2 ms·

You have no way of knowing that, nor does the employer. Maybe I have health issues, maybe I want to go back to school myself to get a more advanced degree, may

You have no way of knowing that, nor does the employer. Maybe I have health issues, maybe I want to go back to school myself to get a more advanced degree, maybe I need more for Retirement because I will not have any kids to take care of me when I am old, maybe 100000 other things However NONE of that is relevant to my wages, my wages and my co-workers wages should be set Solely and Exclusively to the value we bring to the organization. if I choose to have 5 kids, or choose to eat fast food for every meal meaning my cost of living is higher should have ZERO bearing on my wages.

Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago
> wages should be set Solely and Exclusively to the value we bring to the organization This isn't true now and has never been true. Otherwise frontline workers would make a lot more and CEOs would make a lot less. Wages already have skewed dynamics based on a bunch of arbitrary reasons. Saying that people with kids should get a bit more salary I don't think is that much more controversial than saying a permanent employee should get paid more than a someone from a temp agency that does the exact same work (and hence the same value to the organization).
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  >>This isn't true now and has never been true. Otherwise frontline workers would make a lot more and CEOs would make a lot less. Neither one of those statements follow each other. You may belive, and in some cases you may be correct that a CEO is of less value than frontline workers, but the prevailing narrative I see across the internet that workers bring "all the value" is also false >Wages already have skewed dynamics based on a bunch of arbitrary reasons. They are not really that arbitrary, pricing for wages are set largely by 3 factors 1. Market Demand for a given role 2. Number of people available to fill a given role 3. Amount of revenue a company can generate from a given role Wage pricing is a balance of all 3 factors,

Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago

> wages should be set Solely and Exclusively to the value we bring to the organization This isn't true now and has never been true. Otherwise frontline workers would make a lot more and CEOs would make a lot less. Wages already have skewed dynamics based on a bunch of arbitrary reasons. Saying that people with kids should get a bit more salary I don't think is that much more controversial than saying a permanent employee should get paid more than a someone from a temp agency that does the exact same work (and hence the same value to the organization).

phpisthebest 4y ago
>>This isn't true now and has never been true. Otherwise frontline workers would make a lot more and CEOs would make a lot less. Neither one of those statements follow each other. You may belive, and in some cases you may be correct that a CEO is of less value than frontline workers, but the prevailing narrative I see across the internet that workers bring "all the value" is also false >Wages already have skewed dynamics based on a bunch of arbitrary reasons. They are not really that arbitrary, pricing for wages are set largely by 3 factors 1. Market Demand for a given role 2. Number of people available to fill a given role 3. Amount of revenue a company can generate from a given role Wage pricing is a balance of all 3 factors,