4 ms·

I'm sure that would be just peachy when the company you work for runs all its employees and notices that you reported more income than they are paying you. It

I'm sure that would be just peachy when the company you work for runs all its employees and notices that you reported more income than they are paying you. It was bad enough when I worked under a government grant so my salary was public. I prefer privacy.

ginko 10y ago
When would that be the case? When you have another job on the side? How is that your employer's business?
- lettergram 10y ago
  Personally, (I'm less than 25) I make about 75% of my income from the company I work at, the other 25% doing odd jobs, websites, etc. That latter percentage is probably increasing every month too. I can't imagine the company I work at being super excited I'm (for example) doing code reviews; or running a website. Technically, I don't have a clause in my contract forbidding me from doing external work, so long as I give the company 40 hours a week. I know I am not alone. I know one co-worker makes about a half a million a year in an external business selling car parts. He just works at the company for fun essentially, since he is allowed to play with the entire companies system architecture.
  - danso 10y ago
    Why do you feel justified in assuming what your company would think? And how do you justify working at such a place with the kind of corporate moral code that would punish employees for behavior not defined in the employment contract? There are plenty of scenarios in which an employer believes that they deserve to know how their employee conducts themselves outside of work, including other jobs, and in those scenarios, this should be specified in the contract. In the news business, working for someone who might intersect with your beat, e.g. making phone calls for the local chapter of Democrats if you're covering politics, will often result in a severe reprimand if not firing. If you want to be a schoolteacher, you can be fired for having worked in porn, even if those days are over. [0] [0] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/stacie-halas-fired-calif-teacher-with-porn-past-loses-appeal/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/stacie-halas-fired-calif-teacher...
    - lettergram 10y ago
      Sure there are plenty of scenarios where that might be fine. However, I'm sure every business is not the same and I know some of my managers would be offended.
    - manarth 10y ago
      > "how do you justify working at such a place with the kind of corporate moral code that would punish employees for behavior not defined in the employment contract" I've worked for a few organisations where the contract has included clauses on exclusivity and IP assignment. Each time I've asked for those clauses to be removed before joining them, and each time they've agreed.
  - friendzis 10y ago
    I'm just a little bit worried. You state that you do part time websites, your co-worker is doing system architecture, so I'm assuming software related job. Double check your contract and related documents, because while most contracts do not forbid working part time, pretty common clause is forbidding to compete or work for you employer's competitors. Currently I have CEO signed document explicitly allowing me to work part time in a completely unrelated company :)
- wyager 10y ago
  >How is that your employer's business? Exactly. That's why public income info is a bad idea.
  - RodericDay 10y ago
    Public income info means it is much much easier to negotiate against HR. You know exactly how much x or y makes given a or b. This is info that HR has, because they pay for it. If it was public, you'd have it too. Your bosses also would not be allowed to guilt-trip you into foregoing a raise without them taking on a comparable part of the burden. Salary secrecy seems like a quintessentially american thing, completely at odds with faith in markets. If you believe in markets, let the labor markets do the best job they possibly can, by informing agents within them and tearing down information asymmetries.
    - sidlls 10y ago
      Salary transparency is different from tax and income transparency, though. I agree that salary information should be more public. I'm not so sure individual income or other tax information should be.
    - z3t4 10y ago
      I believe in markets. But in Sweden schools can fix wages by only allowing X amount of people to get a degree per year ... At least for those jobs that require a license.
- sidlls 10y ago
  In the US there is a not small number of employers who take a very negative view of moonlighting. This is true in every industry, and in knowledge work industries like software it is compounded by a fear of IP theft. So whether it should be their business or not doesn't matter: they'll make it their business.
giraffehack 10y ago
Might be me missing something cultural here. 1. Why would you report that you earn more than you do, then you would just pay more tax than you had to? 2. Why would the employer care that you earn more in total than they pay you?
- pmorici 10y ago
  Because you have a second job / side business / investment income that is independent of your primary job.
  - giraffehack 10y ago
    Alright, but why is that a problem? Might be a cultural difference thing that i'm not seeing. If you signed with the employer to not have any side business going on then it's a different story. But you would know this in the first place, so you would only complain about not being allowed to shoot yourself in the foot.
    - loeg 10y ago
      Most businesses paying a salary expect (and sometimes encode in your employment contract) that it is your sole job. They don't want the stress, mental fatigue, and time commitments of a second job competing with your work for them. (This is my understanding, as a person living in the US anyway.)
    - Svenskunganka 10y ago
      If you look from it from an employers standpoint, that employee might not be around for much longer if his/hers side-business kicks off. It can be hard to find candidates that can replace that employee. If the employee makes more money from that business than from yours, the employee has literally nothing to lose and may start to become sloppy with their work, not take it as seriously as he/she should, etc. I'd say it's all about control.
    - gsnedders 10y ago
      So it's one thing to imagine you're a programmer who does a small amount of contracting on the side; now imagine you're a teacher who does some "mild" sex work (say, solo camming): the social and financial repercussions on them having their second job disclosed is a real risk. Even from the employer's point-of-view, it's a risk to their reputation for hiring such a person (there again, such a thing seems unlikely to be considered good enough reason to dismiss someone outside of their probationary period in Norway).
amelius 10y ago
I think the bigger problem lies in salary negotiations with a new employer.

