4 ms·
You haven't addressed any part of this argument at all. Managers can and do stack rank their employees, and pay them differentially according to that ranking,
by paisawalla 5y ago
You haven't addressed any part of this argument at all.
Managers can and do stack rank their employees, and pay them differentially according to that ranking, I'm sorry if you're learning this just now. If anything, you've validated my point by agreeing that employee value is a holistic assessment -- i.e. it has non-quantitative elements.
That understanding is what makes it possible for someone who produces less value for the company to argue that they actually produce more. Once they understand exactly how much is available to bargain over, the manager has no leverage to push back, and there is no reason not to make the case that one's non-quantitative competences are worth all of that gap. It costs approximately nothing to keep asking for more money.
- lordnacho 5y agoYou're forgetting that there are other employees and other firms in the world. Either class is free to look outside the current relationship if they are unhappy, and this can rely entirely on subjective judgement. If you see a bunch of people who are paid more than you, you can judge that you'll be able to find another employer who will pay you what you want, but only if you have a reasonable overview of what the salaries are in the system. Same goes in the boss side, he can decide whether he wants to hit or stick. Information is absolutely crucial in markets.