I do?
If he does less and isn't as valuable to the company? It's natural for people to be upset that you get less for doing more.
against harold - the assumption is they do equal work. And sure they get less - but they were "totally" happy about their wage only until they found out that harold was making more - then, and only then, it became a problem.
That's because, like most things, both absolute and relative value have to be accounted for. If they weren't then the gender gap would not be an issue.
You claim that almost no two jobs are the same - then how can you truly came a gap at all?
That's commonly mentioned as a reason that the gap might not actually exist. Stats show that there is a gap, which there is. But they also show that there is a "work gap" and an "experience gap" and a "bargaining gap." All four are factors. So there are lots of people who claim that not only is there no "real pay gap" but even some claim that women earn more for doing less, and they have some math to back it up.
The gender pay gap is far more complex than people let on and is influenced by all kinds of things even going back to high school grading practices that cascade throughout a career.
-
@scottalanmiller I like this idea.
-
@scottalanmiller My experience could very well be unique but I have often seen women get paid more for doing less work and most management have been women. In the school where I am there hasn't been a man in HR in 10 years and all the directors are women. In previous job both managers were women and the other 40 or so non-management were men. The women could not do any of the jobs but I guess they were good paper pushers. So in my small experience there hasn't been a gap and, in truth, its the reverse. I know its not always like that but I don't think its as bad as people make it out to be.
-
@jmoore said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@scottalanmiller My experience could very well be unique but I have often seen women get paid more for doing less work and most management have been women. In the school where I am there hasn't been a man in HR in 10 years and all the directors are women. In previous job both managers were women and the other 40 or so non-management were men. The women could not do any of the jobs but I guess they were good paper pushers. So in my small experience there hasn't been a gap and, in truth, its the reverse. I know its not always like that but I don't think its as bad as people make it out to be.
My personal experience has been reverse, mostly, as well. Although as a man, I'm far more likely to notice the gap in that direction that in the other. But I've experienced glass ceilings as well, with female managers openly laughing that "men can't be managers" as they had a policy that all management jobs were female only and men could only do physical labour. And since it was "reverse discrimination" there was no recourse for the men, they were just screwed.
-
@jmoore said in Asking Salary Starting to Be Banned:
@scottalanmiller My experience could very well be unique but I have often seen women get paid more for doing less work and most management have been women. In the school where I am there hasn't been a man in HR in 10 years and all the directors are women. In previous job both managers were women and the other 40 or so non-management were men. The women could not do any of the jobs but I guess they were good paper pushers. So in my small experience there hasn't been a gap and, in truth, its the reverse. I know its not always like that but I don't think its as bad as people make it out to be.
LOL - I grew up in a reverse discrimination situation similar to your job situation. I was one of 4 white kids in a sea of African-Americans.
As for the whole woman in power thing - Medical practices seem to be the same as your job. While the office is owned currently by all men (the owner/doctors) the office and all supervisors are women (7 of them). I am the only male non physician on staff - oh wait, nope that changed 3 months ago.. we now have a male lab tech also.
