9 ms·

Through my long career, I've notice virtually no correlation between my pay and the utility of my position. And indeed, I've had one or two jobs like yours. S

Through my long career, I've notice virtually no correlation between my pay and the utility of my position. And indeed, I've had one or two jobs like yours. Sadly for my bank book, I can only stand being useless for relatively short stretches. I still reminisce about my lowest paying job, my first. It was probably the most enjoyable and satisfying. It was also useful, though perhaps not at the top of that list. It's annoying that so many useless jobs pay so much. But even worse that it's so hard to find a position where being useful is even a possibility.

not_real_acct 8y ago
My experience is similar. I look at it a lot like insurance policies. For instance, my company once had a service contract with a software company that cost about a million a year. One time I audited that service contract, and found that they'd used it exactly ONCE the entire. A million dollar phone call. But they're not going to cancel the contract, because they want the support in case they need it.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
> I still reminisce about my lowest paying job, my first. It was probably the most enjoyable and satisfying. Weird. I share this experience. My first tech job was really great, I was constantly doing interesting things, actively making things better for everybody all the time, really like all my colleagues, it was part time, and I made a pittance.
edraferi 8y ago
There's an economic theory that job satisfaction is a kind of compensation. That is, you have to pay people more to do unsatisfying jobs.
- evanpw 8y ago
  For those who are interested, the phrase to Google is “compensating differential”
- exolymph 8y ago
  This is just a form of supply and demand. More people want to do $desirable_job or $satisfying_job (and there's plenty of overlap), so you don't have to pay them as much, because there's always another person in line to take the position.
- nikanj 8y ago
  “Passion” careers are a great example of this. Many people would gladly save the planet or do art for free, so the pay in arts and environmental protection is really low.
- interfixus 8y ago
  There is such a theory, yes. It has obviously never encountered low-paying, shitty, backbreaking work on the factory floor.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    I don't think the theory implies it's the only effect on salaries, only that it's a factor. Obviously when the workers have very few or no alternatives, the effect will be minimal. But I know people who dropped out of college courses that provided a good chance of a middle-class income for a career that fulfilled them more, despite paying like crap. So the effect exists.
- ItsMe000001 8y ago
  I doubt that top-paying jobs like CEO are undesirable to those people who have them as well as those who would like to have them. On the other hand all really shitty jobs pay nothing - that's true for hundreds of millions, maybe even billions of people worldwide. A >100k$ programmer office job in the US does not belong in the "shitty job" category, no matter how much someone complains online because they are bored while comfortably sitting in their chair waiting for the next big paycheck to arrive reliably. That rule must have been made by one of those super-rich people grumbling about how unfair life treats them and how the government attempts to steal "their" money. https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/02/poor-lives-rich-people/331159/ https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/02/po...
  - randomdata 8y ago
    It's just basic supply and demand. Top paying jobs like CEO are top paying because the supply of trusted people, who boards are willing to hand control over billions of assets to, is vanishingly small. Programming jobs are reasonably well paying because businesses are careful about who they hand their code over to, although not the extreme degree of CEO. And something like fry cook is low paying because those businesses are willing to hire just about anyone. But we cannot completely discount the effects of desirability. If your employment options are fry cook or oil rig worker, most people would prefer fry cook and thus oil rig worker has considerably higher wages due to the aversion to the job, and therefore reduction in supply at the price point of fry cook. Of course, increased compensation can prompt people to look in alternative directions.
    - learc83 8y ago
      It's not just basic supply and demand though. There are many other factors driving up CEO pay. 1. CEO pay at public companies is public, so they feel the need to keep up with other companies. 2. The incestuous relationship between CEOs and the boards of directors that set their pay. CEO compensation isn't tied to performance.
      - randomdata 8y ago
- RivieraKid 8y ago
  That is an economic theory? This seems like an obvious observation that most people should be able to make.
madeofpalk 8y ago
As I continue my (relatively young as a 20-something year old) web development career, I occasionally look back at my KFC job I had during uni and end of school with great fondness. I honestly really enjoyed that job - it was fun working with great people doing a job of the right level of complexity and mental stimulation.
- droidist2 8y ago
  Well you're only in your 20s, it's not too late to make KFC your career if that's your passion.
afterburner 8y ago
I learned very early on that pay and employment largely depends on budgets.
christophilus 8y ago
In my career, I'd say the correlation is an inverse proportion. The more useful / needed I was the less I was paid and the other way around... It's curious. I'll have to put some thought into why this might be.
rotub 8y ago
That's a hell of a lot of $. I was on $100K for doing a similar amount of depressingly simple or "easy" work, while being surrounded by people who felt or at least appeared stuck. It seems like a dream but I also got really demotivated and my sharp skills quickly became stale and then one day I realised I didn't care enough to upskill again. The job became more about appearance and saying the right things, showing your face in the right meetings, and claiming recognition for other people's work. I've now shelved that career. The money wasn't worth the feeling of guilt or missing out. I think the hardest part was knowing I was getting paid double than people who worked 3X harder.

