3 ms·
Value only sets a maximum. It's meaningless when you are talking about giving paycuts to people you know are in cheaper locations.
by pathseeker 8y ago
Value only sets a maximum. It's meaningless when you are talking about giving paycuts to people you know are in cheaper locations.
- dragonwriter 8y ago> Value only sets a maximum. That sounds very much like what said about setting an upper limit, yes. > It's meaningless when you are talking about giving paycuts to people you know are in cheaper locations. Sure, each side is actually seeking the other sides limit price: as an employee, you demand what you think you are worth to the employer; as an employer, you offer what you think the employee is willing to work for (both sides, of course, present this as reflecting their own side rather than their guess of what the other side will accept.) This gets weird when an employer continues to try to do this but tries to have salary transparency, because then they either have to abandon elements that go into their estimate of what employees will accept or make it clear that that' they are targeting an estimate of the employees lower limit.
- evrydayhustling 8y agoWhat lets you pay them less is not their lower costs, it's the unavailability of higher pay in their area. So if you're going to do it, size it that way and, ideally, call it what it is.