What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Gravity Payments: $70k minimum wage (1 Viewer)

MaxThreshold said:
I'm all for it that's what he wants to do.
Click to expand...
Of course...he is entitled to do whatever he pleases, but ultimately, if he jeopardizes the financial well being of his company, the well intended $70k won't mean much when the employees are out of work. For him to sacrifice his own salary...fine. But to commit 75-80% of the projected company profits to the program seems rather risky to me.

 
Country Boys said:
MaxThreshold said:
I'm all for it that's what he wants to do.
Click to expand...
Of course...he is entitled to do whatever he pleases, but ultimately, if he jeopardizes the financial well being of his company, the well intended $70k won't mean much when the employees are out of work. For him to sacrifice his own salary...fine. But to commit 75-80% of the projected company profits to the program seems rather risky to me.
Click to expand...
That crossed my mind as well. But I would think he's probably thought it through and come up with a responsible plan. Hope it works.

 
I am going to guess the guy that started a multimillion dollar company when he was 19 may just have put some thought into it. And it is going to take 3 years to raise about 70 peoples pay.

 
NCCommish said:
I am going to guess the guy that started a multimillion dollar company when he was 19 may just have put some thought into it. And it is going to take 3 years to raise about 70 peoples pay.
Click to expand...
Getting real, the whole payment card industry is built on M&A. The odds he's even in charge in three years are pretty low.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is research that shows people are happier making a lesser amount as long as they are making more than the people they work with. This is in contrast to making more overall but lesser than their work peers. No clue what this is going to do for the mental state of his employees.

Also, curious if raises will ever occur again or if everyone is now locked in...

 
So what happens when these folks inevitably leave the company and venture back into the real world?

 
Ned said:
So what happens when these folks inevitably leave the company and venture back into the real world?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are getting at. What happens when anyone leaves a company? Your skill set is worth something and he just happens to compensate more than most other companies. If you want to leave, you are foolish to assume you'd be paid a similar salary elswhere.

 
Cjw_55106 said:
Ned said:
So what happens when these folks inevitably leave the company and venture back into the real world?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are getting at. What happens when anyone leaves a company? Your skill set is worth something and he just happens to compensate more than most other companies. If you want to leave, you are foolish to assume you'd be paid a similar salary elswhere.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's easy to say that from the outside looking in, but people are going to get used to the lifestyle that the $70k salary gives them. When they're really worth a $40k salary, they're going to have a big adjustment to make when they leave the company.

Its a cool idea on the surface, but I think it's dangerous too.

 
Ned said:
Cjw_55106 said:
Ned said:
So what happens when these folks inevitably leave the company and venture back into the real world?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are getting at. What happens when anyone leaves a company? Your skill set is worth something and he just happens to compensate more than most other companies. If you want to leave, you are foolish to assume you'd be paid a similar salary elswhere.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's easy to say that from the outside looking in, but people are going to get used to the lifestyle that the $70k salary gives them. When they're really worth a $40k salary, they're going to have a big adjustment to make when they leave the company.

Its a cool idea on the surface, but I think it's dangerous too.
Click to expand...
I guess if they are that concerned about it, they can donate 30K a year and not have to worry about it. :shrug:

 
Ned said:
Cjw_55106 said:
Ned said:
So what happens when these folks inevitably leave the company and venture back into the real world?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are getting at. What happens when anyone leaves a company? Your skill set is worth something and he just happens to compensate more than most other companies. If you want to leave, you are foolish to assume you'd be paid a similar salary elswhere.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's easy to say that from the outside looking in, but people are going to get used to the lifestyle that the $70k salary gives them. When they're really worth a $40k salary, they're going to have a big adjustment to make when they leave the company.

Its a cool idea on the surface, but I think it's dangerous too.
Click to expand...
why would they leave?

 
cstu said:
Gawain said:
The guy making 70K right now is polishing his resume.
Click to expand...
Because 'lesser' employees are making as much as him?

