3 ms·

> Individual workers are in a weaker negotiating position than employers Are they? In normal conditions (which seem to largely prevail in most parts of the U.S

> Individual workers are in a weaker negotiating position than employers Are they? In normal conditions (which seem to largely prevail in most parts of the U.S. labor market), the negotiating positions of both parties are fundamentally determined, not by either party, but by unrelated 3rd parties who are participating in the same labor market. Employers would like to pay as little as possible and employees would like to earn as much as possible. But the ability of both parties to achieve their desired outcome is dependent on their ability to walk away and obtain a better price (whether they're buying or selling labor).

shantly 7y ago
Yes. Being rejected by an employer in the typical case hurts a prospective employee more than it hurts the employer doing the rejecting. I mean, look at who applies to whom and who’s usually perceived as being the stronger party in interviews. That tells the story right there. [edit] how about this: you find a case where a normal employee tells a company they need to spend a half hour typing their job ad details and past pay for the same position into a web form especially for that applicant before they’ll even be considered, then also reformat their ad to match new specs the applicant gives them, and submit that to the applicant as a word document, and the company actually does it, and I’ll eat my hat. Employees are plainly the weaker supplicant in those interactions. Yes they’re “free” to do otherwise, but their job search will... go poorly.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  Have you ever been in the hiring side of the table? Employers take a risk when they hire. They’re signing up to make large payments twice a month starting immediately. Yet they won’t know if the hire is any good for months. Both parties are taking risks and committing resources. That’s part of kicking the tires on a new economic partnership.

shantly 7y ago

Yes. Being rejected by an employer in the typical case hurts a prospective employee more than it hurts the employer doing the rejecting. I mean, look at who applies to whom and who’s usually perceived as being the stronger party in interviews. That tells the story right there. [edit] how about this: you find a case where a normal employee tells a company they need to spend a half hour typing their job ad details and past pay for the same position into a web form especially for that applicant before they’ll even be considered, then also reformat their ad to match new specs the applicant gives them, and submit that to the applicant as a word document, and the company actually does it, and I’ll eat my hat. Employees are plainly the weaker supplicant in those interactions. Yes they’re “free” to do otherwise, but their job search will... go poorly.

toasterlovin 7y ago
Have you ever been in the hiring side of the table? Employers take a risk when they hire. They’re signing up to make large payments twice a month starting immediately. Yet they won’t know if the hire is any good for months. Both parties are taking risks and committing resources. That’s part of kicking the tires on a new economic partnership.