CEO Who Raised Minimum Salary to $70k, Falls On Hard Times

I was making 80k and will get bumped to 90k. Maybe I don't want the 90k job anymore. Maybe I want the 70k job.

And this is why you're a weak employee. No employer in their right mind would keep you around if this is your outlook. Should get your walking papers and head on out.
 
The problem is that you appear to be reading things that aren't there.

Unless you can quote where anyone was arguing for roughly similar pay for all employees, against negotiating salaries, cutting pay for people, etc.

So no, I don't think I can comprehend arguments no one is making. Impressive that you can.

Since I didn't say anybody said that I guess that attests to your reading of things not being as impeccable as you'd have us believe. Kinda funny too, since right above that I actually do attribute a position to you that you don't dispute. Instead you hopped on the last comment which was merely a matter or perspective. So, has the pay gap narrowed in this company and are you giving a negative assessment of those folks who don't appreciate it?

Can you tell me what crucial point you made that I didn't acknowledge and then tell me where it was you acknowledged how labor is valued in the market.
 
No employer in their right mind would keep you around if this is your outlook. Should get your walking papers and head on out.

That's most people's outlook (weighing the effort & opportunity cost vs. reward) and this thread is full of posters vilifying individuals looking to get ahead.

Tell me about how you go about managing your employees and what valuable lessons you've learned regarding compensation and motivation.
 
That's most people's outlook (weighing the effort & opportunity cost vs. reward) and this thread is full of posters vilifying individuals looking to get ahead.

Tell me about how you go about managing your employees and what valuable lessons you've learned regarding compensation and motivation.

Looking to get ahead?

If you spit in the face of an employer who gives you a 13% raise without asking you to do more work or take on more responsibilities then you can get your walking papers and take a hike. Nobody wants an employee like this, trying to nickel and dime their way to "get ahead". Disgusting grubster mentality. This is why so many of you are stuck in the rat race for your entire lives and never experience true wealth.
 
Looking to get ahead?

If you spit in the face of an employer who gives you a 13% raise without asking you to do more work or take on more responsibilities then you can get your walking papers and take a hike. Nobody wants an employee like this, trying to nickel and dime their way to "get ahead". Disgusting grubster mentality. This is why so many of you are stuck in the rat race for your entire lives and never experience true wealth.

Lol. You are worth what the market says you are worth. You honestly think an employee needs to make unnecessary concessions?
 
Lol. You are worth what the market says you are worth. You honestly think an employee needs to make unnecessary concessions?

Because somebody else making more money than they did last month = "concession".

This is a fascinating insight into the mind of the mediocre. "Pay me whatever you want, as long as I can point to someone who makes much less than me you won't hear a peep."

This is why your type of folk see little to no vertical movement in your career. As long as you can point down the ladder and feel like you are above someone else, what you are paid is irrelevant to you (as demonstrated by the woman in the article). What a winning mentality, LMAO.
 
Looking to get ahead?

If you spit in the face of an employer who gives you a 13% raise without asking you to do more work or take on more responsibilities then you can get your walking papers and take a hike. Nobody wants an employee like this, trying to nickel and dime their way to "get ahead". Disgusting grubster mentality. This is why so many of you are stuck in the rat race for your entire lives and never experience true wealth.


So you've no experience in managing a work force? What are the key factors in determining the value of labor?
 
So you've no experience in managing a work force? What are the key factors in determining the value of labor?

I certainly do. There is only 1 factor in determining the value of labor - how much it's worth to me.
 
No one said it's rational. Most things about status are rarely rational.

And it's easy for you to say that the janitor shouldn't feel superior to the fast food worker since you're not doing either of their jobs. But to the janitor and the fast food worker who are in same economic marketplace for homes, spouses, cars, etc. being paid 25% more than someone says something. When you reduce that, you're reducing his self-image even if you're paying him more in absolute dollars.

Maybe not rational but no less real to them because of it.

Fair enough. It's human nature that effects all skill levels. Shit, there are billionaires that are insulted other billionaires make more. Obviously we can't craft policy around irrational behavior.

If you can't earn enough money with your economically low-value skills than apply for assistance. Distorting the marketplace just so an illiterate janitor isn't earning much or a teen-age fryer isn't earning much is bad economics and bad policy.

I think there are better ways to tackle poverty and I know you do too. But while we have the current system we should increase the minimum wage so that people can afford food and rent. However, I don't see why taxpayers should subsidize businesses that refuse to pay their employees enough to live, passing the bill to us.

$15/hour is a pretty steep increase and we will see the effects. A moderate one, say to $10/hour is LONG overdue.
 