:bye: don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Click to expand...
I think someone would have a right to be upset if they took on massive student loan debt, started at a low paying entry level position, worked their way up to 70k because they were innovative and hard working, then suddenly were getting paid the same as the janitor. Especially if it impacts their ability to get a raise.

There is nothing wrong with being a janitor, and they might not be lesser people, but they definitely are lesser employees.

But hey, if everyone there is cool with it, what do I care?

 
I love the whole no one else will ever get a raise thing people seem to be stuck on. I must have missed that in the article.

 
NCCommish said:
I love the whole no one else will ever get a raise thing people seem to be stuck on. I must have missed that in the article.
Click to expand...
If the owner/CEO is bringing his salary down to 70k, I think it is safe to assume that there won't be many others making much more than that.

 
70k for an admin staff... That might ruffle the feathers of the guys paying off student loans.

 
Captain Quinoa said:
Ned said:
Cjw_55106 said:
Ned said:
So what happens when these folks inevitably leave the company and venture back into the real world?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are getting at. What happens when anyone leaves a company? Your skill set is worth something and he just happens to compensate more than most other companies. If you want to leave, you are foolish to assume you'd be paid a similar salary elswhere.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's easy to say that from the outside looking in, but people are going to get used to the lifestyle that the $70k salary gives them. When they're really worth a $40k salary, they're going to have a big adjustment to make when they leave the company.

Its a cool idea on the surface, but I think it's dangerous too.
Click to expand...
why would they leave?
Click to expand...
Of course this will probably lock a lot more folks in for the long haul, but there are plenty of reasons why someone would leave regardless of how much they're being paid.

This whole thing is interesting. Do you take a 100% pay bump today in exchange for a stagnant salary for say, the next 10 years?

 
Ned said:
Captain Quinoa said:
Ned said:
Cjw_55106 said:
Ned said:
So what happens when these folks inevitably leave the company and venture back into the real world?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are getting at. What happens when anyone leaves a company? Your skill set is worth something and he just happens to compensate more than most other companies. If you want to leave, you are foolish to assume you'd be paid a similar salary elswhere.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's easy to say that from the outside looking in, but people are going to get used to the lifestyle that the $70k salary gives them. When they're really worth a $40k salary, they're going to have a big adjustment to make when they leave the company.

Its a cool idea on the surface, but I think it's dangerous too.
Click to expand...
why would they leave?
Click to expand...
Of course this will probably lock a lot more folks in for the long haul, but there are plenty of reasons why someone would leave regardless of how much they're being paid.

This whole thing is interesting. Do you take a 100% pay bump today in exchange for a stagnant salary for say, the next 10 years?
Click to expand...
Somebody would have to make a very big leap in their career to double their salary over the course of ten years, so it seems it would be obvious to take that offer.

 
Ned said:
Captain Quinoa said:
Ned said:
Cjw_55106 said:
Ned said:
So what happens when these folks inevitably leave the company and venture back into the real world?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are getting at. What happens when anyone leaves a company? Your skill set is worth something and he just happens to compensate more than most other companies. If you want to leave, you are foolish to assume you'd be paid a similar salary elswhere.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's easy to say that from the outside looking in, but people are going to get used to the lifestyle that the $70k salary gives them. When they're really worth a $40k salary, they're going to have a big adjustment to make when they leave the company.

Its a cool idea on the surface, but I think it's dangerous too.
Click to expand...
why would they leave?
Click to expand...
Of course this will probably lock a lot more folks in for the long haul, but there are plenty of reasons why someone would leave regardless of how much they're being paid.

This whole thing is interesting. Do you take a 100% pay bump today in exchange for a stagnant salary for say, the next 10 years?
Click to expand...
Yes. If you can make more than market rate you take it and hang on. If/when the market catches up you move on to a better job. Seems pretty straightforward.

 
xulf said:
There is research that shows people are happier making a lesser amount as long as they are making more than the people they work with. This is in contrast to making more overall but lesser than their work peers.
Click to expand...
there is research that shows people are stupid. and how stupid is it to be happier just because you're making more than another employee, even if its less money than in the second scenario?

