4 ms·

It's interesting how many people in the comments are against more transparency. It's almost like they have something to lose from this bill.

by baby 4y ago

radicaldreamer 4y ago
There's a sense that pay transparency will increase competition for lucrative roles and decrease overall comp (but perhaps increase average comp). A lot of people think they have it good and it'll be worse when there's pay transparency (even though this is not true transparency, it's simply public pay bands for listed roles).
- tenpies 4y ago
  To put it simply: ignorance is bliss. Many people are underpaid, but are happy. Telling them they are underpaid and broadcasting it to the world is a great way to destroy that happiness. This becomes even worst when there are non-monetary benefits to a job (e.g. you highly value working outdoors, beautiful scenery, a fantastic commute).
  - int_19h 4y ago
    You don't want to go look up salary bands for the position that you already hold.
donw 4y ago
Perhaps. Laws usually do precisely the opposite of what their titles describe. The PATRIOT act was quite possibly the most unpatriotic thing Congress could have done. The Inflation Reduction Act will increase inflation. I wouldn't be surprised if I read this law and found that it actually criminalized sharing your salary. Moreover, the devil is always in the details. Who is exempted? Does this cover total compensation, or just salary? How much burden does this place on smaller employers? More often than not, regulation like this is a tool for large businesses to strangle startups in the crib with compliance costs.
- shusaku 4y ago
  “I’m against this law because hypothetically there could be an argument against it”
  - donw 4y ago
    I have no opinion on this law. There are plenty of perfectly good reasons why people might be against it.
  - cscurmudgeon 4y ago
    “I’m for this law because hypothetically there could be an argument for it”
sumedh 4y ago
> It's interesting how many people in the comments are against more transparency. If I am not mistaken, salary packages for CEOs went up when that information was made public in the company's annual report because other CEOS could demand more money because the CEO of a similar company was much higher.
whyenot 4y ago
I'm slightly irritated at how many people have no problem with the salaries of every public employee in the state being public information, from groundskeepers to teachers, to head coaches, yet want to keep their own pay private. Many of us have lived with our salaries being public information for years. It's fine, it's not a big deal. In my experience, it does increase equality in compensation, and that's a good thing.
- IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
  Are you including all benefits in that disclosure? Because that component is usually the highest of any public employee, and thats not usually disclosed. In fact, its by far the hardest to approximate by head. Defined benefit plans, platinum insurance plans, retirement pensions, vacations, loan forgiveness. All that comp is anything but transparent.
  - runako 4y ago
    I have not worked for government, but I have looked at government job postings. And their benefit plans, vacation, etc. are surprisingly well-documented. > that component is usually the highest of any public employee This is not correct for most public employees. Depending on the employee, the ratio will be broadly similar to that of a private-sector employee doing a similar job. We don't look at companies with unlimited vacation time and assert that the vacation time is the largest part of their compensation, because it's unlimited. Similarly, we don't look at a pension in year 20, which often has less flexibility than a 401(k) and declare that the pension is somehow worth more than an equivalent 401(k) balance.
    - zone411 4y ago
      > This is not correct for most public employees. Depending on the employee, the ratio will be broadly similar to that of a private-sector employee doing a similar job. This is absolutely false. Participation in retirement benefits is 52% in private industry vs 82% in state and local government. Medical care and benefits is 47% vs 66% and the employee share of the premium is 22% vs 14%. Life insurance participation is 56% vs 81%. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ebs2.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ebs2.pdf Benefit costs are 29.5% for private industry vs 38.3% for state and local governments. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf The difference is larger for federal jobs.
sidlls 4y ago
A lot of HN visitors think they're master salary/compensation negotiators, and fear this will hurt their endeavors to pull one over on their next employer. The reality is that the tech industry is like any other industry: the percentage of IC and middle-management role workers who can successfully negotiate higher pay for a job offer is tiny. I'd guess it's less than 1%, but that's just a hunch.
- sangnoir 4y ago
  > I'd guess it's less than 1%, but that's just a hunch. The folk on HN think they are the 1%. The whole scheme depends on a majority of coworkers being under-informed & not negotiating resulting in a lower floor, hence employees greenlighting the odd negotiator. Transparency will raise the salary floor,and this is not great for self-confessed master negotiators.

