The current controversy at my beloved place of employment arose when one carpenter found out a part-time helper was making more per hour than he was.
Carpenter A , I’ll call him, has been here about 18 mos. and is a good worker who can and does, do just about anything that is asked., but he has an attitude (not real bad)
Boss hired him at a low rate, and only gave him a raise when he was going to walk.
Then 2 weeks ago he goes to get the checks at the office and the helpers pay info was on the computer screen .
HelperB who hustles, but that is all he does right, is making $1.50 more
So carp A gets comes back to the job and tell what he just learned to another carpB who only recently has been making more than helperB.
Needless to say these guys are pissed And I don’t blame them.
Well now boss gives carp A a major “spankin” for discussing pay rates.
So any of you guys got any opinions on this.
It is Semi-annual review time so thingsd are gonna get interesting!!!
Film at 11:00
Mr T
Do not try this at home!
I am an Experienced Professional!
Replies
Usually compensation is confidential, but knowing where you stand helps you frame your argument for higher pay.
I think Boss A is mostly embarrased that he's paying the helper more than his good employees because he likes him (he's a brown-noser too, right?). He knows he did something wrong, he's either screwing his good employees or paying too much for the helper to his ego.
That you know how Carpenter A knows what Helper B makes is a sign that Carpenter A talks too much. He would have done just as well to keep his source confidential, especially to avoid the appearanstrokece of impropriety for peaking at the screen. He wouldn't have been spanked either.
Carpenter A should have just shared the information with Carpenter B without stating the source (assuming they're buds), so Carpenter A and Carpenter B could have made reasonable requests for increases at review time (they know $2+ is reasonable). Preferably after work, off-site.
If helper B is making a reasonable rate for his job, then Carpenter A has been getting screwed for a while and really ought to put his skills on the market, so he can get an appropriate rate for what he does.
Of course this kind of thing happens every day, in every field.
I owned a business. Gave one guy 40K. Later guy hired got 38 be/c he had less experience. They shared an office. First bozo is on phone applying for a loan and blabs his pay. Second guy hears it, and makes the point to me that despite the other's greater experience, it is in fact he who is being more productive.
Carp A and B have a reason to have an attitude problem, it seems to me.
Stuff like this is why I work alone.
Unless there it was in a written employee handbook, discussing pay rates wouldn't stand up as a valid reason to fire or discipline an employee (i.e. with the labor relations board, etc) free speech still being allowed in this country in most cases. Even if it was in the employee handbook, I'm not sure it would be enforceable.
Wasn't this one of the grievances in the movie "9 to 5" with Lily Tomlin and Dolly Parton? Part of what made the boss seem like such a jerk.
What I've always strove for is to keep pay rates private (tell no one but the employee his pay rate) but to have all the rates fair. So that if all the rates were known, an objective person could see that productivity/experience/customer relations/a$$holeness/safe work practices/etc had all been factored in appropriately. Because employees will talk, peek and pry. But employees are also not objective. They will always focus on their own, for instance, experience if it is good and ignore that they are a slacker and jerk.
Advice: Stay above the fray on this one. Focus on your own productivity, learning curve and helpfulness. Then you'll be getting raises and kept on as the folks with the attitude problems are passed over.
When I've been an employee pay rates have been strictly confidential, reason being nobody dares tell anyone else their rate of pay in case the other guy is getting more! I know this only applies when people are doing slightly different jobs, though
John
yes, but really I do not want to know what others make it will hurt my feelings
Everyone likes to “rationalize†why they should make more money than the next guy. And the reason(s) given are as many as a year has days.
I used to tell my guys up front that their hourly rate is based upon many, many things. I specifically put on paper what those reason were and what they were not, such as length of time employed, etc. As for length of time employed, I went into more detail about how A at 2 years was a hustler and wanted to learn more and more, whereas B at about 4 years was like a factory worker, just doing enough to get the jobs done and keep his job.
I put it on paper and had everyone sign a copy so that i the event someone found out what someone else made, there was no discussion, other than, “What can I do to improve my hourly rate.†And occasionally I even make a point of saying to a bunch of guys that happened to be together something like: “And that’s why Tom makes the big bucksâ€. Usually after Tom TYPICALLY exemplified leadership, a positive attitude, or exceptional problem solving skills.
