3 ms·

"Do people vote themselves a pay reduction during bad times? Good luck with that one." Actually, yes. I read the Semco book mentioned above, and he has an exam

"Do people vote themselves a pay reduction during bad times? Good luck with that one." Actually, yes. I read the Semco book mentioned above, and he has an example of it, that people agreed to pay reduction for everyone rather than layoff someone. Which is actually mirrored in other human experiences, where tough times seem to usually bring people together (contrary to what is often believed). Another point from the book. They did financial training for the employees, so presumably, they understood financial dynamics. Semco employed lots of blue-collar workers, apparently, and it still worked for them. I don't see why company employing primarily SW engineers (smart people) couldn't handily do the same. The key message from the book seems to be, just be honest about it, don't try to cheat, and it will work out nicely.

robomartin 13y ago
I posted about this Semco example in another comment. This is not an example of people voting to reduce their salaries because they understand the business finances. That is a ridiculous idea. This is more of a Russian Roulette [1] scenario: If you don't vote for reduction in pay you might lose your job. Without knowing whether you are safe or not all you know is that there is some probability of losing your job. Therefore, the best option in front of you is to go for the pay cut and guarantee you are safe. This is not an example of altruistic [2] behavior but rather almost exactly the opposite. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_roulette http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_roulette [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism
- asgard1024 13y ago
  Workers are not capitalists. They are not interested in money accumulation and growth of the company (for whom, anyway?). They may only be interested in investment if it keeps their job running. Ergo, they won't vote the same way you would like them to do it, because they value a different thing. It's not itself a problem; you perceive it as a problem. It's kinda similar to democratic countries less willing to do military conquests. If you value democracy, you understand implicitly that it doesn't actually matter if your country has population 10 million or 100 million. That may matter for the elites on the top, these get extra credit from that; but for the common working guy, it means just 10 times more of the same. The same way, (more) democratically run workplaces (and yes, they do exist in many places) have different goals. The point is, it's OK.

robomartin 13y ago

I posted about this Semco example in another comment. This is not an example of people voting to reduce their salaries because they understand the business finances. That is a ridiculous idea. This is more of a Russian Roulette [1] scenario: If you don't vote for reduction in pay you might lose your job. Without knowing whether you are safe or not all you know is that there is some probability of losing your job. Therefore, the best option in front of you is to go for the pay cut and guarantee you are safe. This is not an example of altruistic [2] behavior but rather almost exactly the opposite. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_roulette http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_roulette [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism

asgard1024 13y ago
Workers are not capitalists. They are not interested in money accumulation and growth of the company (for whom, anyway?). They may only be interested in investment if it keeps their job running. Ergo, they won't vote the same way you would like them to do it, because they value a different thing. It's not itself a problem; you perceive it as a problem. It's kinda similar to democratic countries less willing to do military conquests. If you value democracy, you understand implicitly that it doesn't actually matter if your country has population 10 million or 100 million. That may matter for the elites on the top, these get extra credit from that; but for the common working guy, it means just 10 times more of the same. The same way, (more) democratically run workplaces (and yes, they do exist in many places) have different goals. The point is, it's OK.