←back to thread

996

(lucumr.pocoo.org)
1001 points genericlemon24 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.002s | source
Show context
stavros ◴[] No.45149464[source]
I don't understand this expectation that employees work more, and stigma if you go home on time, yet we don't have a corresponding stigma for when the amount of money that reaches my account is "only" what we agreed my salary would be.
replies(7): >>45149623 #>>45149739 #>>45149867 #>>45150037 #>>45150218 #>>45150849 #>>45159185 #
Aurornis ◴[] No.45149623[source]
Companies that try to demand extreme hours with average pay have very high turnover.

As employees realize they’re getting a bad deal and that they can find a better ratio of pay to hours worked at other companies, they leave.

replies(2): >>45149651 #>>45149676 #
regentbowerbird ◴[] No.45149676[source]
What happens when the companies band together to compress wages? Like what happened with the high-tech employee antitrust litigation.

Individual employees are far more numerous (therefore harder to coordinate) and have way shallower pockets than companies, so the negotiation power is always going to be lopsided.

replies(3): >>45149881 #>>45150361 #>>45151346 #
1. Aurornis ◴[] No.45149881[source]
> What happens when the companies band together to compress wages? Like what happened with the high-tech employee antitrust litigation.

What happened with that litigation is it got shut down and those companies pay some of the highest compensation now.

One of the few jobs you can get that pays that much compensation with fewer educational requirements and better hours than alternatives in that compensation range (surgeon, specialist doctors, lawyers at demanding firms)

I don’t think that’s a great example for your point since by comparison FAANG employees have some of the best pay you can find in an attainable job for someone with a 4 year degree and the demands are lower than many of the similarly paid jobs that require a lot more education.

replies(1): >>45150527 #
2. regentbowerbird ◴[] No.45150527[source]
Possibly it's just a one time thing that was limited to just these companies.

Or possibly the incentives that led to this are still in place, and the current judicial climate is way more lenient towards big companies. Who's to say?