 
Kev4029 said:
Ned said:
Captain Quinoa said:
Ned said:
Cjw_55106 said:
Ned said:
So what happens when these folks inevitably leave the company and venture back into the real world?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you are getting at. What happens when anyone leaves a company? Your skill set is worth something and he just happens to compensate more than most other companies. If you want to leave, you are foolish to assume you'd be paid a similar salary elswhere.
Click to expand...
Sure, it's easy to say that from the outside looking in, but people are going to get used to the lifestyle that the $70k salary gives them. When they're really worth a $40k salary, they're going to have a big adjustment to make when they leave the company.

Its a cool idea on the surface, but I think it's dangerous too.
Click to expand...
why would they leave?
Click to expand...
Of course this will probably lock a lot more folks in for the long haul, but there are plenty of reasons why someone would leave regardless of how much they're being paid.

This whole thing is interesting. Do you take a 100% pay bump today in exchange for a stagnant salary for say, the next 10 years?
Click to expand...
Somebody would have to make a very big leap in their career to double their salary over the course of ten years, so it seems it would be obvious to take that offer.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's that straight forward. If you're at a $35k salary at a tech company, odds are you're at a lower level position. Doubling your salary in 10yrs should be very doable for anyone that's mildly motivated to climb the ladder.

 
You are making this complicated when it really isnt. You are somehow arguing that is better to climb the ladder to eventually get to the double salary vs getting double the salary immediately? I'll take the $400K over the next ten years and see where you're at with your ladder climb.

 
If he wants to do something like this, he should give everyone bonuses this year to get to the $70k and continue to try to do it that way. He should leave himself some discretion each year instead of cutting his salary and spending profits and potentially jeapordizing the business.

 
If he's the sole owner of the company, he can do whatever he wants.

That said, he's clearly an economic illiterate.

 
kutta said:
If he wants to do something like this, he should give everyone bonuses this year to get to the $70k and continue to try to do it that way. He should leave himself some discretion each year instead of cutting his salary and spending profits and potentially jeapordizing the business.
Click to expand...
The $70k number itself wasn't the actual goal. The goal was for the employees to feel an appropriate level of financial security. 70k is the target number, but the bonus plan you propose sounds like it is predicated on the assumption that, if problems arise, he could simply take the bonuses away. If the employees don't know whether they're going to make 48k or 70k next year, they do not have the desired level of financial security. Basically, he'd end up spending the correct amount of money while failing to achieve the goal.

As for whether or not it is wise, from a business perspective, to pay a large percentage of employees considerably more than market rate...it's his company. Freedom and something something.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
VandyMan said:
kutta said:
If he wants to do something like this, he should give everyone bonuses this year to get to the $70k and continue to try to do it that way. He should leave himself some discretion each year instead of cutting his salary and spending profits and potentially jeapordizing the business.
Click to expand...
The $70k number itself wasn't the actual goal. The goal was for the employees to feel an appropriate level of financial security. 70k is the target number, but the bonus plan you propose sounds like it is predicated on the assumption that, if problems arise, he could simply take the bonuses away. If the employees don't know whether they're going to make 48k or 70k next year, they do not have the desired level of financial security. Basically, he'd end up spending the correct amount of money while failing to achieve the goal.

As for whether or not it is wise, from a business perspective, to pay a large percentage of employees considerably more than market rate...it's his company. Freedom and something something.
Click to expand...
I don't care what the guy does. I just think he could accomplish the same thing with a bonus program. That gives him some leeway to remove it when he realizes this is not a good decision. I would think the employees would be pretty happy if he told them some of them were getting bonuses of $30k. That sure would help with giving employees financial security without jeapordizing the health of the company.
 