In other words to the rest of those there: “Get with the program and you’ll get the big bucks as well.†Unlike a unions set-up, I didn’t and still don’t believe in “categories†or length of time employed as a basis for raises.
Having trade skills is one thing. Knowing how to apply them is another. When to apply them is yet another. And yet people skills is yet another “asset†as is “leadership†and showing the ability - as in initiative - to take a bull by the horns problem and take care of if on one’s own. We all know “delegation†can only be done to certain a certain caliber of people. And trade skills and length of employment has nothing to do with that either.
Besides, as others have said: “I can teach skills, but not character or attitude.â€
Unfortunately, your scenario about proves that there is one heck of a lot to learn about being a? business owner", and even more so with employees. This should have been addressed "before" the first employee was hired. It's called an "Employee Manual."
I've been on both sides of this fence.
Work for Unc' Sugar, and there's no real confidentiallity; you can look up what an E-7 with 15 years in makes, or an O-5 with 12. You can look up what the GS paygrades are, too. Doesn't necessarily tell you what they are making, only what the minimum they are being paid is.
Worked in some big offices, too. Everybody but everybody, "knew' what everyone else made, often as close as $1K, so, the "non disclosure" was a bit pointless. For office jobs, it is not hard to get ahold of the national figures for what pay is for that job--meaning you discover real quick if you are over, on, or under.
http://www.salary.com happens to list a bunch of jobs, and will be as detailed as you are willing to pay for.
So, it's not hard to find out what pay is. What is harder to do is to assess (or assign) worth. Employee A, B, & C all do the same job. A is about 80% productive and has 80% attendance. B is only 70-75% productive, but has 100% attendance, and agood attitude, and alsways seems happy. C puts out 110-115% effort, but always as a "situation" going on. What do you pay them? Simple question, hard answer. Do you need all three (do you really need four)?
One idea I have toyed with is a "public" rate scale--this job pays this, with this much for longevity. And (a very critical "and") a private bonus system, based on periodic reviews and actual perfomance data. Probably hairbrained at this point, but it may be an answer. May not, like as not.
Great discussion.
We have never disclosed any of our employee's pay rates but they seem to know within a week if there is any change or a new employee. We have four employees who have been with us for more than seven years and they are all paid pretty much the same. The hourly rates vary somewhat because of different benefits but they feel that they are paid the same. Are they all worth the same? Definitely not but they each have their strengths and creating a difference in pay without additional responsibilities would only create dissension in the ranks. They are well aware of this and understand the need for peace over justice.
would only create dissension in the ranks. They are well aware of this and understand the need for peace over justice.
Ah, so that's why I can't hire them, they're working for you . . . <grin>Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Going to throw in my two cents worth here.......
Had a similar situation on a job where employees were reamed out for sharing slary info and was told next person to share their slary was gonna get fired.....
Turns out the employer could have their short sued off if he follwed through on the threat.....something about free speech in America.
My philosophy has always been, your pay is none of my beeswax, if you make more than me I'll work harder and then make more than you.
Pay rates re not confidential.
Without a contract you can be fied for no reason, but not for certain protected reasons. Talking about our pay is not a protected reason.
I don't work unless I know what others are being paid.
then you must have alot of time on your hands
George: I never really cared what my co-workers were making. All that counted to me was to try to do my best...make my boss some money...and then hopefully I would be compensated for what I was worth. I always thought if everybody would put their energy into improving what they were worth..and quit worrying about what others are making..their compensation would show it.
Each person has a different niche...and each company has different niches that need to be filled. As for myself,...my niche is stairways...when I started out,.my employer needed that niche filled and I was in the right place at the right time. I never ever revealed my wages..but I knew they were higher than most of my co-workers who had been with the company years longer than I. They had ways of finding out and it just caused resentment. If they would have just worried about utilizing their talents...and not wasted so much energy worrying about what others were making...they would have been much better off.
On the other side of the story...when the trim/stairwork would be caught up...they would send me outside with the framers. They all talked openly about what their pay was...and here comes this trim carpenter with far less years with the company who was making much more. Talk about being uncomfortable. Here I was out of my niche...making more than the guys around me...and I will openly admit I wasnt worth HALF of what they were being paid.
