4 ms·

Well, the obvious solution to the self-selecting issue is just have the company publish all salaries publicly. Of course, very few would dare to do that becaus

Well, the obvious solution to the self-selecting issue is just have the company publish all salaries publicly. Of course, very few would dare to do that because they know that the data will be hiding all sorts of embarrassing and possibly resignation-causing truths. Which is kind of shitty if you think about it, especially when taken with the notion that "companies are people"... sociopathic, lying, cheating people...

icebraining 11y ago
On the other hand, if I was a manager at an established company with thousands of workers, I'd be very wary of "just publishing all salaries publicly" even if I did think they were all fair (which I don't believe it's true for most companies, granted). For one thing, fairness is subjective. For many, "equal pay for equal work" is fair, but many others believe that seniority, or a better CV, or many others factors should be rewarded differently. Secondly, there are issues of perception. A worker might think (s)he should be paid more because (s)he always leaves later than his/her colleague, without taking into account that the colleague prefers to take shorter lunches or fewer breaks and leave earlier. You can explain it to them, but why would they believe you? It'd be different if a company published the salaries from the start, but switching after growing to a huge size can be very disruptive, and I don't blame managers for avoiding opening that can of worms. (Again, I don't believe the salaries at Google are perfectly fair, I'm talking about an hypothetical company)
- mtrimpe 11y ago
  Then again; in all of Sweden everybody's tax returns are public information and their economy still seems to do just fine...
  - icebraining 11y ago
    Yes, but that's been open for over 100 years. What I was talking about was the issues surrounding the transition from closed to open, not the openness itself.
nhebb 11y ago
They could publish descriptive statistics of the salaries without publishing the salaries themselves.
saalweachter 11y ago
Many universities publish everyone's salary yearly. Everyone always says Google feels very collegiate...

icebraining 11y ago

On the other hand, if I was a manager at an established company with thousands of workers, I'd be very wary of "just publishing all salaries publicly" even if I did think they were all fair (which I don't believe it's true for most companies, granted). For one thing, fairness is subjective. For many, "equal pay for equal work" is fair, but many others believe that seniority, or a better CV, or many others factors should be rewarded differently. Secondly, there are issues of perception. A worker might think (s)he should be paid more because (s)he always leaves later than his/her colleague, without taking into account that the colleague prefers to take shorter lunches or fewer breaks and leave earlier. You can explain it to them, but why would they believe you? It'd be different if a company published the salaries from the start, but switching after growing to a huge size can be very disruptive, and I don't blame managers for avoiding opening that can of worms. (Again, I don't believe the salaries at Google are perfectly fair, I'm talking about an hypothetical company)

mtrimpe 11y ago
Then again; in all of Sweden everybody's tax returns are public information and their economy still seems to do just fine...
- icebraining 11y ago
  Yes, but that's been open for over 100 years. What I was talking about was the issues surrounding the transition from closed to open, not the openness itself.

nhebb 11y ago

They could publish descriptive statistics of the salaries without publishing the salaries themselves.

saalweachter 11y ago

Many universities publish everyone's salary yearly. Everyone always says Google feels very collegiate...