Pretty much yeah. Or, its only important that the poor keep being poor. This is what motivates those people: The poor need to continue having a shitty life. That is all that matters.

You see this is all the minimum wage debates. What is important to right-wingers is that the poor keep being poor, that they don't earn half a cent more than they "deserve". This is what drives such debates and motivates people ideologically and politically.

Of course they throw in some bullshit like "if minimum wage goes up prices will increase!" forgetting that wages are just a fraction of expenses (sometimes a small one, depending on the industry).

/thread
 
Because somebody else making more money than they did last month = "concession".

This is a fascinating insight into the mind of the mediocre. "Pay me whatever you want, as long as I can point to someone who makes much less than me you won't hear a peep."

This is why your type of folk see little to no vertical movement in your career. As long as you can point down the ladder and feel like you are above someone else, what you are paid is irrelevant to you (as demonstrated by the woman in the article). What a winning mentality, LMAO.

What? You obviously have as much economic comprehension as you do reading comprehension. Seriously, what the hell are you saying? You negotiate your worth. If you don't have much because you are a commodity than you don't have much. That has nothing to do with anyone or anything being "mediocre." You can have exceptional talents that aren't worth much. It's called being in demand. Sorry your thinking skills are mediocre.
 
I think there are better ways to tackle poverty and I know you do too. But while we have the current system we should increase the minimum wage so that people can afford food and rent. However, I don't see why taxpayers should subsidize businesses that refuse to pay their employees enough to live, passing the bill to us.

$15/hour is a pretty steep increase and we will see the effects. A moderate one, say to $10/hour is LONG overdue.

It's good we will see the effects. Hopefully they are mostly negative so we can drive a nail into the coffin of the idea of price fixing.
 
God bless this ceo. Good on him for paying well.

But if it costs the company is existence or truncates it's ability to create jobs he made the nations economy worse off then if he had stayed the course.

Also taking action that it potentially inflationary does not up the average workings buying power. True this one company wouldn't cause it but if all did the same thing it would be inflationary.
 
It's good we will see the effects. Hopefully they are mostly negative so we can drive a nail into the coffin of the idea of price fixing.

I doubt that would be the outcome, since there is a ton of evidence that moderate increases to the minimum wage show small positives and have an immaterial effect on prices. This is a test of a big increase and it could also be a big success.
 
The people that quit WERE BEING PAID MORE.

Why does a drop in RELATIVE pay offend people if not for antipathy towards the lower class? What is your explanation?

Because usually (not always the case) people who get paid more "earned" it either through busting their ass through school or busting their ass at work. It's an issue of merit not antipathy towards the "lower class."

You encapsulate perfectly a mindset I just can't understand. All of a sudden you hate the poor because you don't find it fair that someone with relatively less skills and education is getting paid almost as much as you.

breakitdown said:
Don't think anyone is having trouble comprehending why someone would get upset, rather people are identifying how laughable and petty it is to get upset at something like this. Their money holds no less value now that someone else is making more, but the thought of a couple of people -out of the billions who live on earth- making more money drives them to quit their job of 5+ years.

We can all hope that she is never able to secure employment again, in any field, now that her true intentions have been made clear.

Again, it's not really about the money as much as it is about merit. Some people have a problem with others who presumably haven't "deserved" it making as much income as someone who presumably does "deserve" it. Even some of the individuals who got the increase in their wages didn't feel comfortable earning so much money when they didn't feel like they earned it. So obviously there is a sense (from both those who earned higher wages before and those who were now going to earn higher wages) that something just isn't fair about the whole arrangement and I don't see how voicing that concern makes anyone "petty."

JosephDredd said:
There are psychological studies that suggest that how much you get paid is not as important to people as how much they get paid compared to the people around them. There are also psychological studies that prove that rape and racism are tendencies that come to most people pretty easily. We've put forward the idea that society is improved when people make a conscious effort to rape less and be less racist (though many people still fight these campaigns ). Maybe it's time we put forward the idea that getting control of a person's need to keep other people down is also better for our country.

You're just pigeonholing everyone who disagrees with this arrangement as someone who "wants to keep other people down" when that isn't the case at all. People have completely rational reasons why they oppose this arrangement and instead of trying to comprehend those reasons it seems people like you rather just muddy the waters by labeling everyone something they are not.

Again, this is the mentality I don't understand.
 
I'm sure it doesn't help his financial matters that his fucking BROTHER is suing him. I don't know why he is suing him but it is still a complete dick move from your own brother. Just fight teh UFC and get it over with like real brothers.
 
Back
Top