Its all about having each persons skills utilized to their fullest.
Edited 11/8/2003 7:24:25 AM ET by Stan Foster
"Without a contract you can be fired for no reason, but not for certain protected reasons. Talking about our pay is not a protected reason. "
On first brush, that is true in an employment-at-will state. But there may also be case law (as opposed to legistation) that firings can not be arbitrary. There is in Alaska. So firing for work slow downs or productivity or mistakes made would be okay. But to fire everyone who played on the opposing softball team would not be okay. e.g. an unfair labor practices suit could be filed and might well prevail.
Race, creed, gender, etc are protected classes and generally you can't fire someone for those reasons. Although small employers, non-government contractors, BSA, and churches may be able to.
Firing anyone who shows up in Levi's instead of Wrangler's would not be a legistatively protected class. But the arbitrariness of it and existing case law may give the employees standing for a suit. Firing for excercising free speech, especially, would be risky. Bill of Rights and all, you know?David Thomas Overlooking Cook Inlet in Kenai, Alaska
the words..
"wrongfull dismissal" come to mind, I'm not sure if thats from my days as a union bag boy at the supermarket and simply a union term or if it applies in a more general sense to employment for states with out "right to work" laws.
At least I've heard them called "right to work" laws in KS, which I find very ironic since it's only come up in context of getting fired.
Edited 11/10/2003 7:21:28 PM ET by CAG
Mr. T,
Helper B may hustle ------and as such may well be a valuable commodity which raises the productivity of the whole crew. It can be VERY hard to find a helper that hustles.
Carpenters A & C may have average skills----but It might be a lot easier to replace an average carpenter than a hustling helper.
on a personal note----I wouldn't hesitate to can either A or C if they gave me grief. they don't sound very bright to me.----the pay rates of A,B and C have NOTHING to do with each other. I fail to see any logic in A feeling underpayed because he learned someone else is earning more.
BTW---why should seniority or experience have ANYTHING to do with pay rate? Productivity and value generated are what sets compensation. why should an employer pay a guy with 30 years experience and 20 years seniority more than a guy with 4 years experience and 2 years seniority----if the experience and seniority isn't generating proportional productivity?
"why should seniority or experience have ANYTHING to do with pay rate?"
Shazlett,
Guess it depends on what they do, but...You were kidding with that statement, right?
There is NO SUBSTITUTE for the two, especially if the more experienced individual is willing to and encouraged to share their knowledge with the newbies.
While on the surface they may look overpaid, remove 'um from the jobsite and see what happens. Nothing like a bunch o hardworking apprentices running around the jobsite taking matters into their own hands. LOL
Jon
Yeah, but how do you tell if a guy has 15 years of experience or just one year of experience repeated 15 times? What's important are the skills and attitudes, and years of experience are no guarantee.
"but how do you tell if a guy has 15 years of experience or just one year of experience repeated 15 times?"
Dunc,
That's easy, the apprentices are the ones who make the mistakes.
Jon
Jon,
uncle Duncs comment elaborated on what I was getting at. Experience means nothing in the pay department---if experience is being out performed by a newer person.
I fired a guy last year---for several reasons. One thing that sticks in my head was the number of times he repeated " I want to be paid for what I know"----unfortuneately for him, I pay for what you PRODUCE.( BTW---he wasn't as knowledgeable as he thought!)
Maybe it's just dumb luck--but mostly what I see is that people who use their experience and knowledge to be productive---do ok finacially. People who are constantly griping about their "seniority''--don't seem to be successfull at converting that into productivity.I don't care at all how long someone has been doing their job---I care how WELL and how FAST they do it.
BTW---I will pay more for dependability than for " seniority and experience"
"Experience means nothing in the pay department---if experience is being out performed by a newer person......I pay for what you PRODUCE"
SHAZ,
Glad I don't work for you. That attitude is likely to encourage those with the years of knowledge to keep it to themselves, rather than share it with the lesser experienced. After all, it would take them away from "producing."
