3 ms·

"It would be interesting to see if you could meaningfully execute a company with total transparency but I don't think it would survive contact with reality. "

"It would be interesting to see if you could meaningfully execute a company with total transparency but I don't think it would survive contact with reality. " I think you can. There are some companies that do it already and places like military and Congress (they fully publish salaries) are transparent without falling apart. Secrecy around salaries is just a tool for employers to keep salaries low.

meowface 8y ago
It is a tool to keep salaries low, but when salaries are known, it can definitely create bitterness, jealousy, and resentment. "[X] definitely knows way less than me, has way less experience than me, and is a lot worse at their job, yet they're being paid almost double what I am" isn't great for morale.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  That means in the long run employers would have to be fair or willing to justify salary decisions if they want to keep employees happy. I think transparency would create a better world overall.
  - meowface 8y ago
    Absolutely, I think in an ideal world it would. I'm not arguing against it. I just think in practice, it will tend to create issues which probably won't get resolved.
- foobiekr 8y ago
  this is what I was referring to someone else mentioned employers would have to be fair - yes, but that would not address the problem that 33% of your employees are crazy and/or delusional.
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    I don't think we should maintain bad policies because some people are crazy or whatever. In any case, that's not why salaries are secret. Employers would publish them in a heartbeat if it were profitable for them. They keep them secret because keeping people in the dark suppresses salaries.
foobiekr 8y ago
Members of congress seem to make most of their compensation by other means. The military I don't really know. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/09/how-did-members-of-congress-get-so-wealthy/379848/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/09/how-did...
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  I am talking about staffers. https://www.legistorm.com/salaries.html https://www.legistorm.com/salaries.html More public salaries: https://publicpay.ca.gov/Reports/Explore.aspx https://publicpay.ca.gov/Reports/Explore.aspx It's doable.
mrfredward 8y ago
Public sector salaries are usually set through a very bureaucratic process, where the salary has everything to do with the position and little to do with subjective evaluations. In the private sector, salaries have more to do with subjective criteria like "how much do I think this person is worth" or "will this person go looking for other jobs if I only pay x." Envy is not as much of an issue when people in the same role all make the exact same amount. It is an issue when pay is set by the will of a manager/HR person whose perception of things differs wildly from the employee's perception (regardless of whose perception is more correct). That being said, paying people by perceived performance, for all its flaws, is still better than rigidly paying someone based on what the sign on their desk says, with no consideration of how well they actually do their job.

meowface 8y ago

It is a tool to keep salaries low, but when salaries are known, it can definitely create bitterness, jealousy, and resentment. "[X] definitely knows way less than me, has way less experience than me, and is a lot worse at their job, yet they're being paid almost double what I am" isn't great for morale.

maxxxxx 8y ago
That means in the long run employers would have to be fair or willing to justify salary decisions if they want to keep employees happy. I think transparency would create a better world overall.
- meowface 8y ago
  Absolutely, I think in an ideal world it would. I'm not arguing against it. I just think in practice, it will tend to create issues which probably won't get resolved.
foobiekr 8y ago
this is what I was referring to someone else mentioned employers would have to be fair - yes, but that would not address the problem that 33% of your employees are crazy and/or delusional.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  I don't think we should maintain bad policies because some people are crazy or whatever. In any case, that's not why salaries are secret. Employers would publish them in a heartbeat if it were profitable for them. They keep them secret because keeping people in the dark suppresses salaries.

foobiekr 8y ago

Members of congress seem to make most of their compensation by other means. The military I don't really know. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/09/how-did-members-of-congress-get-so-wealthy/379848/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/09/how-did...

maxxxxx 8y ago
I am talking about staffers. https://www.legistorm.com/salaries.html https://www.legistorm.com/salaries.html More public salaries: https://publicpay.ca.gov/Reports/Explore.aspx https://publicpay.ca.gov/Reports/Explore.aspx It's doable.

mrfredward 8y ago

Public sector salaries are usually set through a very bureaucratic process, where the salary has everything to do with the position and little to do with subjective evaluations. In the private sector, salaries have more to do with subjective criteria like "how much do I think this person is worth" or "will this person go looking for other jobs if I only pay x." Envy is not as much of an issue when people in the same role all make the exact same amount. It is an issue when pay is set by the will of a manager/HR person whose perception of things differs wildly from the employee's perception (regardless of whose perception is more correct). That being said, paying people by perceived performance, for all its flaws, is still better than rigidly paying someone based on what the sign on their desk says, with no consideration of how well they actually do their job.