> You could say the takeaway is don't work for companies out to screw their workers, but that's most of them.
Seems like this is something transparent salary policies might change.
Seems like this is something transparent salary policies might change.
One doesn't follow from the other, and I don't agree that there's inherent evil just because the salary was lower than elsewhere.
The important characteristics of the companies he's talking about is that they're in an unstable equilibrium dependent on wage ignorance. Meaning that wage info itself would destabilize them rather than any of the mentioned toxicity.
I think he's excluded "companies that underpay but are stable in the presence of wage info" from the class that "should [be expected to] crash and burn".
Random number: 50% of employees consider their employment as a stepping stone.
From what I've seen, the problem often arise not with people hired at a low pay because they didn't know better, but hired at a low pay because that was the market price at the time. They end up having less pay than people with the same experience (or even less) who were hired later when the market salary was higher.
I disagree. There may be some instances of this, but there are also instances of people who love their job and would not change it for more money.
Money isn't the only motivator.
There are plenty of other things that are much more powerful motivators than money, and a good company to work for is probably not the one paying you the most. Otherwise everyone would be in finance working 100 hour weeks and loving it. The issue isn't that someone was paid $X is that they felt they were worth $Y and the other incentives and motivators weren't sufficient to overcome that. If they were paid less than they could command elsewhere but doing work that mattered to them and challenged them, felt valued by the company, were part of a good team, had flexibility in work life balance, were given opportunities to develop and learn, had prospects for advancement and the myriad other things that different people value (and sometimes value very differently) then the situation may have been very different.