That would be some fun transparency. You could compare ratios and that ratio would be a number people talk about.
Comment on Companies lower salaries in job postings as pay transparency laws take effect
Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 8 months ago
The real number I'd like to know is how much value my labor is actually producing versus what they pay me.
paraphrand@lemmy.world 8 months ago
lemming741@lemmy.world 8 months ago
The national average is $128,502 in 2017 dollars, $160k+ today. That’s well over 3 times the median wage of $45k.
r00ty@kbin.life 8 months ago
They do hold that data of course, where possible. I've heard it called personal P&L.
But tbh I reckon it would only be a new source of depression to know. :p
shalafi@lemmy.world 8 months ago
That’s actually rather easy if you work for a publicly traded corp, at least to ballpark it.
Company profits / total workers. (<-this seems facile, what am I missing?)
OTOH, beware comparisons of pay scales.
“CEOs make too much!”
Do the math. CEO pay is typically 1/100th of a penny earned, sometimes 1/1000th, not a drop in the bucket. Don’t matter. When I was a kid, sports star pay was the thing to rage about. LOL, haven’t seen a single lemming comment about that. Whatever.
“I don’t make enough!”
And that’s very likely true, but you cost far more than you think. Good rule of thumb? Double your pay, that’s what you actually cost. You make $15/hr.? Company probably pays $30, or a bit more. Company has to pay worker’s comp insurance, taxes, benefits, unemployment insurance, payroll processing fees, all that and more.
SOURCE: Worked IT for a payroll company, got the inside scoop.
AtariDump@lemmy.world 8 months ago
but you cost far more than you think.
When companies pay peanuts compared to the C-Suite AND post record profits each year, I think the company could give me more than a 3% raise.
Zoboomafoo@lemmy.world 8 months ago
It’s impressive how deftly you avoid the comment to spout your own opinion
shalafi@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Well, that goes without saying. I was commenting on the idea of “fair market value”.
AtariDump@lemmy.world 8 months ago
The downvotes say otherwise.
uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
If you have to underpay your workers to make enough profit, then your business model sucks, and your company should fail.
Economics 1B
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 8 months ago
The full value of labor can only meaningfully be considered at the level of the enterprise.
You and your coworkers contribute labor worth the value of the products you create collectively, minus the cost of inputs and operation.
How such value is distributed within the enterprise is simply a choice by those who control the enterprise. No objective solution is available. Owners pay each worker the minimum possible for the labor to be provided, which may vary under current systems for each kind of labor, due to the commodification labor, which produces valorization by supply and demand, each quantity subject to variation depending on type of labor.
Colorcodedresistor@lemm.ee 8 months ago
[deleted]unfreeradical@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I am not understanding the relevance or meaning of your objection in context, but if you are taking the side of insurance companies, then perhaps you should not be participating in a space created for advancing the interests of workers.
nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 8 months ago
That’s pretty difficult for a lot of jobs. For someone in sales, easy, you can look at the value of the contracts they bring in. For someone who works in facilities maintenance or tech support? Good luck figuring that out.
Skates@feddit.nl 8 months ago
I would argue against this. As someone whose sales guys overpromise just to get the contract signed, in order to see how much they actually bring in I would subtract the number of overtime hours/additional effort we need to invest compared to their initial sales pitch. Oh, you promised feature X is delivered in the first 2 years? Well when the customer doesn’t get it and complains about it, that’s going to go against your bonus.
Listen, I know the job is made so that they bring in the most contracts possible and then the techs need to figure out the rest. But if the company constantly gets in trouble with the same few big-name customers in the industry (making them not want to sign with us in the future because of unrealistic promises), maybe it’s time to consider that Sales’ approach is sometimes detrimental?
Amoeba_of_death@lemmy.world 8 months ago
I work in professional services, and this is so true. I feel like every new client I onboard and start implementing has promises in their contract we can’t fulfill due to product limitations. Oh, it’s supposed to do X out of the box? Nope, maybe we can customize it, but that’s a weird niche requirement that’s going to take a lot of discovery and architecting.
uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 months ago
Businessmen, they drink my wine
Plowmen dig my earth
None of them along the line
Know what any of it is worth
joshthewaster@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Profit/number of employees…
nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 8 months ago
The issue there is not everyone is equally productive. In the most direct example someone who is more experienced with a piece of equipment or technology will often be more productive with it than someone who isn’t. That’s ignoring that different people have different competencies. If you ask me to design costumes for a TV show, I would fail miserably. If you asked a fashion designer to do my job without any training, they would likewise not be very successful at it.
There are plenty of ills that come along with capitalism, but I do think some amount of incentive will promote productivity. I don’t think that people are lazy and won’t do any work unless they are threatened with homelessness and starvation, but I do believe if an innovative strong performer in a role is not given recognition in a real tangible way, they will either leave to a place where they can get that recognition or just stop being as innovative and productive.
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Productivity is a form of activity, not a quantity.
Systems of productivity that are organized by wage remuneration rely on processes of labor valorization, but no such process reflects any inherent or essential feature of the labor process undertaken by any individual worker.
Production in enterprise is by social processes.
Processes of valorization have more cogency at the level of the entire enterprise, because products within the enterprise are created through the complex accumulation of many individual contributions, but are exchanged between easily separable entities, often through commodity markets.
Ultimately, there is no law of nature affirming the distinctively quantified value of each worker’s labor. Neither is there any law of nature proscribing each worker from receiving the same rate of rumuneration for each unit of time contributed to the social processes of labor. A social choice for such practices would be possible to implement.