The company I work for takes a different [more long term]approach, where the senior people are encouraged to act as mentors to the younger ones and share our thoughts and knowledge. We are not penalized for stepping away from a job to do this. Collectively, this raises overall productivity even if on paper it looks like the older folks are doing less.
Jon
jon,
you can't seriously be suggesting that an employer pay a more productive employee LESS than a lower productivity employee----just because the lower productivity employee has more "experience".
your thinking like an employee,not an employer.
"experience" really only has dollar and cents value to an employer if it means increased productivity.
My apologies to Stan Foster in advance---but lets use him as an example.
Stan may well be the greatest custom stair builder ever---I don't know.but let's say misfortune strikes Stan's shop---some disaster---and for whatever reason Stan comes to work for someone like me.Stan will probably be the LOWEST paid guy on the crew. his experience will mean nothing to us. what we want to know is how many bundles of shingles can Stan carry up that ladder today? how many square can he lay? Can he flash that chimney well? will he show up tommorrow and the day after and the day after? his exceptional skills and experience as a stairbuilder etc. mean NOTHING to us. And he WILL be consistently outperformed here by a 22 year old.
Look at any Fortune 500 company( my dad worked for one) you will see huge numbers of highly experienced 50year old guys replaced by 27year old guys who can do the equivalent job for far less money----think it is really gonna be any different in construction.
You are only worth what you produce---and since your employer wants to make a profit---you will be paid LESS than you produce.
BTW, take note---I think I have been pretty clear on this---but maybe you are choosing to ignore it.-----Experience means nothing if it doesn't convert into higher productivity. But---if a more experienced person uses that experience to REALLY be more productive---then of course he will probably be paid more.
but Uncle Dunc summed it up well----30 years experience may be really just one year of experience repeated 30 times. If thats the case---I would rather have the young guy with only a year or so experience---he might have unlimited potential.
also BTW---I have always taken it for granted that no one here would EVER want to work for me or with me.
Stephen, although I agree with you in principle I think you may be overstating your case that experience without production is worthless.
I think there is another reason to pay for experience. There are some situations that are rare, that may only happen once a year, or less. They may be simple or they may be complex, but when they happen it is valuable to have someone with experience there to deal with it. If no one on the job has seen the situation before and makes a bad judgement, productivity and the bottom line may suffer.
In other words, you are paying for what might happen as well as for what will happen. An experienced employee is good insurance for that kind of occasion.
Ak373,( nah---I am just gonna call you Joe---that's your real name anyhow ,ain't it?)
You are correct to a certain degree----but in my case I supply the needed experience beyond a certain level. ( and though I no longer learn something everyday---I do usually learn something every week or so!)
I just throw these things out there---and usually somebody comes along and illustrates it much clearer and better----most recently Shellingm.
BTW---in Jons case---one of the things it seems that the more "experienced " workers are supposed to be producing is new skilled workers. that is not what I am after at all( although it once was!)---My goal is to keep employees as few and as seldom as possible. I will contrast that with a guy who lives about 5 doors away that I sometimes sub stuff out to----his goal is to have as many employees as possible---he has 10-11 and he is slowly going broke---he just doesn't know it yet.
anyhow---good talking to you Joe
I'm imagining a young Shaz in algebra class...
Teacher: So let x represent that number.
Shaz: But what number is x?
T: Any number.
S: But what number?
T: It's not a particular number, we use x to represent a number.
S: But what number?
T: We just use x as a label, we let it stand for whatever number fits the equation.
S: Well, I'll just call it 5, OK?
Grinningly,
Joe
Joe,
you know me better all ready. I suck at any math that can't be accomplished by counting on my fingers.
Ok at VERY simple geometry----but really bad at anything mechanical or involving spatial relations like descriptive geometry.
Unfair pay must be a big deal with people wanting to discuss it and with employers to not want it discussed.
I think that employers could do a better job by having at least a written list of skill levels and pay rates to base their wages on.
As an employer I would never ask an employee how much he wants to be paid. I would pay him what he is worth to me.
As an employee I would never tell an employeer how much I want. I would expect to be paid what I am worth.
a little over simplistic don't you think?
"I think that employers could do a better job by having at least a written list of skill levels and pay rates to base their wages on."
