4 ms·
Things work out much better if you start out with assuming good will from both parties. With that I mean the employee wants to do a good job and the employer wa
by rejschaap 12y ago
Things work out much better if you start out with assuming good will from both parties. With that I mean the employee wants to do a good job and the employer wants to treat his employees well.
I think the employer in this case made a good start by giving the employee a decent salary. It doesn't make much sense to think this is some scheme to swap them out for 'better' employees. Also, don't forget the kind of jobs this will affect. It will mostly be low skilled work. The upside of replacing this type of employee with someone who is a little bit better is just not worth the trouble.
The 'golden handcuffs' argument doesn't make a lot of sense either. Sure, it would be hard to give up a seriously overpaid job. But just think of the opportunities it gives you. You could save up a lot of money to start your own business. You could invest in your own education so you are able to land a higher paid job. That's all probably not even interesting because the company from the article treats its employees really well, so they are probably willing and able to help you with any ambition you might have.
- srtjstjsj 12y agoPeople strongly favor secure income over risk, once they have the income. risk-taking is far greater before the safe option has actually started delivering. The HN crowd (especially founders) probably skews toward risky, but that's not the general mode of behavior. And people are pretty good at spending the delta of $70k-$50k/yr, especially on things like mortgages that have a many-year lock-in, or past accumulated debt. This is a different story from the webtech world where a $100K to $200K (or even $1M+) bump creates financial independence (not just security) in the near term.