3 ms·
I think you have the causality backwards. A person is able to demand higher pay not because they are in charge, but because the owners/upper management want the
by seti0Cha 4y ago
I think you have the causality backwards. A person is able to demand higher pay not because they are in charge, but because the owners/upper management want them to be in charge. That is, they get hired with high pay because that's the value the employer puts on their labor. They determine that the same way the determine what they're willing to pay for other goods and services: how much do they want it, and how easy it is to get.
- topaz0 4y agoI don't know what point you are trying to make. You are describing some of the ways that people higher up the hierarchy have more power to demand higher wages. That's what I was talking about.
- seti0Cha 4y agoOk, let me say it a different way. They don't have the power to demand more than they are worth, because the amount the employer offers reflects what the employer thinks they are worth. You may disagree about how much value they supply, but that's not really relevant. Wages aren't set by what some 3rd party thinks is fair, they're set like other prices - how much the employee's skills are needed and the available supply of people with those skills. Hierarchy is only incidentally involved, and not always. Consider, for example, the wages of actors or professional athletes for example.
- danielscrubs 4y agoIn my experience it’s not about labor at all. It’s very far from wanting to put the best high up and more about which social circles you get access to. It’s always a struggle between what’s best for the company and what is best for the individual board members/ceo and there is way to few real active investors for the best of the company to take priority usually.