I've seen that work very well. Each level 1 through 6 detailed with the skills and knowledge you needed. As shown as your supervisor said you qualified, the foreman (spot) checked you out (in like 30 minutes) and the next day you were making more money. 15-20% more.
And your supervisor got a day's pay of your new rate (from the company, not from you) in recognition of the time he took to educate you. I'm a smart guy and my supervisor was very experienced. I went up a level every month. 6 months later I was making twice as much, our crew banged out a job at twice the speed of others and everyone (at least on the high-performing crews) was happy.David Thomas Overlooking Cook Inlet in Kenai, Alaska
I make sure all employees know what each other is making, including what I pay myself, ( not including profit, if there is one).
Not only do you have to earn a raise, you half to earn what you already get. I have cut people's pay, too. Most often, they stay, and work harder. If they have a problem, or an excuse, (same thing), I ask that they come to me right away. Give now, take later. Loyalty must go both ways.When all else fails, use duct tape!
Shaz,
These guys are young (late 20's) and both very bright, and do good work at a good pace if the boss lets them(bad Planning and management, but that is another soap opera)
One has been given the responsiblity of running jobs but not the commensurate pay, He has brought this up at his reviews constantly and is always given the I wish I could pay you more line.
They both are truly assets to the company but are not being treated as such.
The helper hustles (as do the carps)but always wants to do things he can't handle. He always grabs the saw to cut even when he is told to do something else. Then we get to take apart stuff he has cut wrong.
Thursday he was supposed to be cleaning up but grabbed the RA drill to "help" drill for the sub feed, and proceeded to drill thru a HW heat line!
Then less than an hour later he was driving the POS company dumper and the clutch gave out.
So he backs down hill into a driveway and backs over a fence and gets stuck on the lawn!
NASA will NOT be calling this guy soon!
IMO the boss is making an issue of the pay discussion thing to deflect attention away from his bad decision making.
well I gotta go take the Cub scouts out to collect the food bags we distributed last weekend.
I'll let you know how this turns out.
Thanks for listening!!
Mr T
Do not try this at home!
I am an Experienced Professional!
Mr. T,
Although it may seem unfair to the fellow who feels screwed, he would have served himself better if he kept his yap shut and talked to the boss quietly,and like an adult. The boss will only be in a position now to let the fella go, rather than cave to whatever is demanded now and in the future.
Just a thought,
Curly
When my boss interviews people he talks to them a little, asks them what they can do then has them tell him What they want for money. They name their price he either accepts it or he doesn't. The problem with this is it all depends on what mood he's in. It's not uncommon for a helper with moderate skills to be making fifty cents to a dollar more an hour then an experianced hand who has more experiance and a lot more skills. Guys are constantly whining about money. Myself I aint got a problem cause I came in as an electrician and wanted electricians wages. And he accepted that. And that' what I tell them when they whine to me. I say. "When you sat down in that interview you were asked what you wanted to be paid. So your getting what you thought you were worth." (Somedays they really hate me.) LOL
The best system I have ever seen was was the grade system. They made you a grade one through five, as you learned you advanced and so did your pay. Everyone had to be graded and evaluated on their skills before they could advance. Best system yet.
Who Dares Wins.
Gunner,
that's pretty much my technique for hiring. If a guy tells you he will start at $9/hour---that tells me A LOT.
I figure a guy should know what he's worth better than I do initially. I will quickly find out if he is worth the money---and if he ain't worth it--he will be down the road pretty quick.
I have always felt that it was an un-spoken rule not to tell others your salary/wages. As with a few other responses, I work in a grade system and a job description to determine salary. I think it works well but in an office setting, and there isn't as much competition for salary because you know where you stand, with degrees, experience, etc. Also, only your supervisors really know how much your make.
As a GC I could see this being more difficult because you have many different levels of experience and I am assuming a higher turn-over rate then an office. Also, there is something to be said for Carp A and B to be working side by side and noticing if the other is pulling their weight or not. I would hope that a site project manager could help to better the relation by helping the boss realize who needs to be paid better. So, in the future I would hope your company would figure out a way to categorize your employees to determine pay, and try to make wages as confidential as possible.
