Should your salary be known to everyone?

[Necuno]

I was listening to this debate on 702, in short the argument was about

1. It is good to know everyone's salary in the workplace.
2. It is not good because it creates difficulties between employees.

I leaning towards 2, but with an exception to 1:

What should be known is the amount it was increased with because of getting yourself more educated or skilled. Meaning for example you work in IT as a developer and you just got that additional certification. This is both good for yourself and the company as they can use it as part of the bid to get a contract. Then I would say it is good make it known that X is now getting R1000 more p/m because of the skills development that has taken place.


Where 2 does not work, out of experience as an example is where everyone knows each others salaries, but not everyone is working as they should. Especially if the person earning more is the one who does the least in the exact same job. I've been in this scenario, worked more, worked less and worked the same and no change in salary. However that one person just keeps on getting more than yourself.

 

[HavocXphere]

Don't think it should be. It'll cause hectic tension. Just look at the unions bitching about CEO salaries...it'll be the same on a smaller scale.

That being said, at my workplace its fairly common knowledge who earns what because it follows a predictable pattern. Works out OK but its not exactly a normal company structure...I don't think it'd work well in other places.

 

[MickeyD]

1. Your salary is your business.

Firstly, what should be known to all is the salary band (scale) for each position, e.g. clerk 60-84k/a, supervisor 120-180k/a, etc.

If you are a supervisor and earning 150k/a and get a 10% increase due to good work performance it takes you to R165k/a.

The person cruising along, doing just enough to keep everybody happy, is on R140k/a and gets a 7% increase will then go to R150k/a.

So the gap has increased from R10k/a to R15k/a and this is fully justified. All supervisors also know when they are hitting the top of their salary scale, so they know when it's time to move on.

The counter argument to this is that sometimes person A gets an opportunity to "shine" while person B holds the fort. In this case Person A should get a "once off" bonus that does not impact his salary increase.

It's important to remember that the current year's salary increase impacts all future increases. In the first example, supervisor A could have a mediocre year next year but he will still be earning more than supervisor B.

 

[The_Unbeliever]

Agreed. I think it's not a good idea to make salaries known as this will foster petty jealousy and underhanded tactics in the workplace.

 

[rrh]

In some countries in Europe (e.g. Norway & Sweden) salaries are not confidential.

http://www.tlnt.com/2013/11/13/salary-transparency-do-the-upsides-outweigh-the-traditional-concerns/

 

[Hamster]

Nope, bad idea. For one the "losers" who don't think they are losers will freak the **** out and your losers friends will hate you.

And you may just find out that you are one of the losers

 

[satanboy]

...

Firstly, what should be known to all is the salary band (scale) for each position, e.g. clerk 60-84k/a, supervisor 120-180k/a, etc.

....

even this is secret at my workplace...it is very frustrating to apply for other jobs because we have two different grading systems...one for IT positions and another for the rest.

 

[biometrics]

even this is secret at my workplace...it is very frustrating to apply for other jobs because we have two different grading systems...one for IT positions and another for the rest.

Ha ha. IT rulez!

 

[midnightcaller]

A long time ago I worked in the SA offices of a company that had its head office in Netherlands. The company policy on salaries was that it is not confidential. However, to invoke the policy one needed solid motivation.
We tried to get the salaries to be shared, but it was blocked by the local HR.

IMO I would rather not know.

 

[RichardG]

It's none of their business. Only your business.

 

[Paul Hjul]

One of two positions needs to be adopted with respect to salary information:
[1] The salary of a particular person is private personal information - such that even management have limited access on a need to know basis - and the MDs PA doesn't have the data for gossip
[2] Salary information is known to be open internally and this is part of the organizational culture.

You can differentiate what information is in what pool - so bands in 2 but exact figure in 1 - but it really is disastrous where some people have access to some sensitive information pertaining to others

 

[Ancalagon]

I don't think salary information should be secret at all. I think employers have created this culture where we don't talk about salaries because it suits them. People who don't know how much their colleagues earn, have a much more difficult time arguing for raises. Imagine if your company hires a guy with the same experience as you but pays him 20% more because he is a new hire. You aren't paid the same because you haven't complained.

Think about why salary information is treated as confidential - because people have been led to believe that your salary defines your worth as an individual. You are taught that a lesser paid individual is a lesser individual. Thus, you do not want people to know how much you earn, either because they will realize you are a loser because you earn to little, or they will judge you and say you are not worthy of your salary. That is what everyone fears.

First, I hope everyone can immediately see the fallacy in judging people by their financial status. Second, I don't know why financial information should be confidential at all. It is numbers, it is just accounting. So what?

Having salary information out in the open would ultimately lead to more people being paid a fair amount. Some would get less, some would get more. The distribution would be more even.

 

[icyrus]

I don't think salary information should be secret at all. I think employers have created this culture where we don't talk about salaries because it suits them. People who don't know how much their colleagues earn, have a much more difficult time arguing for raises. Imagine if your company hires a guy with the same experience as you but pays him 20% more because he is a new hire. You aren't paid the same because you haven't complained.

Think about why salary information is treated as confidential - because people have been led to believe that your salary defines your worth as an individual. You are taught that a lesser paid individual is a lesser individual. Thus, you do not want people to know how much you earn, either because they will realize you are a loser because you earn to little, or they will judge you and say you are not worthy of your salary. That is what everyone fears.