Quez said:
70k for an admin staff... That might ruffle the feathers of the guys paying off student loans.
Click to expand...
Not sure I understand this - You believe that none of the other people that were making the "average" pay had any schooling?

 
I think that it is probably legitimate to suggest that there could be better ways to implement this program, though the article is pretty light on details, so who knows what the specifics will be.

However, the underlying premise is not necessarily anti-financial health. The research cited has been around for a while, and many studies have shown that money is not the best motivator. The positive feelings generated by a raise last about 2 weeks, supposedly. Things like creativity and autonomy are said to be more important factors to people when it comes to their happiness with their job. And individual financial motivations can frequently be at odds with the company's goals, particularly from a long-term sustainability perspective. So depending on what the CEO's long-term goals are for the company's finances and the kind of culture that might be required to achieve that, it could be a very smart financial decision.

 
kutta said:
VandyMan said:
kutta said:
If he wants to do something like this, he should give everyone bonuses this year to get to the $70k and continue to try to do it that way. He should leave himself some discretion each year instead of cutting his salary and spending profits and potentially jeapordizing the business.
Click to expand...
The $70k number itself wasn't the actual goal. The goal was for the employees to feel an appropriate level of financial security. 70k is the target number, but the bonus plan you propose sounds like it is predicated on the assumption that, if problems arise, he could simply take the bonuses away. If the employees don't know whether they're going to make 48k or 70k next year, they do not have the desired level of financial security. Basically, he'd end up spending the correct amount of money while failing to achieve the goal.

As for whether or not it is wise, from a business perspective, to pay a large percentage of employees considerably more than market rate...it's his company. Freedom and something something.
Click to expand...
I don't care what the guy does. I just think he could accomplish the same thing with a bonus program. That gives him some leeway to remove it when he realizes this is not a good decision. I would think the employees would be pretty happy if he told them some of them were getting bonuses of $30k. That sure would help with giving employees financial security without jeapordizing the health of the company.
Click to expand...
Clark: I've gotten a Christmas bonus every year but this one. You don't want to give bonuses, fine. But when people count on them as their salary, well what you did just plain...

Rusty Griswold: Sucks.

Clark: Thank you, Russ. My cousin-in-law, whose heart is bigger than his brain...

Eddie: Appreciate that, Clark.

Clark: Is innocent. I'll be more than happy to take the rap on this, on behalf of myself and every other employee you rear-ended this Christmas.

 
I'm curious as to what the Exec team does.

If you're the CFO, do you take a hit for solidarity?

What about managers? Generally there is a compensation increase for moving to a managerial role.

If CSR rep made 35K and CSR manager made 50K, do they both make 70? Why would anyone want to be a manager and take on the added pressure without the compensation?

I'm curious to see the implementation.

 
Captain Quinoa said:
Jack White said:
Captain Quinoa said:
Jack White said:
If he's the sole owner of the company, he can do whatever he wants.

That said, he's clearly an economic illiterate.
Click to expand...
How much revenue did the company you own earn last year?
Click to expand...
Well, that was predictable.
Click to expand...
In fairness, your dumb comment was predictable too.
Click to expand...
What's dumb about it?

I said if he owns the company, he can do whatever he wants. That's a fact.

I also said he is an economic illiterate. If you disagree with that, it makes it debatable, not dumb.

 
Gawain said:
I'm curious as to what the Exec team does.

If you're the CFO, do you take a hit for solidarity?

What about managers? Generally there is a compensation increase for moving to a managerial role.

If CSR rep made 35K and CSR manager made 50K, do they both make 70? Why would anyone want to be a manager and take on the added pressure without the compensation?

I'm curious to see the implementation.
Click to expand...
As am I. Relative pay is a big deal in a typical office. Stress & responsibility typically increase as you move up the ladder. If there isn't much of an incentive to work harder, then the average person wont.

