4 ms·
While I agree to most of what you said, the attitude of paying based on what someone needs doesn't seem to be a fair basis for negotiation to me. The case you m
by starbugs 8y ago
While I agree to most of what you said, the attitude of paying based on what someone needs doesn't seem to be a fair basis for negotiation to me. The case you mentioned is surely an extreme that deserves an exception to be made and I highly appreciate that you helped your employee in this situation, but this shouldn't be the general way to assess what someone is worth to you as an employer.
Also someone working on the side (within limits) may actually benefit you as an employer. It's a way to gain experience that you otherwise couldn't get your hands on. I agree that things need to be made transparent and agreed on before, but I'd rather not recommend a general negative attitude towards this.
- FBISurveillance 8y agoI'm assuming the case when one gets paid fairly, regardless of their location. In my previous comments on one of GitLab posts I expressed my disagreement with the way their salary calculator works: it calculates salary based on location and I'm against that. When discussing those things first thing to keep in mind are legal complications for both parties, and being open about this lets everyone deal with risks properly.
- scarface74 8y ago“Fair” in a capitalist economy is based on supply and demand. If you want to get a developer locally to Silicon Valley, you’re going to have to pay more based on the pool of qualified individuals. If your pool is “the entire United States” or the “entire English speaking population”, as employer, you can pay less. As an employee, you’re competing with a much larger pool. Why would s company pay more than they have to?
- mlevental 8y agolol haven't you ever heard of "from each according to his means to each according to his needs"