Kind of an odd article, as sometimes there really are reasonable times for a “promotion” with little/no pay increase.
A lot of manual labor and trades positions require experienced people to be management, supervisors, etc. When you take a promotion in a field like this you might have “more responsibility” but the same pay, and that makes sense. Why? Well - because you’re not fucking breaking your back or manning a line all day. I think most people who have worked one of these jobs sees that as reasonable.
Unfortunately, most journalists and many people making online posts about the topic are people who have really only ever worked behind a computer, or ever worked in a big city - so these articles tend to focus on that kind of “technocrat” job sphere where everyone is just some variation of “computer manager person”
In many professional circles, especially blue collar unions or close knit groups - there is wide transparency and a mutual understanding regarding pay. No one wants to be the fucker making twice as much money than the guys they just worked with who are breaking their backs in the sun while you run excel spreadsheets. It’s simply a different type of job
I know it can be hard to understand if you’ve only worked “computer jobs”, but not everything is a hyper corporate job that takes place in a tower or whatever.
Instead of being indignant, you should ask about my experience. I’ve done blue collar work, and so has everyone I know. Not a single person would be willing to take a promotion if it didn’t also mean a raise.
Edit: Where I grew up, we called people who took promotions without wage adjustments “suckers”.
I’ve worked as a field hand on multiple farms, picked rock, pulled ragweed, moved grain bins, fixed tractors, etc. I grew up in a rural area. Everyone I know has done work similar to this.
And, let me get this straight, your whole big “workers rights” point here is that the guys ‘managing’ from inside the air conditioned building should make a lot more money than the laborers in the field.
And you’re still saddled with responsibility for the whole crew, the whole job and coming in on budget. Mental work saves the body but at mental expense. Maybe C-suite and board should take pay cuts so everyone gets decently paid for quality work with quality tools and quality materials.
Again, you’re assuming there is a “c-suite and board” to every job and there often isn’t. Many many many people work for their local sewer company or whatever that just has a single owner or maybe two co-owners in it.
Yes, obviously people at the “top of of the pack” often make too much moneys but I don’t think anyone who has actually done hard manual labor for 10-12 hour shifts is going to tell you it’s so much easier than the ‘responsibility of coming in on budget’. It’s simply not the same.
I’m not wasting time on someone intent on “winning” than on inner standing. Maybe you really don’t get it, somehow I doubt it. The bottom line is, if you can’t post everyone a living wage (more than scraping by), you can’t afford to be in business or you’re too greedy.
… yeah no shit man. Did you come here just to regurgitate vaguely progressive talking points or actually discuss anything that anyone is actually talking about.
I’m sure it makes you feel very good to just kind of say things that are obvious and completely ignore anything I actually say.
Why don’t you respond to my last comment? Laborers should typically make as much as middle management on computers, right?
Be careful! Don’t make up another conversation that no one said and respond to that instead!
What your spouting is corporate propaganda, designed to make you value your labor less. As is the “not making more than the others”-lie which oppressors have used to control their populations for ages.
But there are different perspectives to the situation, so for academical purposes, let’s explore a few:
Labour market model;
If you’re doing work that requires skills, knowledge and/or combinations thereof that are harder to acquire, your rarity and thus value increases - you should be paid more in cash and/or benefits.
This includes institutional knowledge, how things are done at the specific workplace, including who to talk with and how.
Economics/value capture;
If you’re doing work that brings the employer more profits, such as organising, costing, budgeting or taking over tasks to let the employer scale up - you should be paid a part of those increased profits.
The case for cooperatives; If you truly would be equal, and comfortable, in a workplace there’s much to be said that wage differences disturb that harmony, and you could see it as playing different parts in a commune.
This does however assume that you are all equally invested in the goal, it is profitable enough to compensate all of you fairly and equally, and enough that you are not wanting, or at least equally lacking. This is the case for situations like homesteads, communist society, and anarchist societies like Star Trek or The Culture.
Hmm…
From my perspective, the only reasonable way to get a promotion without increased pay is if you’re working less (which 4-day week studies show isn’t connected to weekly hours), and getting benefits to compensate.
I don’t think you actually understand union/communist philosophy if you think “rigid promotion structure where the managerial class always has more money and power than the laborer is super worker friendly
That… is not at all what I’m saying, nor implying.
I’m actually agreeing with you that the managerial system should not have more power and/or money, but if that class wants more labor from you it is only fair they cede some power and money.
I’m saying that not compensating someone for more complex labor, to benefit an owner, is never worker friendly.