First, I hope everyone can immediately see the fallacy in judging people by their financial status. Second, I don't know why financial information should be confidential at all. It is numbers, it is just accounting. So what?

Having salary information out in the open would ultimately lead to more people being paid a fair amount. Some would get less, some would get more. The distribution would be more even.

I totally agree. It is amazing to me how many employees have bought into the confidentially of salary information when it is against their interests.

 

[cguy]

Hell, no - sharing salary information is a bad idea. Individual employees tend to look a "fairness" in terms of how some subset of their abilities or qualifications compare to their colleagues, whereas a successful business needs to look at what skill sets and personalities best suite the goals of the company - the two are very different - not to mention issues such as IP retention, key skill retention, company specific logic/knowledge retention and skill rebalancing to meet long term goals.

 

[Ancalagon]

Hell, no - sharing salary information is a bad idea. Individual employees tend to look a "fairness" in terms of how some subset of their abilities or qualifications compare to their colleagues, whereas a successful business needs to look at what skill sets and personalities best suite the goals of the company - the two are very different - not to mention issues such as IP retention, key skill retention, company specific logic/knowledge retention and skill rebalancing to meet long term goals.

There is a link on this page about a company that implemented an open salary information and the benefits it gained them.

Besides, what is important is that there is a REASON why that individual is paid more. If there is a reason, then it can be explained. What causes more resentment is when people find out that someone is paid more than their colleagues feel they are worth, but because of the policy of don't ask don't tell, everyone shuts up and just complains behind the manager's back.

 

[lucifir]

I don't think salary information should be secret at all. I think employers have created this culture where we don't talk about salaries because it suits them. People who don't know how much their colleagues earn, have a much more difficult time arguing for raises. Imagine if your company hires a guy with the same experience as you but pays him 20% more because he is a new hire. You aren't paid the same because you haven't complained.

Think about why salary information is treated as confidential - because people have been led to believe that your salary defines your worth as an individual. You are taught that a lesser paid individual is a lesser individual. Thus, you do not want people to know how much you earn, either because they will realize you are a loser because you earn to little, or they will judge you and say you are not worthy of your salary. That is what everyone fears.

First, I hope everyone can immediately see the fallacy in judging people by their financial status. Second, I don't know why financial information should be confidential at all. It is numbers, it is just accounting. So what?

Having salary information out in the open would ultimately lead to more people being paid a fair amount. Some would get less, some would get more. The distribution would be more even.

I totally agree. It is amazing to me how many employees have bought into the confidentially of salary information when it is against their interests.

^ this ^

 

[Hamster]

I don't think salary information should be secret at all. I think employers have created this culture where we don't talk about salaries because it suits them. People who don't know how much their colleagues earn, have a much more difficult time arguing for raises. Imagine if your company hires a guy with the same experience as you but pays him 20% more because he is a new hire. You aren't paid the same because you haven't complained.

Think about why salary information is treated as confidential - because people have been led to believe that your salary defines your worth as an individual. You are taught that a lesser paid individual is a lesser individual. Thus, you do not want people to know how much you earn, either because they will realize you are a loser because you earn to little, or they will judge you and say you are not worthy of your salary. That is what everyone fears.

First, I hope everyone can immediately see the fallacy in judging people by their financial status. Second, I don't know why financial information should be confidential at all. It is numbers, it is just accounting. So what?

Having salary information out in the open would ultimately lead to more people being paid a fair amount. Some would get less, some would get more. The distribution would be more even.

Screw that. Some people just don't handle other's success that well and if I get paid the same as a guy doing half arsed work the company can shove the job (I don't handle being treated the same as the masses that well)

 

[Deadmanza]

This would do more harm than anything else, the massive gaps between admin and IT staff salaries would cause endless issues.

 

[Messugga]

Screw that. Some people just don't handle other's success that well and if I get paid the same as a guy doing half arsed work the company can shove the job (I don't handle being treated the same as the masses that well)

Yep, I know myself well enough that I'd be fairly annoyed if someone reporting to me were to earn more than me. That's a stupid example but it's a real example as one of my software developer friends had to deal with that. The inexperienced (in the technology being used) new hire was earning what I'd call significantly more than himself, being the new hire's mentor. He handled it professionally but there was a lot of resentment and eventually the new hire couldn't cope and was given the boot. My friend left not too long after.

 

[cguy]

There is a link on this page about a company that implemented an open salary information and the benefits it gained them.

There are benefits, I'm not denying it - but in companies that have a wide spectrum of earners, it would be a complete disaster.

Besides, what is important is that there is a REASON why that individual is paid more. If there is a reason, then it can be explained. What causes more resentment is when people find out that someone is paid more than their colleagues feel they are worth, but because of the policy of don't ask don't tell, everyone shuts up and just complains behind the manager's back.

There is a reason, but what that reason is, is between the employer/management and the employee. Having to justify (and then argue about) every query for why I pay my staff what I pay them, would be inane, not to mention that the reasons are usually confidential.

I don't know where you work, but where I work, people don't complain behind their manager's back - if they think they're underpaid, they leave. If the management wants to retain them, they pay them enough so that they don't complain.

I think you are completely discounting the envy factor - it doesn't just vanish if/when reasons are provided.