|
How would you operationalize this in the States? An online public database with name, job role, and total compensation? I can see it working for public sector jobs since there're standards in terms of pay scale (GS whatever) and promotion by age/seniority but there's such a variety of job titles across companies and industries that having it associated by job title seems meaningless. For my company alone, there're a bunch of people with the generic title "Business Associate" ranging from MBA fresh graduates to 10+ seniors starting at $150K base to $500K. Do you just lump them together?
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2014 11:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 05:57 |
|
|
With call centers shifting from India to the Philippines, I've found the accent thing to be less of an issue. Anyway, just give it another couple years, real wages should go low enough in the South than we can onshore call centers again.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:State jobs generally have much better benefits and job security than equivalent private sector jobs. Exactly how much of that is due to open wages isn't clear without data but it's not unreasonable to think it's at least part. Isn't the trade-off for working in the public sector that you earn less in exchange for better non-pecuniary benefits? How does open wages factor into this at all?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
If salary disclosures help with compensation negotiations, why haven't we seen any meaningful uptick in comp with sites like glassdoor or payscale?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 09:25
|
|
|
This Jacket Is Me posted:I've never heard of these sites, and frankly they don't inspire a lot of confidence. Payscale looks like it's fishing for demographic information, and glassdoor doesn't seem to work at all. So, I don't think these sites actually do anything towards salary disclosures at all. The way glassdoor works is that you need to disclose your own comp before you're allowed to see the comp of others. It's probably more useful for white collar roles at decent sized firms but it's been pretty accurate for finance and software companies from my personal anecdotal experience.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 14:27
|
|
|
It's not limited to finance and technology. I'm saying that I've found it accurate for those industries based on my personal experience.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
I guess the next question is what exactly are you proposing be disclosed and how. You mention anonymity being an issue so are you suggesting that we have a nationwide system where we can look up any person's wage by name?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
It'd be hilarious to see the number of awkward water cooler conversations occur when a public wage database initially goes online. There are going to be a lot of pissed off employees when they find out how underpaid they are relative to their colleagues or superiors. I'd support it just on that basis.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
It's not that surprising that it'd be less of an issue with public sector jobs given that pay/promotions tend to follow a more methodical stepwise process (GS etc.) I think it'd be a lot more common to see issues with entry level hires making more than early career hires or external hires making more than internally promoted hires in the private sector.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
How much variance is there within a title? I'm not familiar with academic pay so if it was something like 10%, it's still less of an issue than in industry. To give you an example, my previous firm jacked up fresh grad pay from 120k to 150k in the past 4 years, I wouldn't be surprised if there were new grads making more than earlier hires. And I'm not sure why the threshold for unhappiness with disclosure has to be literal stabbings. The website you linked to is pretty awesome though. I have friends on the list so it'll make for conversation the next time I see them. To be clear, I'm for something like this. All I'm saying is that there's going to be a period of adjustment among private sector employees about social mores regarding salary comp. It's definitely a social taboo to talk about it. shrike82 fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
Only if you're in the tiny minority of academics with tenure. The vast majority of adjuncts and postgrads get paid poo poo money and benefits, and aren't unionized. There's been some movement among postgrads to unionize and get a living wage + benefits but it hasn't gone very far.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2014 02:28
|
|
|
Heh, I suspect people advocating psychometric testing as some sort of panacea for the hiring process have never been involved in recruiting. My previous firm used to use psychometric tests as a first cut to filter candidates after CV vetting. Based on my personal experience, the tests were only useful to weed out the chaff. There were still a large number of candidates who "passed" the tests (i.e., >95 percentile) that failed the rest of the interview process. And in terms of "nepotism"/referrals, they only got to skip the CV vetting step and still had to go through the rest of the process. Aptitude tests might work for low end work like call center work or coding but I can't imagine a professional would want to work at a place that used such tests as the primary means of hiring.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
It's interesting how minority hiring impacts the workplace. I used to work in a foreign jurisdiction with a large expat (read white) community with a native black majority. There was a "soft" quota of local blacks that foreign companies had to hire as a proportion of total employee headcount. Companies that didn't toe the line suddenly found work permits issuances or renewals for expats being delayed for months. Anyway, in a lot of cases, the companies hired the quota and pretty much siloed the locals in non-productive roles because they could never fire them either.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
I doubt that comp disclosure + litigation would work. Any employee with the temerity to sue for pay is likely to be blackballed not just by his present employer but future employers. We've seen that happen in a couple cases with unpaid interns who sued but basically couldn't find a job after that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
I'm in favor of wage disclosure simply because it'll be hilarious to see all the workplace spats arise due to workers finding out that they're grossly underpaid or overpaid. I just don't think it'll solve anything.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
I'd like to hear more about what exactly it'll solve and how. We're 6 pages into the thread and no one seems to be able to explain whether the proposed disclosure mechanism is open to the general public with a key-name look up or whether it's only for looking up pay for employees within the same company etc.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
rscott posted:How is more information available in the labor market a bad thing, seriously I don't understand that. A market's efficiency relies on actors having as close to perfect information as possible right? Are we really supposed to believe that labor as a class, despite all of its' defeats in the last 35 years is manipulating this inefficiency to its' advantage? To me it seems far more likely that it's the other way around and that employers are using this lack of knowledge to their advantage, like the silicon valley collusion that was discovered recently. Are you speaking from an econ 101 textbook? Should we also disclose the health issues and criminal records of employees to the general public?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
Wait, criminal records are available to the general public? I take back my objections.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
Heh, bilingual typically means native or close-to-native level proficiency with the second language. It's a white/American person thing to say bilingual and mean being able to speak a second language brokenly.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 07:02
|
|
|
Nah, to give an example, my firm was recruiting for bilingual English/Japanese speakers to launch an office in Tokyo last year. We pretty much had to filter out all the American candidates who put "bilingual" or "native Japanese" on their CVs because they couldn't use Japanese in a business setting even on a phone screen. Japanese on the other hand are much more hesitant about putting bilingualism unless they're actually fluent in English. Cultural differences I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
That could very well be the case. It's pretty clear that Americans tend to really spin their CVs relative to Europeans or Asians.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
I think we're in agreement then. Your point about resumes being half filled with lies is well taken.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 05:57 |
|
|
Pay disclosure is ultimately an uninteresting solution because it's not a solution in of itself and because it has no natural constituency. Put it another way, given how Americans are uncomfortable with discussing comp and the political capital required to enact a public comp database, you might as well shoot for the moon and go for multiplier income limits or something equally implausible.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2014 21:20
|
|