You can compensate in other ways than money and benefits, and you can remove the exploitative/segregating systems by paying everyone enough and not extracting value (as owner profits do), but both require collective action.
And other things as well, like vision, plan and funding. But without collective action, the only incentive is for the owning class to squeeze you tighter and manipulate you to blame the worker class.
Thats… fine, and I agree, it’s just so odd that so many people read my comment where I said “well, in some circumstances it makes sense that a promotion wouldn’t automatically confer more money” and so many people just instantly made up arguments wherein they’re making me out to say that “you should do more work for the same pay!”.
It’s just bizarre, it’s frustrating a bit. Because a lot of these people view themselves as progressive leftists as I do - but they’re utterly incapable of visualizing any job structure other than their own, and they end up advocating for what is essentially a “money funnels up” system by making this implicit assumption everyone at the bottom of the totem is doing ‘less work’ than the people in the middle or the top.
So we’ve agreed this whole time, but I feel like in haste to ‘make a point’ there’s been some hostility
I apologise if there’s been perceived hostility towards you. I aimed for being hostile of the rhetoric and framework of what has been active manipulation and corporate propaganda for almost a century, and probably longer in non-corporations.
The medium doesn’t lend itself well to nuances, but I did not intend to aim any hostility to you as a person, only the rhetoric, and I’m very sorry if the delineation wasn’t sufficiently communicated.
Hatred of intellectual elites is one of the signs of fascism, BTW.
Anyway, you are not paid for breaking your back, you’re paid for having a valuable skill. If that skill is just being a grunt, everyone can do it, you are replaceable. If that skill is managing grunts, only few can do it, you are less replaceable, thus can get a higher pay.
If you really think, moving into a superior role doesn’t deserve more pay, you are being fucked by your employer. You don’t understand the system you’re working in and you’re lashing out against those stoopid office workers because you don’t understand that they are not responsible for your misery, your boss is.
No one is hating intellectual elites here. You are not an intellectual elite by virtue of being a computer programmer.
There’s a sharp divide between “computer socialists” and “blue collar socialists” in my opinion. You are the former, I am the latter. I understand that the person managing the laborers and the laborers themselves are probably entitled to roughly the same pay - as laboring fucking blows. You believe that the “managerial” class should always make more and more money.
Compared to a factory worker, of course a well paid developer is an elite.
The divide you’re trying to create here is bullshit. Mostly because we’re not talking about any form of socialism, but about the real world of capitalism we’re both living in.
And a foreman is no “managerial” class. Just a better qualified worker. Nothing more.
Intellectual does not mean “having a PhD in sociology and literature”, it means “working with your mind”. That’s why there’s a suspiciously close relation with the word “intelligence”.
In my current role taking a management position would not result in a pay increase becuase I already wear a few hats that give me slight bumps in rate and allowances so I’m effectively paid the same take home.
What it would mean is that I no longer have to go outside in sweltering heat, freezing cold or pissing down rain for 4 to 6 hours a day. Would I take a promotion with no pay bump? In a fucking heartbeat.
Nah, that’s the wrong attitude. If they’re giving you more responsibility, regardless of the quality of work overall, you should get paid commensurately, whether or not you’re effectively taking home the same pay due to multiple hats.
Yes, I like Lemmy - but it’s almost bizarre how much of a monolith the user base seems to be. I’d think that every single person here was a desk jockey of some sort who has never worked a blue collar job in their life. And that really does warp mindsets regarding what the “average” work experience is like (again, similar to how many journalistic outlets seem to assume that the ‘average American’ works in a major metro city in a white collar office job)
Naw dude, you legit just onboarded every bit trash that’s been fed to you. You are getting suckered into taking less pay for more work. It doesn’t matter if the work changes, the venn diagram of your responsibility increases.
I would never and have never offered or have taken a promotion without an increase in pay. I have had responsibilities added to my position without an increase, but when I figure that out, I ask to be paid what I’m fucking owed.
Someone owes you, and has been taking from you, you have lost time not being paid for the work you’re doing by accepting experience in lieu of compensation. Or maybe you are the boss taking from someone else because that’s what someone did to you. That’s a fucking cycle of abuse imo.
I think you just don’t actually understand workers working together. The managerial class shouldn’t always have more power and money than the laborers, despite the techno-managerial class co-opting vaguely socialist/union rhetoric to make their high wages for less intensive work sound vaguely leftist.
Workers working together would demand fair pay for work, like the UAW.
