I think that a quarterly "Ask HN: How much do you make?" Would be a great addition to the "Who's Hiring?" threads.

I posted one for Google here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11314449

This Amazon thread has been very enlightening.

The problem is that when you share your salary people who make less than you start despising you and people who make more than you start looking down on you.

It's less of a corporate conspiracy but more "this is why you can't have nice things". People just can not handle it in a mature and responsible way, which is why the 'don't talk about money' "common sense" developed.

My experience is that people tend to hate the employer, not the employee.

Less, "You make more than me? You earn too much!" and more "You make more than me? I should be paid more!"

Yes, I think engineers tend to undervalue themselves when compared to many other professionals such as lawyers, traders and financiers.

Perhaps it is because our work puts us is a position where we aren't able to practice our people skills (and negotiation skills) and we don't have good instincts when it comes to how the free market works (we get boxed in and caught up in our work and forget about the financial realities of life).

When you think about the enormous value which engineers have created over the past 50 years and you compare that to who actually benefited the most from that value (in terms of wealth accumulation) - The people who benefited the most are business people, lawyers and financiers.

Every field of industry has been significantly enhanced by engineers... Heck, even medicine would still be voodoo pseudo-science if it wasn't for all the awesome tools created by engineers... Yet in spite of talent shortages, the education/intelligence barrier, the extreme amount of after-work hours required; we barely get paid more than an Australian construction worker.

It comes down to the fact that we don't stand up for ourselves - And we should.

Not saying you're wrong, but I think it probably also has a lot to do with the fact that engineers, by training and often by personality, tend toward being "rational" in their worldview, which basically means looking for "reasons" for things, and wanting "reason" to prevail. Such a person would tend to set the value of his own labor at some rationally-supportable level, and would have a hard time coming up with a rational reason why he (or anyone else) needs or deserves to be paid more than that.

Whereas other types of people who are quicker to embrace "irrational" ideas of what they're worth, are more likely to ask for and therefore receive irrationally high salaries.

The reason it's hard to come up with a rational reason for a particular pay rate, is because no such reason exists in the real world. You can talk in terms of being paid proportionately for value created, but that's just an attempt to apply reason where it doesn't actually govern. Plenty of people are underpaid compared to the value they create, for no good reason: teachers, women, manufacturing workers, foreign sweatshop workers, open-sourcers - though willingly in the latter case.

What governs in setting labor prices is not reason, but all the gloriously irrational behavior of any and every marketplace, where people we denigrate as stupid idiots are basically like "oh look, shiny things." Well guess what, those shiny things - objects of desire - are worth a lot, even if rationally speaking they are crap. Never underestimate the Shiny Factor.

That's how someone ends up paid more for the same work for example. Like when a person from outside gets hired on at a higher rate for the same job being done for less by someone already in-house. The "reason" is simply that the new guy happened to be an "object of desire" (not currently working for the firm) which enhanced his Shiny Factor. As opposed to someone already on the payroll, dependably doing exactly the same thing - that guy, by his very dependability, actually has a lower Shiny Factor. To raise it, he needs to create a real threat of his leaving, and/or actually leave for somewhere else, and maybe come back.

That's a straw vulcan.

Rationality, is or should be, by definition, pursuing actions that are in your own self interest.

Maybe engineers, if they had the knowledge that they could increase their salary by inflating their self worth in the eyes others, would do so. But in that case the problem is one of knowledge, not of rationality. Or perhaps engineers are more ethical. But in that case the problem is one of values, and not of rationality.

If someone needs to justify their pay by more rigorous means at their own expense, should they really be viewed as rational? Compare that question to the following one. Should someone with OCPD (obsessive compulsive personality disorder), that is conscientiousness and perfectionist to a fault be seen as more adept?

Business people and financiers exist to extract value from the people doing the actual work. That is the entire purpose of the position. They literally sit around most days devising new or better ways of extracting more value.

We should, therefore, not be surprised when the structure of organizations in their control reflect that reality.

That's because he's talking to you. He's not gonna tell you he despises you to your face.

But secretly he wonders: "why does he get more than me, im smarter than him!!".

This is then bottled up under 10 psi of pressure until the perfect moment when the slightest thing sets it off and creates a scene in the office.

