> felt if I saw similar level people earnt more and I raised this but didn't get equalised it could hurt my sense of justice and how content I felt in the workplace.
Shouldn't it, though? It's like saying your partner is cheating on you, but you don't want to know because it could 'hurt your sense of justice and how content I feel in the relationship'.
I mean, I'll grant you that if you're happy in your job, and honestly don't care about pay, it's different. Just like if you're in an open relationship, and genuinely don't care if your partner sleeps with other people. That's fine. But by saying it could hurt you, you're implying it does matter. And if it matters, the first step to righting any wrong is to know about it and to be able to take adequate steps.
Put differently, suppose other people knew they were worth more, took that information and asked more, got more, and you didn't, even though you could've. That doesn't sound right to me.
What I think could be a useful tool is to take that raw Norwegian tax data, run a basic condition on it, and then spit out only results you find 'relevant', which can protect you from knowing things you don't want to know.
e.g. input 10 names of your peers (who should be earning the same), and only show those salaries that are say 20% above your own. That prevents you from knowing Bob earns 5% more for reasons that may never be resolved, which could still annoy you. But if say Bob earns 20% more, that's something I'd want to know to see if I could take action.
Or, perhaps even more conservative, to only get a sense of where you stand versus company average (for your function) and versus market average. That takes out a lot of the personal but tells you whether you should be happy where you are, or asking for a raise or another employer.