By not demanding that, you are licking a boot, you are being exploited.
If you are on a group of people also getting exploited, and not demanding fair pay, that’s a gaggle of suckers! Just cause you’re the lead goose in that gaggle, still makes you a fucking sucker.
??? Are you just making up people to get mad at now? Did you read a comment saying I’m against unions or fair pay in your dreams? Or saying I love being exploited?
It kind of shows how out of touch you are with actual workers when you read me saying “I think laborers and the managerial class should be paid roughly the same, with laborers even making more than managers in some cases” and you manage to get so mad about it. You’re lost in the sauce of online discourse
No, I’ve read most of your replies, I’m starting to think you don’t even believe your own rhetoric, you sound ridiculous. You’re even purity testing people who’ve obviously had similar experiences.
Yeah man, “laborers should make the same as managers” is a really terrible arguement for you im sure. As long as you get to call someone a fascist, who cares about actually advocating for workers rights, yeah?
Yeah I could see that. I think I view it more as the working class, which now includes a lot of gig work - which doesn’t have the same “family” feel as a lot of blue collar jobs have
I agree wholeheartedly, Lemmys userbase seems to be heavily weighted to certain demographics and especially on certain topics to the point where sometimes Id like to join in on the discussion but I take a moment and think “Do I want to argue with communists today?”
Yeah, it’s a really ugly side of the website imo. Like, I’m sympathetic to a lot of communist ideals! But the “communism” people preach here is often variations of people looking for every opportunity to call you a fascist because you said maybe computer programmers aren’t the most oppressed demographic in the world.
It’s kind of a shame, because these same people will turn around and say “why can’t socialism get off the ground?” And it’s basically entirely their fault
Kind of an odd article, as sometimes there really are reasonable times for a “promotion” with little/no pay increase.
A lot of manual labor and trades positions require experienced people to be management, supervisors, etc. When you take a promotion in a field like this you might have “more responsibility” but the same pay, and that makes sense. Why? Well - because you’re not fucking breaking your back or manning a line all day. I think most people who have worked one of these jobs sees that as reasonable.
Unfortunately, most journalists and many people making online posts about the topic are people who have really only ever worked behind a computer, or ever worked in a big city - so these articles tend to focus on that kind of “technocrat” job sphere where everyone is just some variation of “computer manager person”
Nah, fuck that. Promotions should be coming with a reasonable wage increase in every job.
Did you not actually read anything I wrote.
In many professional circles, especially blue collar unions or close knit groups - there is wide transparency and a mutual understanding regarding pay. No one wants to be the fucker making twice as much money than the guys they just worked with who are breaking their backs in the sun while you run excel spreadsheets. It’s simply a different type of job
I know it can be hard to understand if you’ve only worked “computer jobs”, but not everything is a hyper corporate job that takes place in a tower or whatever.
Instead of being indignant, you should ask about my experience. I’ve done blue collar work, and so has everyone I know. Not a single person would be willing to take a promotion if it didn’t also mean a raise.
Edit: Where I grew up, we called people who took promotions without wage adjustments “suckers”.
I don’t think you have
That fine if you don’t believe me, but I know my lived experience.
What are your blue collar jobs my man. Don’t be shy
I’ve worked as a field hand on multiple farms, picked rock, pulled ragweed, moved grain bins, fixed tractors, etc. I grew up in a rural area. Everyone I know has done work similar to this.
And, let me get this straight, your whole big “workers rights” point here is that the guys ‘managing’ from inside the air conditioned building should make a lot more money than the laborers in the field.
Yeah… that’s real… progressive of you man…
And you’re still saddled with responsibility for the whole crew, the whole job and coming in on budget. Mental work saves the body but at mental expense. Maybe C-suite and board should take pay cuts so everyone gets decently paid for quality work with quality tools and quality materials.
Again, you’re assuming there is a “c-suite and board” to every job and there often isn’t. Many many many people work for their local sewer company or whatever that just has a single owner or maybe two co-owners in it.
Yes, obviously people at the “top of of the pack” often make too much moneys but I don’t think anyone who has actually done hard manual labor for 10-12 hour shifts is going to tell you it’s so much easier than the ‘responsibility of coming in on budget’. It’s simply not the same.
Of course not. I never said otherwise, and said everyone should be decently paid.
Ok, awesome, so the laborers busting their balls every day should make the same money as the middle managers on the computers
I’m not wasting time on someone intent on “winning” than on inner standing. Maybe you really don’t get it, somehow I doubt it. The bottom line is, if you can’t post everyone a living wage (more than scraping by), you can’t afford to be in business or you’re too greedy.
