[hgq]

>Paying employees more is supposed to work because it results in employees who do their job better.

I'm sure above certain threshold, which is probably low, raising wages doesn't make employees do their job any better.

In other words, unless you pay your workers literally peanuts, they will do the same job more or less.

[XMPPwocky]

So all executive salaries should be capped at, say, a low six-figure amount, and bonuses should be eliminated? Interesting proposal.

[kortilla]

You have to pay the market rate for the people you want. The point is that going above that rate probably won’t get anything more out of them other than maybe retention.

[XMPPwocky]

So, more productive / friendly workers don't command a higher wage?

[monetus]

You meant figurative peanuts right? That is what a lot of people get paid in retail.

[smileysteve]

> I'm sure above certain threshold, which is probably low, raising wages doesn't make employees do their job any better.

This is a known study

> In other words, unless you pay your workers literally peanuts, they will do the same job more or less.

Welp, nope, this deviates from the study; The "drive" study suggests that wages need to satisfy their needs, give them cushion, be at or above their peers.

For the most part, "happiness" in the U.S.A. starts at 50% more than the average salary ($50k).

[baddox]

I think part of the point is that you pay more money to attract different people who will perform better, or to encourage people to stay at the job longer (and thus get better at it).