3 ms·

I mean, from what you’re saying, it’s complicated in the sense that the credit bureaus are exploiting their customer’s greed, because if the customer really car

I mean, from what you’re saying, it’s complicated in the sense that the credit bureaus are exploiting their customer’s greed, because if the customer really cared about their own employees, they would say no to the discounted rates, and that would be the end of that. No?

d4mi3n 4y ago
You're correct, but I believe this line of thinking is a simplification. If you operate a public company and your shareholders demand a return, odds are you'll have a board that's going to force you to have specific policies. Some of those policies are along the lines of "take any discounts you can get on things that cause operational expenses." The only real way around this is having shareholders that care about employee privacy, and I think _that_ will only happen if these privacy issues impact the bottom line in some way (difficulty hiring, increased costs, etc). It's frustrating in that this behavior is cultural and endemic to how businesses operate in the US. Change is possible, but it requires support from more than just the line of business employees and management.
- arcturus17 4y ago
  > but I believe this line of thinking is a simplification Yea, sure. I wasn't meaning to take a hard moralist or anti-system stance, when I say "the company is greedy" I understand the company and its people are a cog in a larger machine. There is a simpler way out than waiting for a cultural change to stop that practice, though: regulation. I'm not entirely sure, but I doubt that here in Europe it's so easy for companies to sell payroll data - if at all legal. At any rate it sounds like an abhorrent practice.
- acdha 4y ago
  > If you operate a public company and your shareholders demand a return, odds are you'll have a board that's going to force you to have specific policies. Some of those policies are along the lines of "take any discounts you can get on things that cause operational expenses." There's a lot of mythology around that, however: managers are giving a large amount of discretion about business decisions because it's extremely rare that there are no trade-offs for any decision. For example, you could save a lot of operational hosting expense by switching from AWS to Bob's Bait Shack and Server Farm. In this case, you could argue that the risk to employees is significant and would potentially spill over to the company if leaked information was used to compromise them.

d4mi3n 4y ago

You're correct, but I believe this line of thinking is a simplification. If you operate a public company and your shareholders demand a return, odds are you'll have a board that's going to force you to have specific policies. Some of those policies are along the lines of "take any discounts you can get on things that cause operational expenses." The only real way around this is having shareholders that care about employee privacy, and I think _that_ will only happen if these privacy issues impact the bottom line in some way (difficulty hiring, increased costs, etc). It's frustrating in that this behavior is cultural and endemic to how businesses operate in the US. Change is possible, but it requires support from more than just the line of business employees and management.

arcturus17 4y ago
> but I believe this line of thinking is a simplification Yea, sure. I wasn't meaning to take a hard moralist or anti-system stance, when I say "the company is greedy" I understand the company and its people are a cog in a larger machine. There is a simpler way out than waiting for a cultural change to stop that practice, though: regulation. I'm not entirely sure, but I doubt that here in Europe it's so easy for companies to sell payroll data - if at all legal. At any rate it sounds like an abhorrent practice.
acdha 4y ago
> If you operate a public company and your shareholders demand a return, odds are you'll have a board that's going to force you to have specific policies. Some of those policies are along the lines of "take any discounts you can get on things that cause operational expenses." There's a lot of mythology around that, however: managers are giving a large amount of discretion about business decisions because it's extremely rare that there are no trade-offs for any decision. For example, you could save a lot of operational hosting expense by switching from AWS to Bob's Bait Shack and Server Farm. In this case, you could argue that the risk to employees is significant and would potentially spill over to the company if leaked information was used to compromise them.