 
Itchy Amos said:
Gawain said:
I'm curious as to what the Exec team does.

If you're the CFO, do you take a hit for solidarity?

What about managers? Generally there is a compensation increase for moving to a managerial role.

If CSR rep made 35K and CSR manager made 50K, do they both make 70? Why would anyone want to be a manager and take on the added pressure without the compensation?

I'm curious to see the implementation.
Click to expand...
As am I. Relative pay is a big deal in a typical office. Stress & responsibility typically increase as you move up the ladder. If there isn't much of an incentive to work harder, then the average person wont.
Click to expand...
About 20 years ago, I faced this exact situation. I was in a management position overseeing 4-6 people.

One day, the owner announced that he was cutting my salary and raising the salaries of the 4-6 workers so that we would all make the same salary.

What do you think I did?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jack White said:
Itchy Amos said:
Gawain said:
I'm curious as to what the Exec team does.

If you're the CFO, do you take a hit for solidarity?

What about managers? Generally there is a compensation increase for moving to a managerial role.

If CSR rep made 35K and CSR manager made 50K, do they both make 70? Why would anyone want to be a manager and take on the added pressure without the compensation?

I'm curious to see the implementation.
Click to expand...
As am I. Relative pay is a big deal in a typical office. Stress & responsibility typically increase as you move up the ladder. If there isn't much of an incentive to work harder, then the average person wont.
Click to expand...
About 20 years ago, I faced this exact situation. I was in a management position overseeing 4-6 people.

One day, the owner announced that he was cutting my salary and raising the salaries of the 4-6 workers so that we would all make the same salary.

What do you think I did?
Click to expand...
Made up a story and posted it on the internet?

 
Jack White said:
Itchy Amos said:
Gawain said:
I'm curious as to what the Exec team does.

If you're the CFO, do you take a hit for solidarity?

What about managers? Generally there is a compensation increase for moving to a managerial role.

If CSR rep made 35K and CSR manager made 50K, do they both make 70? Why would anyone want to be a manager and take on the added pressure without the compensation?

I'm curious to see the implementation.
Click to expand...
As am I. Relative pay is a big deal in a typical office. Stress & responsibility typically increase as you move up the ladder. If there isn't much of an incentive to work harder, then the average person wont.
Click to expand...
About 20 years ago, I faced this exact situation. I was in a management position overseeing 4-6 people.

One day, the owner announced that he was cutting my salary and raising the salaries of the 4-6 workers so that we would all make the same salary.

What do you think I did?
Click to expand...
Now that guy was clearly an economic illiterate.

 
Jack White said:
Itchy Amos said:
Gawain said:
I'm curious as to what the Exec team does.

If you're the CFO, do you take a hit for solidarity?

What about managers? Generally there is a compensation increase for moving to a managerial role.

If CSR rep made 35K and CSR manager made 50K, do they both make 70? Why would anyone want to be a manager and take on the added pressure without the compensation?

I'm curious to see the implementation.
Click to expand...
As am I. Relative pay is a big deal in a typical office. Stress & responsibility typically increase as you move up the ladder. If there isn't much of an incentive to work harder, then the average person wont.
Click to expand...
About 20 years ago, I faced this exact situation. I was in a management position overseeing 4-6 people.

One day, the owner announced that he was cutting my salary and raising the salaries of the 4-6 workers so that we would all make the same salary.

What do you think I did?
Click to expand...
If you and 4-6 others were all making something close to double your market value, I hope you stayed at the job and rewarded him with outstanding job performance.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Do You Believe That The Modern "Tipping" Culture Has Gone Completely Out Of Control? (1/30)
6 7 8
Replies
358
Views
10K
eighsse2
eighsse2
[icon]
"Anatomy of the Deep State" - Unsettling look at American Poli
Replies
1
Views
791
Slapdash
S
bostonfred
Fair workweek laws
2
Replies
59
Views
1K
bostonfred
bostonfred

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top