« Flexibility: Your Salary Program's Strength... or its Achilles' Heel? | Main | March Madness Comes to the Carnival of HR! »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Short answer = "resolution" (or "spine").

Exposure can just make pay more contentious, unless you have a really good storyboard ready.

Skill (KSAs), effort, responsibility, working conditions and such are all justifiers, but you would be well advised to keep your answers general. To carefully avoid all ad-hominem counterattacks and challenges to proper exercise of managerial discretion, I'd clearly by state just that. It is the role of management to make the tough calls and they are accountable to the owners rather than to the employees. What makes YOU worth YOUR pay is none of your co-worker's business, nor is theirs yours.

"Fair" is not a compensation term; it is NOT a synonym for "more," either: but it is typically in the eye of the beholder. Companies should be more focused on what is necessary and proper, and not what the troops would like.

Um....wow...that is really the slippery slope. What a fabulous logic process on this. Pretty soon we'll just turn over our full identities to our coworkers and let them come up with the "Worth Algorithm."

How much did you get paid to write this post? I demand to know, and I want someone to pay me more. :)

Wow! This is incredible and a very dangerous idea. Just as an example of how this might work - my son and son-in-law both worked for the same person for over a year. My son earned more simply because his work was worth more to his boss. But in my son-in-law's mind, he should have earned more or at least the same as my son because he had a wife and child to support and my son didn't. So every time they got paid my son-in-law felt like he had been treated unfairly. It created a spirit of jealousy and strife. Not a good idea.


Sounds like you and I sit firmly on the "its none of your business and management has the right to make tough pay calls" side of the argument.


If that happens, I predict that debating and challenging the "worth algorithm" could become a nearly full-time occupation for some workers.


Well, let's say you deserve the punk rock premium, which is 50% more than the geek rate I get, so your pay should be 150% of mine, which is 1.5 times zero, which is ... zero...

Man, we are both underpaid ...


Great story and illustration of yet another very slippery slope - basing pay on "cost of living" rather than "cost of labor" (or what their skills and their job are worth).

Thanks - all - for the great comments and discussion!

Ann, that "worth algorithm" could be a huge one. Imagine what could happen. Consulting heyday!


I see your point. Time to roll out that iFractal/Altura collaborative venture known as "Work Algorithms R Us"!


I admire your way of synthesizing an issue down to its bare essentials! That's why when the Paycheck Fairness Act gets an open hearing (remember the promise for more transparency in government), we're going to have you come to Washington, DC to testify!

Thanks for the insightful observation!



Let's hope the PFA does get the benefit of an open hearing (I do remember that promise...). From Cara Welch's latest post, sounds like we shouldn't expect that bill to surface again until August. Thanks for the comment - and for your patience with the commenting mechanism today!

The comments to this entry are closed.

About The Author

  • More Info Here
    Compensation consultant Ann Bares is the Managing Partner of Altura Consulting Group. Ann has more than 20 years of experience consulting with organizations in the areas of compensation and performance management.

Compensation Force Spot Survey

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Search This Site


  • Get this widget from Widgetbox