17 ms·

If you read the article, you'll note that they don't actually have the cash for this. The CEO is taking a massive paycut to make it happen. That being said, th

by dsg42 11y ago

If you read the article, you'll note that they don't actually have the cash for this. The CEO is taking a massive paycut to make it happen. That being said, that kind of logic demonstrates an incredible lack of caring for the people who are benefiting from this. I presume you make more than $70k a year, and you fail to understand what it's like to live on less than $48k, as half of his employees do, in a city like Seattle. Making sure his employees are well paid makes a huge difference in their lives in a way increasing someone's salary from 75k to 95k just doesn't.

cheald 11y ago
The two aren't mutually exclusive. A skilled employee can both be happy for their coworker who is now living comfortably, and upset that they draw the same wage with twice the experience and domain-specific skills that their colleague doesn't possess. To put it another way, why invest time and money into education and specialized skills development if you can draw the same wage for an entry-level job with fewer responsibilities?
- jasonlotito 11y ago
  You might have twice the experience, but if the value of your output and your coworkers output is the same, why should you get paid more?
  - cheald 11y ago
    You shouldn't, and that isn't my argument. If Gravity was paying some people $40k and some people $75k for the same work and result, they were being economically irrational. I'm saying that the $75k worker, up until today, was someone who likely commanded $75k because a) their training and experience allowed them to do productive work that exceeds that of entry-level workers, and b) they are harder to replace than entry-level workers. If your employer says "your value to this company is equivalent to the value of unskilled entry-level workers", when you are in fact a highly trained and experienced worker, that may well be difficult to swallow.
    - jasonlotito 11y ago
      > You shouldn't, and that isn't my argument. That is your argument. The company decides what it values, not you. > If your employer says "your value to this company is equivalent to the value of unskilled entry-level workers", when you are in fact a highly trained and experienced worker, that may well be difficult to swallow. Your value doesn't necessary map to your training and experience.
  - loco5niner 11y ago
    That's the point. The value of the output of various workers in various positions is NOT the same. Often that comes as a result of considerable effort, btw. That difference is naturally reflected in pay.
    - jasonlotito 11y ago
      > That's the point. The value of the output of various workers in various positions is NOT the same. The company decides the value, however, and they pay according to that. Are you suggesting this is not the case? This is literally how practically every company I know of works.
      - loco5niner 11y ago
        I don't know how it is possible that you read what I wrote and came away thinking that.
hdjdijkdu 11y ago
Average salary for a programmer in Seattle is $72K according to GlassDoor. Why should a mailroom guy make the same as a programmer? The programmer had to go to school, learn his craft, keep up with the latest technology, learn several different languages, fix bugs at odd hours, forced to learn new things or be obsolete, etc. The mailroom guy just sorts mail and packs boxes. Why should they be paid the same?
- srtjstjsj 11y ago
  > Average salary for a programmer in Seattle is $72K > Average salary for a software engineer in Seattle is $92K And Glassdoor 'salary' doesn't include bonuses or equity. http://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/seattle-software-engineer-salary-SRCH_IL.0,7_IM781_KO8,25.htm http://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/seattle-software-engineer-... > keep up with the latest technology, learn several different languages, fix bugs at odd hours, forced to learn new things or be obsolete, These are not the programmers making <= $72k/yr Why is "should" relevant here? Why is the free market sacrosanct, except when someone makes a decision you don't like? Anyway, there are plenty of programmers who haven't honed their bodies in a way to make them competent mailroom staff.
mc32 11y ago
A couple of things: The article mentions salaried employees. Maybe the have no hourlies. Two. However things work out, we can be happy for the workers who got a pay raise. Maybe other cos will follow suit and lessen the spread between upper mgmt and kind worker pay. The current trajectory of increasing disparity does not bode well for the middle class or the lower classes both of which are experiencing an economy squeeze compared to their late sixties counterparts, in real terms.

by dsg42 11y ago

cheald 11y ago

The two aren't mutually exclusive. A skilled employee can both be happy for their coworker who is now living comfortably, and upset that they draw the same wage with twice the experience and domain-specific skills that their colleague doesn't possess. To put it another way, why invest time and money into education and specialized skills development if you can draw the same wage for an entry-level job with fewer responsibilities?

jasonlotito 11y ago
You might have twice the experience, but if the value of your output and your coworkers output is the same, why should you get paid more?
- cheald 11y ago
  You shouldn't, and that isn't my argument. If Gravity was paying some people $40k and some people $75k for the same work and result, they were being economically irrational. I'm saying that the $75k worker, up until today, was someone who likely commanded $75k because a) their training and experience allowed them to do productive work that exceeds that of entry-level workers, and b) they are harder to replace than entry-level workers. If your employer says "your value to this company is equivalent to the value of unskilled entry-level workers", when you are in fact a highly trained and experienced worker, that may well be difficult to swallow.
  - jasonlotito 11y ago
    > You shouldn't, and that isn't my argument. That is your argument. The company decides what it values, not you. > If your employer says "your value to this company is equivalent to the value of unskilled entry-level workers", when you are in fact a highly trained and experienced worker, that may well be difficult to swallow. Your value doesn't necessary map to your training and experience.
- loco5niner 11y ago
  That's the point. The value of the output of various workers in various positions is NOT the same. Often that comes as a result of considerable effort, btw. That difference is naturally reflected in pay.
  - jasonlotito 11y ago
    > That's the point. The value of the output of various workers in various positions is NOT the same. The company decides the value, however, and they pay according to that. Are you suggesting this is not the case? This is literally how practically every company I know of works.
    - loco5niner 11y ago
      I don't know how it is possible that you read what I wrote and came away thinking that.

hdjdijkdu 11y ago

Average salary for a programmer in Seattle is $72K according to GlassDoor. Why should a mailroom guy make the same as a programmer? The programmer had to go to school, learn his craft, keep up with the latest technology, learn several different languages, fix bugs at odd hours, forced to learn new things or be obsolete, etc. The mailroom guy just sorts mail and packs boxes. Why should they be paid the same?

srtjstjsj 11y ago
> Average salary for a programmer in Seattle is $72K > Average salary for a software engineer in Seattle is $92K And Glassdoor 'salary' doesn't include bonuses or equity. http://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/seattle-software-engineer-salary-SRCH_IL.0,7_IM781_KO8,25.htm http://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/seattle-software-engineer-... > keep up with the latest technology, learn several different languages, fix bugs at odd hours, forced to learn new things or be obsolete, These are not the programmers making <= $72k/yr Why is "should" relevant here? Why is the free market sacrosanct, except when someone makes a decision you don't like? Anyway, there are plenty of programmers who haven't honed their bodies in a way to make them competent mailroom staff.

mc32 11y ago

A couple of things: The article mentions salaried employees. Maybe the have no hourlies. Two. However things work out, we can be happy for the workers who got a pay raise. Maybe other cos will follow suit and lessen the spread between upper mgmt and kind worker pay. The current trajectory of increasing disparity does not bode well for the middle class or the lower classes both of which are experiencing an economy squeeze compared to their late sixties counterparts, in real terms.