Fyi standard temp and pressure at is 14 psi, so 10 is actually a slight vacuum. Or 10 over current is still not very much. Usually not enough to even explode. people can blow up to about 20psi, eg 6 psi over stp (otherwise we couldn't breathe). So it'd be more like a birthday baloon that flubbered around for 4 seconds and then went flat.

Interesting. So if my bike tire is at 10 lbs, is that 10 above atmosphere or just 10psi? I think a balloon flubbering arround for 4 seconds then going flat at the office would still be considered a scene. In fact I think your depiction is perfect. Ha.

Bike tires are typically inflated to a psi (lbs per square inch). A bike tire is a bad example in this context because most are filled pretty high (80-130psi, mine are 90psi). The average car tire is 30-40psi.

I run my dirt bikes trials tire at about 10 psi rear, and 14 front. Mountain bike tubeless 14-25 psi. So I guess my question was, is a guage measurement above atmospheric pressure? The answer is yes. [0] "Gauge Pressure: The pressure of a system above atmospheric pressure."

[0] https://www.boundless.com/physics/textbooks/boundless-physic...

Of all the times I've ever heard a pressure figure mentioned in casual conversation, I cannot recall a single time where the person was referring to absolute pressure rather than gauge pressure.

In fact, if I were at a party and I mentioned something about "10 psi", only to have someone correct me by saying "actually that's a slight vacuum...", I would assume they were trying to be mean.

okay 10 atm then

So I read this a while ago and it really stood out in my mind.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/my-boss-revealed-everyones-salar...

It's a question addressed to "Evil HR Lady" (didn't know that was a thing...) from a woman. Her new boss accidentally emailed a spreadsheet with everyone's salary to everyone. The spreadsheet revealed she was underpaid and was embarrassed and now wants the boss's head on a stick.

This is the response from Evil HR Lady

"You are really angry, and you should be -- but your anger is misplaced. Your new supervisor made a mistake in sending out everyone's salaries. But because she is new, I can guarantee she didn't decide on your salaries. Your previous boss did. So, yes, you should be angry, but not at her. You should be angry with your old supervisor.

In fact, you should be thanking your lucky stars that the new supervisor did this. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if she subconsciously did it on purpose. If I got a new job and on day one found out that there was a huge disparity in pay among workers doing the same job, it would be top of my priority list to fix that. And I would act as a thorn in my boss's side until it was fixed. Since the problem is a longstanding and expensive one, no one is going to be excited about fixing it. By revealing the discrepancies, she's just brought the issue front and center, and HR and the big bosses cannot ignore it anyone more.

By sharing everyone's salaries, she's given you the power and the tools to fix the problem. HR can't smile sweetly and say, "You're making the market rate, dear!" because you've got hard evidence that you're being underpaid. And you should use this information to negotiate a new salary, as should all of your coworkers. And your boss? She has plausible deniability. It was amistake.

You're angry because you're embarrassed that your salary is low. Not because your "privacy" was violated. If she'd sent out your medical records, or notes from a conversation about your marital problems because they were affecting your work, then that would be a privacy violation and you'd be justifiably angry. But this anger is coming from the unfairness of the whole thing. Yes, you should have negotiated better when you were hired, but because of the information asymmetry in hiring, the company was able to low-ball you. Lesson learned -- always negotiate.

This is precisely why I advocate more openness in pay in the workplace. If you had been aware of what other people in your group were earning when you negotiated your salary, your present salary would likely be more fair. Everyone shouldn't be paid an identical salary because performance and skills are not identical, but salaries should be justifiable and logical.

So forgive your supervisor for her mistake. Accidentally attaching a file in an email shouldn't be a fireable offense. Use the new information to get a higher salary. And if you have to be angry, be angry at the previous supervisor who allowed this to go on.

Good luck with your salary negotiations."

That's basically the best response anyone could have possibly written.

I think you should share your salary with as many people as possible. This "don't share" policy is just a trick used by companies to keep labor costs down.If employees know each other's pay, they will start demanding raises.

------ Keep in mind that 2 employees with the same education and years of experience might not always be "equal in all respects". There are so many other things which come into play - taking initiative, energy they bring to the company, team play etc. etc. most of which cannot be measured. So the reason for 2 employees with apparantly equal qualifications + experience not getting the same salary is not always the company "trying to fuck them" or because they did not "negotiate hard".

If you make all salaries open, keep in mind that so many employees will get demotivated to know the colleague next cubicle gets paid more. Serves no purpose.