3 ms·

>> There is a clear display on lack of honesty here. And such people don't deserve any loyalty at all. If a company can't be honest with its own people they wil

>> There is a clear display on lack of honesty here. And such people don't deserve any loyalty at all. If a company can't be honest with its own people they will definitely cheat their customers. In the hypothetical scenario I outlined, was there a lack of honesty? There is an imbalance of information, certainly, but I don't think that information should be disclosed. >>> Right, if some doesn't know they are being cheated. Cheating is now perfectly justified. In fact if they discover later what happened its wrong on their part to be refuse to be cheated further. Along the same lines, where is the cheating occurring?

kamaal 13y ago
I am surprised you don't see the lack of honesty. A person/system knows what the fair measure of pay is towards labor of an individual. Instead of paying that they turn this into a negotiation game, and hope they can squeeze as much out based on how ignorant a person is. Please note this negotiation attitude is unacceptable on job. They demand a more human requirement, called 'loyalty'. >>where is the cheating occurring? I am not sure how else would you term that.
- balls187 13y ago
  I agree with what you're saying. I (assuming I am the system) should not take advantage of people, and use negotiating tactics to get them to work for less pay than they deserve. However, "market rate" isn't just a flat value you get when punching in a formula, and is subjective. Also, I think you've read more into what I wrote. I didn't mention what was fair pay. I just said I had $10 to pay someone, and asked what they wanted, and offered them just that. Why did you assume that $7 was not market? Why did you assume that the individual was ignorant when asking for $7? Why did you assume the individual was entitled to the full $10, perhaps they performed only okay during the interview, but showed signs of promise? The point I'd like to illustrate is that if you're paid an amount that makes you happy, or that you are okay with because you had some control over it (i.e. negotiating), it seems childish to accuse the system of cheating, or being unfair if you later find out there was money "left on the table." In life, no one is going to watch out for your best interests. I don't believe in screwing people over, "cheating" them if you will, but I also don't believe in overpaying either. At some point, for most individuals, the utility value of additional money diminishes. Hopefully you will get to a point where making an extra $10k in salary isn't the deciding factor in joining a company.
kazagistar 13y ago
In the same way, if an employee, say, does not "fully disclose" that they are leaving town in a month while applying to a full time job, that is also perfectly OK, right? Not dishonest at all? The distinction between a lie and not telling the full truth is a trivial detail.
- balls187 13y ago
  What? How? Huh? How is this about not telling the truth? Do you walk around telling everyone everything?

kamaal 13y ago

I am surprised you don't see the lack of honesty. A person/system knows what the fair measure of pay is towards labor of an individual. Instead of paying that they turn this into a negotiation game, and hope they can squeeze as much out based on how ignorant a person is. Please note this negotiation attitude is unacceptable on job. They demand a more human requirement, called 'loyalty'. >>where is the cheating occurring? I am not sure how else would you term that.

balls187 13y ago
I agree with what you're saying. I (assuming I am the system) should not take advantage of people, and use negotiating tactics to get them to work for less pay than they deserve. However, "market rate" isn't just a flat value you get when punching in a formula, and is subjective. Also, I think you've read more into what I wrote. I didn't mention what was fair pay. I just said I had $10 to pay someone, and asked what they wanted, and offered them just that. Why did you assume that $7 was not market? Why did you assume that the individual was ignorant when asking for $7? Why did you assume the individual was entitled to the full $10, perhaps they performed only okay during the interview, but showed signs of promise? The point I'd like to illustrate is that if you're paid an amount that makes you happy, or that you are okay with because you had some control over it (i.e. negotiating), it seems childish to accuse the system of cheating, or being unfair if you later find out there was money "left on the table." In life, no one is going to watch out for your best interests. I don't believe in screwing people over, "cheating" them if you will, but I also don't believe in overpaying either. At some point, for most individuals, the utility value of additional money diminishes. Hopefully you will get to a point where making an extra $10k in salary isn't the deciding factor in joining a company.

kazagistar 13y ago

In the same way, if an employee, say, does not "fully disclose" that they are leaving town in a month while applying to a full time job, that is also perfectly OK, right? Not dishonest at all? The distinction between a lie and not telling the full truth is a trivial detail.

balls187 13y ago
What? How? Huh? How is this about not telling the truth? Do you walk around telling everyone everything?