ginko 10y ago

When would that be the case? When you have another job on the side? How is that your employer's business?

lettergram 10y ago
Personally, (I'm less than 25) I make about 75% of my income from the company I work at, the other 25% doing odd jobs, websites, etc. That latter percentage is probably increasing every month too. I can't imagine the company I work at being super excited I'm (for example) doing code reviews; or running a website. Technically, I don't have a clause in my contract forbidding me from doing external work, so long as I give the company 40 hours a week. I know I am not alone. I know one co-worker makes about a half a million a year in an external business selling car parts. He just works at the company for fun essentially, since he is allowed to play with the entire companies system architecture.
- danso 10y ago
  Why do you feel justified in assuming what your company would think? And how do you justify working at such a place with the kind of corporate moral code that would punish employees for behavior not defined in the employment contract? There are plenty of scenarios in which an employer believes that they deserve to know how their employee conducts themselves outside of work, including other jobs, and in those scenarios, this should be specified in the contract. In the news business, working for someone who might intersect with your beat, e.g. making phone calls for the local chapter of Democrats if you're covering politics, will often result in a severe reprimand if not firing. If you want to be a schoolteacher, you can be fired for having worked in porn, even if those days are over. [0] [0] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/stacie-halas-fired-calif-teacher-with-porn-past-loses-appeal/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/stacie-halas-fired-calif-teacher...
  - lettergram 10y ago
    Sure there are plenty of scenarios where that might be fine. However, I'm sure every business is not the same and I know some of my managers would be offended.
  - manarth 10y ago
    > "how do you justify working at such a place with the kind of corporate moral code that would punish employees for behavior not defined in the employment contract" I've worked for a few organisations where the contract has included clauses on exclusivity and IP assignment. Each time I've asked for those clauses to be removed before joining them, and each time they've agreed.
- friendzis 10y ago
  I'm just a little bit worried. You state that you do part time websites, your co-worker is doing system architecture, so I'm assuming software related job. Double check your contract and related documents, because while most contracts do not forbid working part time, pretty common clause is forbidding to compete or work for you employer's competitors. Currently I have CEO signed document explicitly allowing me to work part time in a completely unrelated company :)
wyager 10y ago
>How is that your employer's business? Exactly. That's why public income info is a bad idea.
- RodericDay 10y ago
  Public income info means it is much much easier to negotiate against HR. You know exactly how much x or y makes given a or b. This is info that HR has, because they pay for it. If it was public, you'd have it too. Your bosses also would not be allowed to guilt-trip you into foregoing a raise without them taking on a comparable part of the burden. Salary secrecy seems like a quintessentially american thing, completely at odds with faith in markets. If you believe in markets, let the labor markets do the best job they possibly can, by informing agents within them and tearing down information asymmetries.
  - sidlls 10y ago
    Salary transparency is different from tax and income transparency, though. I agree that salary information should be more public. I'm not so sure individual income or other tax information should be.
  - z3t4 10y ago
    I believe in markets. But in Sweden schools can fix wages by only allowing X amount of people to get a degree per year ... At least for those jobs that require a license.
sidlls 10y ago
In the US there is a not small number of employers who take a very negative view of moonlighting. This is true in every industry, and in knowledge work industries like software it is compounded by a fear of IP theft. So whether it should be their business or not doesn't matter: they'll make it their business.

giraffehack 10y ago

Might be me missing something cultural here. 1. Why would you report that you earn more than you do, then you would just pay more tax than you had to? 2. Why would the employer care that you earn more in total than they pay you?

pmorici 10y ago
Because you have a second job / side business / investment income that is independent of your primary job.
- giraffehack 10y ago
  Alright, but why is that a problem? Might be a cultural difference thing that i'm not seeing. If you signed with the employer to not have any side business going on then it's a different story. But you would know this in the first place, so you would only complain about not being allowed to shoot yourself in the foot.
  - loeg 10y ago
    Most businesses paying a salary expect (and sometimes encode in your employment contract) that it is your sole job. They don't want the stress, mental fatigue, and time commitments of a second job competing with your work for them. (This is my understanding, as a person living in the US anyway.)
  - Svenskunganka 10y ago
    If you look from it from an employers standpoint, that employee might not be around for much longer if his/hers side-business kicks off. It can be hard to find candidates that can replace that employee. If the employee makes more money from that business than from yours, the employee has literally nothing to lose and may start to become sloppy with their work, not take it as seriously as he/she should, etc. I'd say it's all about control.
  - gsnedders 10y ago
    So it's one thing to imagine you're a programmer who does a small amount of contracting on the side; now imagine you're a teacher who does some "mild" sex work (say, solo camming): the social and financial repercussions on them having their second job disclosed is a real risk. Even from the employer's point-of-view, it's a risk to their reputation for hiring such a person (there again, such a thing seems unlikely to be considered good enough reason to dismiss someone outside of their probationary period in Norway).

amelius 10y ago

I think the bigger problem lies in salary negotiations with a new employer.