3 ms·

> Corporations don’t need to have empathy to make deals with the benefits you mention No, they will only do these family friendly things if it benefits them. T

> Corporations don’t need to have empathy to make deals with the benefits you mention No, they will only do these family friendly things if it benefits them. That is what a sociopath does. > Medicare has little to do with corporations It has everything to do with the workers. > most people prefer extra wages over vacation Do you have statistics for this? Because all my friends want more time off with the same pay.

nickff 1y ago
Sociopathy is characterized by a lack of empathy. Regardless, the only way to make a deal stick is to ensure it is beneficial to all parties. Healthcare definitely impacts workers, but the only reason for widespread employer-provided healthcare in the USA is the tax exemption. This is not an employer-driven phenomenon. I am talking about revealed preferences; it’s not a real preference if you are not willing to give something up for it. Extra vacation time comes at a cost in productivity and availability, which aren’t free, so your friends want their employers to give them something for nothing.
- 9rx 1y ago
  > so your friends want their employers to give them something for nothing. The presented alternative (written by you, oddly enough) was extra wages without vacation. His friends aren't wanting something for nothing. He asserts that they are willing to give up the apparent extra wages coming their way in exchange for vacation.
  - nickff 1y ago
    More vacation for the same pay can be interpreted at least three ways: - Same annual income for fewer days worked. This is increased daily pay - Same daily pay for fewer days worked. This is actually increased daily compensation, because of how vacation pay accrual works (you’d have to be accruing at a higher rate). - Same daily pay with fewer days worked, and same number of paid vacation days, along with additional unpaid vacation days. This one is the only interpretation which does not come with increased compensation per unit of work. Two of these financially benefit the employee, and none of the three benefit the employer. What alternative are you considering where the friends are actually giving the employer anything?
    - 9rx 1y ago
      > More vacation for the same pay can be interpreted at least three ways: If you read it in complete isolation, fine. But it wasn't written in isolation. It was clearly written alongside a hypothetical offer of extra wages as per the context of discussion. Accepting the extra wages would not equate to the same pay. That would be higher pay by any reasonable interpretation. > What alternative are you considering where the friends are actually giving the employer anything? If you really need it mechanically spelled out, imagine you are paid $x, accept an additional $y (the extra wages), then give $y back to the employer in exchange for vacation. $y is what is given to the employer. In actuality you would skip some steps because they are pointless in practice, but the outcome is the same.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

nickff 1y ago

Sociopathy is characterized by a lack of empathy. Regardless, the only way to make a deal stick is to ensure it is beneficial to all parties. Healthcare definitely impacts workers, but the only reason for widespread employer-provided healthcare in the USA is the tax exemption. This is not an employer-driven phenomenon. I am talking about revealed preferences; it’s not a real preference if you are not willing to give something up for it. Extra vacation time comes at a cost in productivity and availability, which aren’t free, so your friends want their employers to give them something for nothing.

9rx 1y ago
> so your friends want their employers to give them something for nothing. The presented alternative (written by you, oddly enough) was extra wages without vacation. His friends aren't wanting something for nothing. He asserts that they are willing to give up the apparent extra wages coming their way in exchange for vacation.
- nickff 1y ago
  More vacation for the same pay can be interpreted at least three ways: - Same annual income for fewer days worked. This is increased daily pay - Same daily pay for fewer days worked. This is actually increased daily compensation, because of how vacation pay accrual works (you’d have to be accruing at a higher rate). - Same daily pay with fewer days worked, and same number of paid vacation days, along with additional unpaid vacation days. This one is the only interpretation which does not come with increased compensation per unit of work. Two of these financially benefit the employee, and none of the three benefit the employer. What alternative are you considering where the friends are actually giving the employer anything?
  - 9rx 1y ago
    > More vacation for the same pay can be interpreted at least three ways: If you read it in complete isolation, fine. But it wasn't written in isolation. It was clearly written alongside a hypothetical offer of extra wages as per the context of discussion. Accepting the extra wages would not equate to the same pay. That would be higher pay by any reasonable interpretation. > What alternative are you considering where the friends are actually giving the employer anything? If you really need it mechanically spelled out, imagine you are paid $x, accept an additional $y (the extra wages), then give $y back to the employer in exchange for vacation. $y is what is given to the employer. In actuality you would skip some steps because they are pointless in practice, but the outcome is the same.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]