3 ms·
A grudge? They've just been put into a strong negotiating position, because now both parties acknowledge that these are key employees.
by scarab92 2y ago
A grudge?
They've just been put into a strong negotiating position, because now both parties acknowledge that these are key employees.
- ruszki 2y agoI would never go back under a boss who thinks even for a second that I’m easily replaceable. It would immediately indicate to me, that I can’t trust in my boss at all. Nobody really can work effectively without trust. That’s the base of our whole society.
- intelVISA 2y agoIf you're not easily replaceable then the company has failed on some level. This is why I think current org structures, and incentives, don't map properly to SWE and fuels this employment theater of "trust me I'm not a cog" => "trust me you are". Don't know what an ideal arrangement would be, maybe SaaS is closer. Even then, still have to convince some 'cogs' to build your SaaS corp while you recoup 90% margins off their labor which is a fast path to class consciousness and we're back at square one!
- ageofwant 2y agoYes good, and now because their value is appreciated they can be paid what they will be paid in the private sector, perhaps ~180k/y instead of 60k/y. So if you fire 2/3 of the workforce and pay those that remain what they are "worth", you have saved exactly what ?
- scarab92 2y agoIn your hypothetical scenario, it would be a no brainer to proceed. Your key workers are now paid at market rate, and those who were unnecessary will find other jobs.