How do you determine worth? is it experience, time with the company and it's inter-workings, amount of production, knowledge of specific situtions, leadership skills, client relationships, etc. Each company needs to figure out their own list of qualities for their particular trade.
Dan
Just a question from an "outsider." Why would pay rates be confidential? Sure most people don't speak openly about them but that's because most don't want others knowing what they make. If someone wants to talk pay rates, I think they are entitled- it's personal preference.
Paying people two different rates is fine as long as its defensible if you're ever questioned. Probably most of the time, pay rates won't ever get discussed between coworkers but anyone in a management position should be prepared to defend the rates if an employee learns that others are making more than he/she.
I'm an "outsider", too, but was intrigued both by the subject and the huge number of responses that occurred over such a short period of time. Touched a nerve, it seems.
I'm 51. I cannot do all the physical things I did at 25 as easily or as quickly these days. I care about my work. I pay attention to details that a 22 yr old might overlook because I know the results of skipping details. But I can't run as fast or lift as much, so many of you think I should be paid less. Doesn't seem fair after working hard day-after-day for the past 30 years.
This has become a throw-away society. When something no longer works as well as it did, throw it away and get a new one. It appears this now applies to people as well. I think that is a sad comment on human values.
When Stephen talks about productivity, he is talking about an employee's total productivity. Granted he is concerned about roofing where the physical demands are great but experiece is important if it helps an employee's total productivity. In other words, the old guy might not be able to lay quite as many squares as the young buck but knows how to build and flash a cricket quickly and so it won't leak. It is the employer's job to make a judgement about how each employee's work contributes to the company's income and to set the pay at that level.
As a GC I have a lot more latitude about where I assign my workers. I often can find the right spot for the guy who has lost a step, but not always. Considering that the partners in our company are the oldest and most experienced guys and we know that our productivity is what allows us to charge what we do, we are not going to look too favorably on an employee who thinks that he can skate by on his experience.
We once had an employee who made the mistake of asking for a raise in front of the entire crew during lunch. The employee prefaced their request by pointing out that a new hire just out of high school was being paid 50 cents an hour more. The partner looked at the employee coldly and said no. When the employee continued to press the case, all the other employees beat a hasty retreat so as not to hear the terse explanation that the new employee could carry and dig and do all the tough nasty jobs with greater speed and efficiency and that the old employee did not have the skill level on finer work to justify higher pay. This employee soon left to take on a new career to everyone's satisfaction.
I saw where a couple of people said that you could not be fired for discussing wages, that may be true if there is no policy but my wife who is in retail has always worked under the "discuss pay and it's grounds for dismissal". Nothing illegal about it.
I to take the philosophy of not caring what others are making, I have a good idea what the market allows for my skills and if I don't feel I'm getting it from the guy that I work for I'll go elsewhere. Don't really care what my coworkers are getting.
And I too am glad I don't work for SHazlett, God I don't want to be up on a roof, nothing against him though, its all that hard work that bothers me!
Doug
Not ment to be addressed to Unc, just happened
Edited 11/11/2003 7:30:22 PM ET by Doug@es
"I saw where a couple of people said that you could not be fired for discussing wages, that may be true if there is no policy but my wife who is in retail has always worked under the "discuss pay and it's grounds for dismissal". Nothing illegal about it."
I agree that there is probably nothing illegal about having that clause in an employee handbook. But enforcing it. . . . i.e. firing someone. . . . I would strongly suggest you first run it by a lawyer in your state who deals with employment law and fair labor practices. Because the fired employee may well run it by a lawyer in your state who deals with employment law and fair labor practices.
Statues and case law vary widely from place to place.
David Thomas Overlooking Cook Inlet in Kenai, Alaska
I think the two carpenters have every right to be pissed, and the boss has a small window to make things right....if I was them, and he didn't, I'd be gone. The labourer is hired as a labourer; it's a necessary function in some cases, and a good one can be an asset, but he's still a labourer, and that's unskilled or low skill work. The carpenters are skilled tradesmen, and you say they can do they job, and they're productive. No way should they be paid less than the labourer. If the labourer is that good (and you say he isn't), make him a carpenter. The message the boss is sending is that having skills that contribute to the company aren't as valuable to him as....whatever the hell is prompting him to pay the dippy labourer more than two skilled men.