… yeah no shit man. Did you come here just to regurgitate vaguely progressive talking points or actually discuss anything that anyone is actually talking about.
I’m sure it makes you feel very good to just kind of say things that are obvious and completely ignore anything I actually say.
Why don’t you respond to my last comment? Laborers should typically make as much as middle management on computers, right?
Be careful! Don’t make up another conversation that no one said and respond to that instead!
You need to join a union.
What your spouting is corporate propaganda, designed to make you value your labor less. As is the “not making more than the others”-lie which oppressors have used to control their populations for ages.
But there are different perspectives to the situation, so for academical purposes, let’s explore a few:
Labour market model; If you’re doing work that requires skills, knowledge and/or combinations thereof that are harder to acquire, your rarity and thus value increases - you should be paid more in cash and/or benefits.
This includes institutional knowledge, how things are done at the specific workplace, including who to talk with and how.
Economics/value capture; If you’re doing work that brings the employer more profits, such as organising, costing, budgeting or taking over tasks to let the employer scale up - you should be paid a part of those increased profits.
The case for cooperatives; If you truly would be equal, and comfortable, in a workplace there’s much to be said that wage differences disturb that harmony, and you could see it as playing different parts in a commune.
This does however assume that you are all equally invested in the goal, it is profitable enough to compensate all of you fairly and equally, and enough that you are not wanting, or at least equally lacking. This is the case for situations like homesteads, communist society, and anarchist societies like Star Trek or The Culture.
Hmm…
From my perspective, the only reasonable way to get a promotion without increased pay is if you’re working less (which 4-day week studies show isn’t connected to weekly hours), and getting benefits to compensate.
I don’t think you actually understand union/communist philosophy if you think “rigid promotion structure where the managerial class always has more money and power than the laborer is super worker friendly
That… is not at all what I’m saying, nor implying.
I’m actually agreeing with you that the managerial system should not have more power and/or money, but if that class wants more labor from you it is only fair they cede some power and money.
I’m saying that not compensating someone for more complex labor, to benefit an owner, is never worker friendly.
You can compensate in other ways than money and benefits, and you can remove the exploitative/segregating systems by paying everyone enough and not extracting value (as owner profits do), but both require collective action.
And other things as well, like vision, plan and funding. But without collective action, the only incentive is for the owning class to squeeze you tighter and manipulate you to blame the worker class.
Thats… fine, and I agree, it’s just so odd that so many people read my comment where I said “well, in some circumstances it makes sense that a promotion wouldn’t automatically confer more money” and so many people just instantly made up arguments wherein they’re making me out to say that “you should do more work for the same pay!”.
It’s just bizarre, it’s frustrating a bit. Because a lot of these people view themselves as progressive leftists as I do - but they’re utterly incapable of visualizing any job structure other than their own, and they end up advocating for what is essentially a “money funnels up” system by making this implicit assumption everyone at the bottom of the totem is doing ‘less work’ than the people in the middle or the top.
So we’ve agreed this whole time, but I feel like in haste to ‘make a point’ there’s been some hostility
I apologise if there’s been perceived hostility towards you. I aimed for being hostile of the rhetoric and framework of what has been active manipulation and corporate propaganda for almost a century, and probably longer in non-corporations.
The medium doesn’t lend itself well to nuances, but I did not intend to aim any hostility to you as a person, only the rhetoric, and I’m very sorry if the delineation wasn’t sufficiently communicated.
Hatred of intellectual elites is one of the signs of fascism, BTW.
Anyway, you are not paid for breaking your back, you’re paid for having a valuable skill. If that skill is just being a grunt, everyone can do it, you are replaceable. If that skill is managing grunts, only few can do it, you are less replaceable, thus can get a higher pay.
If you really think, moving into a superior role doesn’t deserve more pay, you are being fucked by your employer. You don’t understand the system you’re working in and you’re lashing out against those stoopid office workers because you don’t understand that they are not responsible for your misery, your boss is.
No one is hating intellectual elites here. You are not an intellectual elite by virtue of being a computer programmer.
There’s a sharp divide between “computer socialists” and “blue collar socialists” in my opinion. You are the former, I am the latter. I understand that the person managing the laborers and the laborers themselves are probably entitled to roughly the same pay - as laboring fucking blows. You believe that the “managerial” class should always make more and more money.
Compared to a factory worker, of course a well paid developer is an elite.
