It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Seattle CEO Who set Company Minimum Salary at $70k/yr Struggling

page: 6
18
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: EternalSolace

Looks to me like that defines vanity and self-centeredness perfectly.


So I have you and 5 others to mow lawns. You been working with me for 5 years and you are an expert on all the equipment and know all the customers and their likes/dislikes. I pay you 71k per year to take care of all the equipment, drive it to where it needs to be, make sure enough gas etc is available, pick up the 5 guys and get them to their lawns, anyone missing and you fill in to get everything done well, done on time, done correct and all the equipment is back in the shop and cleaned for another day.

I decide that everyone on the team will make 70k and the guy I hired yesterday who you had to wake up at his house now makes 70k and still gives the effort that he did at 8 bucks an hour. Do you think this is great? Has all your efforts equal this new guys efforts?




posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero
No. No. No.

You should be happy to have the job you have and happy that people who have no experience get paid the same thing you do. Seniority, productivity, and experience have no place in the workplace. Morale of long time employees is not relevant.



edit on 8/2/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xtrozero
No. No. No.

You should be happy to have the job you have and happy that people who have no experience get paid the same thing you do. Seniority, productivity, and experience have no place in the workplace. Morale of long time employees is not relevant.


I don't recall the CEO guy stating that he's also enacting a "never fire anyone" policy.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes
Do you recall if he's fired anyone?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes
Do you recall if he's fired anyone?

Does it matter? He can. It's not Soviet Russia; they're not government-ordained jobs.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Why is he being paid $71k per year while your other employees only get $70k? Sounds like a meritocracy to me! Better call yourself a greedy capitalist pig or shake out an extra grand for you other employees quick before the "because I exist" crowd shows up with their torches and pitchforks.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes
Yes. Off course he can.
And his experienced workers can (and did) quit. Now what? Fire the overpaid newbies?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes
Yes. Off course he can.
And his experienced workers can (and did) quit. Now what? Fire the overpaid newbies?

If they're good at their job, why should he fire them?



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Based on how this blunder has financially crippled him, I'm guessing he's fired any personal services oriented staff he may have once employed at his home.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:30 PM
link   
a reply to: AshOnMyTomatoes




If they're good at their job, why should he fire them?

If they're not good at their job, what choice does he have but keep them until he finds someone better. And good luck with that.

He seems to have created himself a sticky wicket.


edit on 8/2/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:37 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

That is not a very accurate way of representing the fact that Dan Price voluntarily dropped his own salary from 1.1 million per year to 70k.

Further the problems he's having are not due to the salary change itself, but, rather, from backlash from other businesses and his own brother, who is suing - despite the fact that the brothers 1.1 million per year salary was not changed at all.

In other words, you're basically blaming the victim of a witch hunt for being a victim of a witch hunt.

Relevant



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide




Further the problems he's having are not due to the salary change itself, but, rather, from backlash from other businesses and his own brother

You mean there were unforeseen consequences to the arbitrary pay raises he provided?
What a surprise. His rose colored glasses didn't help him much, did they?


edit on 8/2/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Arbitrary changes? You mean dogmatic attacks from others now qualify as arbitrary? Interesting.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide
No. I mean his pay raises were arbitrary. Something his experienced employees (and some clients) did not appreciate.


edit on 8/2/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I would argue that calling Mr Price's decision to raise wages at his own company "arbitrary" is unfair. Just watching the brief video in my above link shows that he lost sleep in the period before the announcement. This directly shows that his decision was anything but arbitrary. It was not a whim.

ETA: I would have to dig a bit to find the size of his entire staff, but two employees quit. Odds are that is not the bulk of his staff by any means.

edit on 8/2/15 by Hefficide because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide



It was not a whim.

Not a whim. But the raises were not based on any systematic analysis. The raises did not consider the morale of existing employees. The raises did not consider the reactions of clients. The raises did not consider, apparently, a number of factors.

Rose colored glasses. "I'll just lower my salary and increase that of the guys at the bottom and everything will be wonderful! My employees will love me and my business will thrive!"


edit on 8/2/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

You put that in quotes, can you source it please.



posted on Aug, 2 2015 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

Yeah. Me.
Unless I provide a source and/or use ATS external quote tags, it's all me.

You didn't actually think it was a direct quote, did you?

edit on 8/2/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 12:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Of course not. I just wanted to make things clear for anyone reading along at home. Obvious debate tricks are, well, obvious.



posted on Aug, 3 2015 @ 12:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

Yes. And stating the obvious is redundant.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join