Regulating Pay


#1

Should the government be involved in the decision of pay packs of private employees?

This is not necessarily setting a flat pay level, but rather setting a maximum wage, or a ratio level meaning the highest paid employee can only be paid 20x the lowest paid. Or any other example.

In a way the government is already involved by using the tax system.

Proponents claim that this will lead to greater levels of equality.


#2

Ah yes the maximum pay, im less “for equality” for the sake of equality and more the workers underneath these men get the pay and conditions they deserve, discussing the increase of equality is nothing more then a token measure until you actually go to the very root as to why inequality especially such extreme amounts of it appear constantly.


#3

can’t see how it can be done, like what happens to all the money if someone is capped at 20X?


#4

You simply cannot be paid more than 20x the lowest paid employee. The money would likely remain in the business and be invested, proponents would say, but it would be more likely to go to investors.


#5

reinvested in what? what if the company does not need it, will it just sit in a bank - and the investors, don’t they get capped too?


#6

You could probably cap investors dividends.

Well it can be reinvested to grow the business, it could be paid to employees who are receiving the least which would in turn mean that the higher paid people can be paid more etc. etc.

Even when sitting in a bank money simply doesn’t “sit in a bank”. The bank invests that money in mortgages or other businesses, and the company would earn a interest rate.


#7

sounds ok ish, but you could end up in a situation at a big company where the cleaner starts earing 100bucks an hr, might not work out so well in the bigger picture


#8

There could be any argument to be had that this may harm workers rights, as companies may begin to hire cleaners in the same way Uber hire employees - employees being independent contractors.


#9

that would have to be banned, ie. get rid of contractors, agency workers etc…


#10

Really? So a builder would have to be hired and paid an hourly flat wage by a family, rather than paid a flat sum to build a house?


#11

the builiding company would pay the wage, as they would have to do for the cleaners


#12

But a builder is a contractor. They may work for a building company, but they ultimately have contracts with companies. Ergo, the cleaners could be paid by a separate entity, but on a contract to the business. A company may also rent an office, and the cleaners are paid by the owner of the building - they are not counted as workers in the business who are renting the office.


#13

under the 20X system then that would have to stop , ie. companies would not be able to contract out in this way


#14

That would be impossible.


#15

not really, why so?


#16

How do you think houses are built already? Lmao you don’t get a flat sum to build a house you get an estimate and you don’t get the final bill until it’s finished and hours are accounted for.

I’d say a majority of houses are built this way unless they’re cheap rowhomes, but even then hours are counted in building contracts almost always.


#17

I’ve just explained: Builders are contracted by families wanting to extend their house, not by families setting up a business to then hire a builder like an employee. Cleaners are paid by the building owner, not the firm or family renting the space.


#18

[quote=“lake, post:16, topic:112499”]
How do you think houses are built already? Lmao you don’t get a flat sum to build a house you get an estimate and you don’t get the final bill until it’s finished and hours are accounted for.

I’d say a majority of houses are built this way unless they’re cheap rowhomes, but even then hours are counted in building contracts almost always.[/quote]

The flat sum wasn’t meant in that context. It was meant in the context that they don’t get paid a weekly wage, or whatever. They get paid for finishing a job on time, etc. A family wouldn’t hire a builder like an employee - it’s completely different.

A firm doesn’t hire a builder, they pay a building company to get a job done. It would be silly for the vast majority of business’ (non-building companies), I’m not willing to say all, to have dedicated builders on hand.


#19

if it’s ony a couple of builders then it’s a non issue - they’d likely be on similar pay anyhow

as for cleaners, the company they clean for must provide them with pay within the band , ie. no less than 20 times the CEO


#20

So you’re expecting a family to set up a business to add an extension onto their house?

But cleaners are more than likely going to be servicing more than one firm. Essentially the building manager of a random office, an unrelated entity to the company, can decide how much the top CEO can be paid.