not_real_acct 8y ago

My experience is similar. I look at it a lot like insurance policies. For instance, my company once had a service contract with a software company that cost about a million a year. One time I audited that service contract, and found that they'd used it exactly ONCE the entire. A million dollar phone call. But they're not going to cancel the contract, because they want the support in case they need it.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago

> I still reminisce about my lowest paying job, my first. It was probably the most enjoyable and satisfying. Weird. I share this experience. My first tech job was really great, I was constantly doing interesting things, actively making things better for everybody all the time, really like all my colleagues, it was part time, and I made a pittance.

edraferi 8y ago

There's an economic theory that job satisfaction is a kind of compensation. That is, you have to pay people more to do unsatisfying jobs.

evanpw 8y ago
For those who are interested, the phrase to Google is “compensating differential”
exolymph 8y ago
This is just a form of supply and demand. More people want to do $desirable_job or $satisfying_job (and there's plenty of overlap), so you don't have to pay them as much, because there's always another person in line to take the position.
nikanj 8y ago
“Passion” careers are a great example of this. Many people would gladly save the planet or do art for free, so the pay in arts and environmental protection is really low.
interfixus 8y ago
There is such a theory, yes. It has obviously never encountered low-paying, shitty, backbreaking work on the factory floor.
- icebraining 8y ago
  I don't think the theory implies it's the only effect on salaries, only that it's a factor. Obviously when the workers have very few or no alternatives, the effect will be minimal. But I know people who dropped out of college courses that provided a good chance of a middle-class income for a career that fulfilled them more, despite paying like crap. So the effect exists.
ItsMe000001 8y ago
I doubt that top-paying jobs like CEO are undesirable to those people who have them as well as those who would like to have them. On the other hand all really shitty jobs pay nothing - that's true for hundreds of millions, maybe even billions of people worldwide. A >100k$ programmer office job in the US does not belong in the "shitty job" category, no matter how much someone complains online because they are bored while comfortably sitting in their chair waiting for the next big paycheck to arrive reliably. That rule must have been made by one of those super-rich people grumbling about how unfair life treats them and how the government attempts to steal "their" money. https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/02/poor-lives-rich-people/331159/ https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/02/po...
- randomdata 8y ago
  It's just basic supply and demand. Top paying jobs like CEO are top paying because the supply of trusted people, who boards are willing to hand control over billions of assets to, is vanishingly small. Programming jobs are reasonably well paying because businesses are careful about who they hand their code over to, although not the extreme degree of CEO. And something like fry cook is low paying because those businesses are willing to hire just about anyone. But we cannot completely discount the effects of desirability. If your employment options are fry cook or oil rig worker, most people would prefer fry cook and thus oil rig worker has considerably higher wages due to the aversion to the job, and therefore reduction in supply at the price point of fry cook. Of course, increased compensation can prompt people to look in alternative directions.
  - learc83 8y ago
    It's not just basic supply and demand though. There are many other factors driving up CEO pay. 1. CEO pay at public companies is public, so they feel the need to keep up with other companies. 2. The incestuous relationship between CEOs and the boards of directors that set their pay. CEO compensation isn't tied to performance.
    - randomdata 8y ago
RivieraKid 8y ago
That is an economic theory? This seems like an obvious observation that most people should be able to make.

madeofpalk 8y ago

As I continue my (relatively young as a 20-something year old) web development career, I occasionally look back at my KFC job I had during uni and end of school with great fondness. I honestly really enjoyed that job - it was fun working with great people doing a job of the right level of complexity and mental stimulation.

droidist2 8y ago
Well you're only in your 20s, it's not too late to make KFC your career if that's your passion.

afterburner 8y ago

I learned very early on that pay and employment largely depends on budgets.

christophilus 8y ago

In my career, I'd say the correlation is an inverse proportion. The more useful / needed I was the less I was paid and the other way around... It's curious. I'll have to put some thought into why this might be.

rotub 8y ago

That's a hell of a lot of $. I was on $100K for doing a similar amount of depressingly simple or "easy" work, while being surrounded by people who felt or at least appeared stuck. It seems like a dream but I also got really demotivated and my sharp skills quickly became stale and then one day I realised I didn't care enough to upskill again. The job became more about appearance and saying the right things, showing your face in the right meetings, and claiming recognition for other people's work. I've now shelved that career. The money wasn't worth the feeling of guilt or missing out. I think the hardest part was knowing I was getting paid double than people who worked 3X harder.