If my company decided to start paying me minimum wage, I'd leave.
If my salary stayed the same and another company would pay me slightly more I'd stay because I like the work, location, people, etc.
If another company (credibly) offered me a million dollars a month, I'd leave and go work for them.
Someone here was talking about working for banks or data analytics companies that work with law enforcement.
He accuses all of them of some sort of moral breach. But that's from his point of view. A lot of them may not see what they're doing as wrong. In that case, it's not a case of "having a price", it's just a job like any other to them.
Now. If he worked for them in spite of his clear objections, then he clearly has a price.
... I mean, that's just a matter of locality of ethics. IMO going against your own principles is unethical from your own perspective.
Killing a man is generally seen as unethical. Eating meat generally isn't.
So if a vegetarian was working as a taster for Al's Nothing But Beef restaurant, we wouldn't say they are unethical, but they are violating their principles.
Or if Stallman started working for Apple or Microsoft. He wouldn't be doing anything unethical, but he'd be violating every principle he stands for.
So I think the distinction is an important one. To separate one's personal principles from what is generally regarded as ethical.