The divide you’re trying to create here is bullshit. Mostly because we’re not talking about any form of socialism, but about the real world of capitalism we’re both living in.
And a foreman is no “managerial” class. Just a better qualified worker. Nothing more.
You glorify physical labor for no reason.
No one but you considers developers “elites” lmfao. Most laughable programmer
That’s why there’s a qualifying context in my statement.
But apparently, context isn’t your strong suit.
I don’t think anyone in the world would consider you an intellectual
I don’t think that’s on you to decide.
Intellectual does not mean “having a PhD in sociology and literature”, it means “working with your mind”. That’s why there’s a suspiciously close relation with the word “intelligence”.
Yes, you are not an intellectual or intelligent.
In my current role taking a management position would not result in a pay increase becuase I already wear a few hats that give me slight bumps in rate and allowances so I’m effectively paid the same take home.
What it would mean is that I no longer have to go outside in sweltering heat, freezing cold or pissing down rain for 4 to 6 hours a day. Would I take a promotion with no pay bump? In a fucking heartbeat.
Nah, that’s the wrong attitude. If they’re giving you more responsibility, regardless of the quality of work overall, you should get paid commensurately, whether or not you’re effectively taking home the same pay due to multiple hats.
This is a very interesting take and observation, thank you for sharing
Yes, I like Lemmy - but it’s almost bizarre how much of a monolith the user base seems to be. I’d think that every single person here was a desk jockey of some sort who has never worked a blue collar job in their life. And that really does warp mindsets regarding what the “average” work experience is like (again, similar to how many journalistic outlets seem to assume that the ‘average American’ works in a major metro city in a white collar office job)
To be fair, the typical American does work in a major city in an office job, as that’s where the jobs are.
By some estimates there’s only about 20 million US blue collar jobs in total.
Naw dude, you legit just onboarded every bit trash that’s been fed to you. You are getting suckered into taking less pay for more work. It doesn’t matter if the work changes, the venn diagram of your responsibility increases.
I would never and have never offered or have taken a promotion without an increase in pay. I have had responsibilities added to my position without an increase, but when I figure that out, I ask to be paid what I’m fucking owed.
Someone owes you, and has been taking from you, you have lost time not being paid for the work you’re doing by accepting experience in lieu of compensation. Or maybe you are the boss taking from someone else because that’s what someone did to you. That’s a fucking cycle of abuse imo.
As another user noted, you are kind of a sucker.
I think you just don’t actually understand workers working together. The managerial class shouldn’t always have more power and money than the laborers, despite the techno-managerial class co-opting vaguely socialist/union rhetoric to make their high wages for less intensive work sound vaguely leftist.
Workers working together would demand fair pay for work, like the UAW.
By not demanding that, you are licking a boot, you are being exploited.
If you are on a group of people also getting exploited, and not demanding fair pay, that’s a gaggle of suckers! Just cause you’re the lead goose in that gaggle, still makes you a fucking sucker.
??? Are you just making up people to get mad at now? Did you read a comment saying I’m against unions or fair pay in your dreams? Or saying I love being exploited?
It kind of shows how out of touch you are with actual workers when you read me saying “I think laborers and the managerial class should be paid roughly the same, with laborers even making more than managers in some cases” and you manage to get so mad about it. You’re lost in the sauce of online discourse
No, I’ve read most of your replies, I’m starting to think you don’t even believe your own rhetoric, you sound ridiculous. You’re even purity testing people who’ve obviously had similar experiences.
You are making terrible arguments en masse.
Yeah man, “laborers should make the same as managers” is a really terrible arguement for you im sure. As long as you get to call someone a fascist, who cares about actually advocating for workers rights, yeah?
Yeah I could see that. I think I view it more as the working class, which now includes a lot of gig work - which doesn’t have the same “family” feel as a lot of blue collar jobs have
Lemmy is full of nerds that tend to use computers in their jobs, go figure
I agree wholeheartedly, Lemmys userbase seems to be heavily weighted to certain demographics and especially on certain topics to the point where sometimes Id like to join in on the discussion but I take a moment and think “Do I want to argue with communists today?”
Yeah, it’s a really ugly side of the website imo. Like, I’m sympathetic to a lot of communist ideals! But the “communism” people preach here is often variations of people looking for every opportunity to call you a fascist because you said maybe computer programmers aren’t the most oppressed demographic in the world.
It’s kind of a shame, because these same people will turn around and say “why can’t socialism get off the ground?” And it’s basically entirely their fault