[thomasgerbe]

I wonder what life would be like if salaries were publicized in the same way as professional athletes.

I've had situations where extremely intelligent and productive fellow employees left the company because they found out someone else of the same level was making a lot more than they were. And by the time they offer a raise, the employee has already emotionally moved onto other pastures.

I'll admit that when I found out someone else was making a lot more despite putting in less hours, my motivation within the company dropped dramatically and I put in my notice a few days later. It's not that my only motivation was money but I lost a lot of respect for mgmt.

I do think the argument is funny sometimes. I'm not saying that the author believes this, but I've seen other owners come across like, "we're not trying to be greedy... we really don't have much money." Okay, so then why not tell me what everyone is earning and owns so that I know where I fit in? Oh right... you want to get away with the minimal amount you can get paying me.

[BerislavLopac]

A good approach is to have a well-determined, public salary policy, as described by Joel Spolsky in http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000038.html

[trafficlight]

This is good stuff. As the article was written in 2000, does anyone know how these things panned out? Is Fogcreek still using this plan?

[libria]

Yeah, http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/how-much-should-you-pa...

[gte910h]

That just seems incompatible with the necessities of hiring many particular, high value people. This is at least if it's total compensation, not just a nod to actual cash salary.

Looking at Spolsky's other posts on stock options, it isn't a complete picture I think.

(Spolsky's particular federal-type pay scale. Not public salaries at all).

[uniquejosh]

thanks, good information!!