4 ms·

Consider that it might be an abuse of power for companies to use information asymmetry to create an unfair pricing mechanism. I think companies should pay empl

Consider that it might be an abuse of power for companies to use information asymmetry to create an unfair pricing mechanism. I think companies should pay employees what they are worth, after taking a fair cut. Common opinion is that should pay what they can get away with, using any and all cultural forces, information asymmetries, etc available to them. One of the ways companies pay women less is by taking advantage of the fact that women are less likely to think they are worth as much as they are. It's easy for companies to take advantage of this things, so they do. I still think it's wrong. I won't think less of you for disagreeing, because as you say it's quite normal. I would say it's a common wrongdoing. Many/most employers aren't aware of the harm they are causing. And common (therefore often subconscious) wrongdoing is a lesser evil than conscious wrongdoing. But it's still wrongdoing.

someone7x 8y ago
> a common wrongdoing I’m not aware of any other term that captures a practice that is both commonplace and wrong. This is good and I’m adding it to my lexicon. Thanks!
danielcampos93 8y ago
I think it’s easy to forget that it’s someones job to design employee compensation and they usually aren’t the same person or even team working on retention, benefits or recruiting. When they get rated on how well they do their job it’s mostly on how efficiently did you use our capital which means as they optimize for their reward they pay people the minimum they can get away with.
- erikpukinskis 8y ago
  Yes! Teams should have a role for someone whose full time job is just that: designing employee compensation. There is so much money to be made by companies in paying someone for this: think about how much lost productivity there is because underpriced employees aren't bothering to solve problems they have the skills to solve! Essentially: someone who efficiently uses capital to pay themselves to find ways to give more capital to employees who can efficiently use it. Micro VC I guess you could think of it is? Like each employee is a place to invest capital, and that is inevitably disbursed as higher wages.

someone7x 8y ago

> a common wrongdoing I’m not aware of any other term that captures a practice that is both commonplace and wrong. This is good and I’m adding it to my lexicon. Thanks!

danielcampos93 8y ago

I think it’s easy to forget that it’s someones job to design employee compensation and they usually aren’t the same person or even team working on retention, benefits or recruiting. When they get rated on how well they do their job it’s mostly on how efficiently did you use our capital which means as they optimize for their reward they pay people the minimum they can get away with.

erikpukinskis 8y ago
Yes! Teams should have a role for someone whose full time job is just that: designing employee compensation. There is so much money to be made by companies in paying someone for this: think about how much lost productivity there is because underpriced employees aren't bothering to solve problems they have the skills to solve! Essentially: someone who efficiently uses capital to pay themselves to find ways to give more capital to employees who can efficiently use it. Micro VC I guess you could think of it is? Like each employee is a place to invest capital, and that is inevitably disbursed as higher wages.