I've seen this become an issue in several companies (not my own). I also remember one commerical job when I was an apprentice....we were doing the millwork in a full floor fit up, and discovered that the new hire on the contractors crew, who was going around with a bar chipping up mud from the floor, and not doing a great job of that, was getting paid more than any of the cabinetmakers, including our foreman....and before anyone says, we should have changed trades, yeah, that was our option. Still caused a good bit of ill will.cabinetmaker/college woodworking instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
David
The thing about the wage deal isn't where I work, its where my wife works, but it must be enforceable because she has told me of an instance in another store(in the same state) where it was done.
I'm assuming that a big company knows more about the law pertaining to this than I do.
Maybe they sign something regarding it when they hire on, don't know, I'll probably never be in a position where it will matter though.
Doug
I really don't think fair and justified payment to employees should even be an issue! A good employer can A.) Design and create their contracts or estimates to cover their costs as well as the costs or salary requested by the employees. or a "fly-by-nighter employer can B.) Design and create their contracts and estimates to pay their employees, not what they want, but rather what they are willing to pay them, and pad their own pockets what could've fairly compensated "Good Help". Top-down.................. or bottom-up?
The issue is not whether the employee is "good" or "fly-by night". Most of us fall somewhere in between.
The issue is whether a worker's productivity is the basis for his pay. There are certainly many different approaches possible in determining a workers pay and we use a blend of them. It is difficult to have an objective measure of productivity in any complex situation. This judgement is ultimately a subjective one by the employer.
Ultimately, however, the pay must reflect the worker's production or the company will suffer financially. If the pay is too high, the bids that reflect this will not be accepted and there will be no work or the company will lose money on bids that are low. If the pay is too low, the company will not retain its employees.
The customer does not know or care what the employees are paid. They want a job done at a price they will pay. Any pay that can meet those requirements is fair.
There's an old saying;
Ask a European how much he makes and he'll be happy to tell you, ask him how he does something and he won't say a word.
Ask an American how much he makes and he'll tell you it's none of your business, ask him how he does something and he'll show you everything......
No comment, just an interesting observation which seems to be pretty much confirmed by all the discussions around here.
Everyone is happy to tell you how they do something (or that you are doing it wrong and how you SHOULD be doing it) but have you ever seen a discussion that starts out, "So I make xxxx dollars per hour working for so and so doing this" The closest that anyone comes is I am making $1.20 less than someoen else...
I assume that the complaining worker wasn't bitching about how much he made BEFORE he found out the other guys wage.
You just cannot hide the information.
So take the opposite road: Post the rates in the truck, the office, the bathroom..whereever ( not everywhere). Include your bids and prices. They´ll want to see what you make too. Justify the pay by hard facts - not emotions. I do it this way...It works. It lures others you want too. Anybody here can look into my tax sheets, bank account...It makes them have empathy. I mean I am sitting here in the office...hacking into the computer (it looks like work, but this Forum is fun). Healthy competition...
If you pay good that is. http://www.raulfcarpenters.com
I agree Matt. When it is hidden we speculate. We all want to know what we "should'nt". Just look at the society that we live in and the numerous examples to apply this to. Why does it have to be so private? Who cares?
We as Americans are generally bred to not speak of money. It is so odd to me.
If a helper makes more money than a carpenter, then the boss should have a good reason for it. If his reason is: "I was in a good mood when I hired him." or something arbitrary like that, no one would be happy (except maybe for the overpaid helper) .
People just want a fair rate for what they do.
I did not expect somebody to agree on this. Interesting.
The employer wants as much work as he can get for what little money as can be, the employee wants just the opposite. Price is where they meet. It´s a free world, anybody can pack up and leave...Had one guy come back for lesser pay than he was offered another place he was talked into (by The Wife of course).
You get what you pay for, but you sure don´t always get paid for what they get. Gather the best...some of them primadonnas...each needs special attention. It is not covered by money - all the time.
Mathias
http://www.raulfcarpenters.com
BTW: In the swiss canton (state) Solothurn, there are some villages that post each citizens income declaration (TAX return) at the post-office. It sure does keep people honest... The best things in life are free.