Skip to main content

Firms should make more information about salaries public



SWEDES discuss their incomes with a frankness that would horrify Britons or Americans. They have little reason to be coy; in Sweden you can learn a stranger’s salary simply by ringing the tax authorities and asking. Pay transparency can be a potent weapon against persistent inequities. When hackers published e-mails from executives at Sony Pictures, a film studio, the world learned that some of Hollywood’s most bankable female stars earned less than their male co-stars. The revelation has since helped women in the industry drive harder bargains. Yet outside Nordic countries transparency faces fierce resistance. Donald Trump recently cancelled a rule set by Barack Obama requiring large firms to provide more pay data to anti-discrimination regulators. Even those less temperamentally averse to sunlight than Mr Trump balk at what can seem an intrusion into a private matter. That is a shame. Despite the discomfort that transparency can cause, it would be better to publish more information.

There is a straightforward economic argument for making pay public. A salary is a price—that of an individual worker’s labour—and markets work best when prices are known. Public pay data should help people make better decisions about which skills to acquire and where to work. Yet experiments with transparency are motivated only rarely by a love of market efficiency, and more often by worry about inequality. In the early 1990s, it was outrage at soaring executive salaries which led American regulators to demand more disclosure of CEOs’ pay. Such transparency does not always work as intended. Compensation exploded in the 1990s, as firms worried that markets would interpret skimpy pay-packets as an indicator of the quality of executive hires.
Despite this, bosses tend to oppose transparency, for understandable reasons. Firms have an easier time in pay negotiations when they know more about salaries than workers do. What is more, shining a light on pay gaps can poison morale, as some workers learn that they earn substantially less than their peers. A study of employees at the University of California, for instance, found that when workers were given access to a database listing the salary of every public employee, job satisfaction among those on relatively low wages fell. In industries in which competition for talented workers is intense, the pernicious effects on morale of unequal pay create an incentive to split the high-wage parts of the business from the rest. Research published in 2016 concluded that diverging pay between firms (as opposed to within them) could account for most of the increase in American inequality in recent decades. That divergence in turn resulted from increased segregation of workers into high- and low-wage firms.

Yet transparency increases dissatisfaction not because it introduces information where there was none before, but because it corrects misperceptions. Surveys routinely find that workers overestimate their performance and pay relative to their peers’. This is true across economies as well as within firms. In 2001, tax records in Norway were put online, allowing anyone to see easily what other Norwegians had earned and paid in tax. Reported happiness among the rich rose significantly, while the well-being of poorer people fell as they learned their true position on the economic ladder. Better information changes behaviour. Low-paid workers at the University of California became more likely to seek new jobs after salary data became public. In Norway the poor became more likely to support redistribution.
Continue Reading: Firms should make more information about salaries public

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sex robot SHOCK: Increasing sophistication of AI will cause massive issues, experts warn

The growing sophistication of creepily real sex robots is leading to moral and legal dilemmas, a leading academic has warned. As technology has expanded sex robots have become increasingly lifelike, bringing about a the need for a revolution in how we think about sex, morals and the legal status of these sex robots, according to Kent Law School Professor Robin Mackenzie. Prof Mackenzie specialises in areas such as robotics and the ethical and legal relations between humans and robots. She said: "Sex, law and ethics will never be the same. Sooner than we think, technologists will create sentient, self-aware sex robots, capable of emotional/sexual intimacy.” Prof Mackenzie added: "Humans having sex with other humans who are unable to consent to sex, like children and adults lacking decision-making capacity, is seen as unlawful and unethical. So is human/animal sex. Such groups are recognised as sentient beings who cannot consent to sex with interests in ne

Why are more women than men illiterate?

Two-thirds of the world’s illiterate adults are women. So what is preventing girls and women from learning to read and write? As part of this year's 100 Women, a team in India's capital Delhi will be looking at ways to tackle this problem.  Why are more women than men illiterate?

Kremlin: Putin and Trump agreed to exchange information on North Korea

The Kremlin said on Friday that President Vladimir Putin and his U.S. counterpart Donald Trump had agreed in a phone call to exchange information about North Korea and cooperate on possible initiatives to resolve a crisis around the Asian nation. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call that Putin and Trump had also spoken about establishing contacts with North Korea. The two men had also talked about improving dialogue between Russia and the United States, Peskov said. The Kremlin earlier on Friday released a statement about the phone call between the two leaders. Continue Reading: Kremlin: Putin and Trump agreed to exchange information on North Korea