5 ms·

Companies can take advantage of situations for profit, and that's their right, but the argument needs to be qualified so that we aren't speaking past one anothe

by jakevn 12y ago

Companies can take advantage of situations for profit, and that's their right, but the argument needs to be qualified so that we aren't speaking past one another. Are we talking about "should be able to" or "it's the right (for whatever definition of right) thing to do"? I'm going to go with the latter since I have little opinion on the law. For example, a company has the right to ask its programmers to work 80 hours. It's their right to squeeze as much out of their employees as they can. Should they? Should companies be taking advantage of low wages in other countries instead of paying market value? They certainly can chase the profit, but we're talking about people, not goods. At the end of the day, they're paying a person less simply because they know that they have little bargaining room. Some consider it unethical, others do not.

DINKDINK 12y ago
"Should companies be taking advantage of low wages in other countries instead of paying market value?" If someone leaves a programming job in India to take a programming job in the USA, they're implicitly saying, This is a better deal for me. The only unethical/anticompetative practice was that someone created an artificial barrier (often pushed through legislation because of xenophobia) to keep "others" out. If you don't think we should the USA should be hiring talented people from India, do you think California should prevent people from Seattle from working in California? Where would you draw the line?
- jakevn 12y ago
  I don't want to draw the line simply because I think it's too much a matter of opinion. To me, it's not about widely applicable ethics. I think companies should have the right to hire people from other countries and pay them low(er) wages. Or at least, they should have the right until there's some agreeable line that can be drawn (unlikely). I simply would lose respect for that company because I think the decent thing is to pay wages based on merit. I believe paying wages based on where someone is from is on the same level as squeezing as many hours as possible out of your workforce. In my eyes, it's irresponsible and not respectable.

by jakevn 12y ago

DINKDINK 12y ago

"Should companies be taking advantage of low wages in other countries instead of paying market value?" If someone leaves a programming job in India to take a programming job in the USA, they're implicitly saying, This is a better deal for me. The only unethical/anticompetative practice was that someone created an artificial barrier (often pushed through legislation because of xenophobia) to keep "others" out. If you don't think we should the USA should be hiring talented people from India, do you think California should prevent people from Seattle from working in California? Where would you draw the line?

jakevn 12y ago
I don't want to draw the line simply because I think it's too much a matter of opinion. To me, it's not about widely applicable ethics. I think companies should have the right to hire people from other countries and pay them low(er) wages. Or at least, they should have the right until there's some agreeable line that can be drawn (unlikely). I simply would lose respect for that company because I think the decent thing is to pay wages based on merit. I believe paying wages based on where someone is from is on the same level as squeezing as many hours as possible out of your workforce. In my eyes, it's irresponsible and not respectable.