It's interesting how many people in the comments are against more transparency. It's almost like they have something to lose from this bill.

by baby 4y ago

It's interesting how many people in the comments are against more transparency. It's almost like they have something to lose from this bill.

radicaldreamer 4y ago

There's a sense that pay transparency will increase competition for lucrative roles and decrease overall comp (but perhaps increase average comp). A lot of people think they have it good and it'll be worse when there's pay transparency (even though this is not true transparency, it's simply public pay bands for listed roles).

tenpies 4y ago
To put it simply: ignorance is bliss. Many people are underpaid, but are happy. Telling them they are underpaid and broadcasting it to the world is a great way to destroy that happiness. This becomes even worst when there are non-monetary benefits to a job (e.g. you highly value working outdoors, beautiful scenery, a fantastic commute).
- int_19h 4y ago
  You don't want to go look up salary bands for the position that you already hold.

donw 4y ago

Perhaps. Laws usually do precisely the opposite of what their titles describe. The PATRIOT act was quite possibly the most unpatriotic thing Congress could have done. The Inflation Reduction Act will increase inflation. I wouldn't be surprised if I read this law and found that it actually criminalized sharing your salary. Moreover, the devil is always in the details. Who is exempted? Does this cover total compensation, or just salary? How much burden does this place on smaller employers? More often than not, regulation like this is a tool for large businesses to strangle startups in the crib with compliance costs.

shusaku 4y ago
“I’m against this law because hypothetically there could be an argument against it”
- donw 4y ago
  I have no opinion on this law. There are plenty of perfectly good reasons why people might be against it.
- cscurmudgeon 4y ago
  “I’m for this law because hypothetically there could be an argument for it”

sumedh 4y ago

> It's interesting how many people in the comments are against more transparency. If I am not mistaken, salary packages for CEOs went up when that information was made public in the company's annual report because other CEOS could demand more money because the CEO of a similar company was much higher.

whyenot 4y ago

I'm slightly irritated at how many people have no problem with the salaries of every public employee in the state being public information, from groundskeepers to teachers, to head coaches, yet want to keep their own pay private. Many of us have lived with our salaries being public information for years. It's fine, it's not a big deal. In my experience, it does increase equality in compensation, and that's a good thing.

IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
Are you including all benefits in that disclosure? Because that component is usually the highest of any public employee, and thats not usually disclosed. In fact, its by far the hardest to approximate by head. Defined benefit plans, platinum insurance plans, retirement pensions, vacations, loan forgiveness. All that comp is anything but transparent.
- runako 4y ago
  I have not worked for government, but I have looked at government job postings. And their benefit plans, vacation, etc. are surprisingly well-documented. > that component is usually the highest of any public employee This is not correct for most public employees. Depending on the employee, the ratio will be broadly similar to that of a private-sector employee doing a similar job. We don't look at companies with unlimited vacation time and assert that the vacation time is the largest part of their compensation, because it's unlimited. Similarly, we don't look at a pension in year 20, which often has less flexibility than a 401(k) and declare that the pension is somehow worth more than an equivalent 401(k) balance.
  - zone411 4y ago
    > This is not correct for most public employees. Depending on the employee, the ratio will be broadly similar to that of a private-sector employee doing a similar job. This is absolutely false. Participation in retirement benefits is 52% in private industry vs 82% in state and local government. Medical care and benefits is 47% vs 66% and the employee share of the premium is 22% vs 14%. Life insurance participation is 56% vs 81%. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ebs2.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ebs2.pdf Benefit costs are 29.5% for private industry vs 38.3% for state and local governments. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf The difference is larger for federal jobs.

sidlls 4y ago

A lot of HN visitors think they're master salary/compensation negotiators, and fear this will hurt their endeavors to pull one over on their next employer. The reality is that the tech industry is like any other industry: the percentage of IC and middle-management role workers who can successfully negotiate higher pay for a job offer is tiny. I'd guess it's less than 1%, but that's just a hunch.

sangnoir 4y ago
> I'd guess it's less than 1%, but that's just a hunch. The folk on HN think they are the 1%. The whole scheme depends on a majority of coworkers being under-informed & not negotiating resulting in a lower floor, hence employees greenlighting the odd negotiator. Transparency will raise the salary floor,and this is not great for self-confessed master negotiators.