[dan-0]

Sorry, I don't see a valid point in any of these salary arguments. In fact, they're down right insulting and ignorant.

I did strenuous manual labor for next to nothing once upon a time. After about 8 years of that, on top of regular 60 hour work weeks, I spent almost every waking moment of 4-5 years to learn and better myself with about every sacrifice you could imagine short of divorce. I'm now making significantly more and working much less with an extremely happy family.

I'm not some trust fund kid. I have a high school education. My father worked 3-5 jobs to provide for my family growing up. So if you haven't picked it up, I know what the other side looks like.

I work in tech now, I wouldn't even reply to a recruiter presenting a 190k job offer if it meant living in New York. I can get more working remote. It's not because I'm spoiled, it's not because I make bad financial decisions, it's because I know my value and won't compromise and I sure won't reduce my family's quality of life because some multi million dollar company wants to short change me.

I get paid fairly for my experience and what I bring to the table, I make sure of that. If my employer isn't matching what I know I can get on the market, I will first negotiate (which is right where the NYT Tech workers are at), then leave for greener pastures if that falls through. I can do that because I worked hard to bring more value to myself in an in demand field.

I'm sorry if you're making a lower salary, but that doesn't mean everyone should just take what they're given. That's how people are exploited.

These arguments aren't just wrong. They are backwards and self limiting.

[9x39]

There are many commenters that talk past each other given the emotionally charged topics of unions, pay, negotiations, etc. I think this is one of them.

What I read from parent is that lifestyle inflation must be high in some of these demographics when the rhetoric used is about survival, despite evidence of many more people 'surviving' on far less income.

What I read from you is that you fiercely maintain negotiating power because you can and feel it's only right given your high value. Why WOULD anyone leave money on the table, after all?

Both can be true.

[dan-0]

I called out my high value solely because I fall into the "privileged propagandist" rhetoric the comment I responded to and some other siblings are pushing.

Yes, the notion you need 300k to be comfortable anywhere is absurd, but just because someone makes more doesn't mean their desire to achieve a better quality of life is any less valid than anyone else. Do people with higher salaries need more? No. But why assume that just because an individual or group of people want a better quality of life they're "privileged?"

FTR, 100k as a average base salary is pretty low for tech in NYC. When the other 90k is bonus and RSUs that probably vest over 4 years, the stock has fluctuated 50%, and this being the journalism space, I wouldn't expect to see the full value. They have every right to try to negotiate better quality of life improvements out of NYT, especially for something as low impact on revenue as pet bereavement, as ridiculous as that is. I feel a lot of these comments don't understand tech compensation, where sometimes companies can't meet market value in cash so resort to all kinds of quirky benefits to attract/retain skilled workers. That is exactly where I see such a crazy request coming from when a company pushes back against giving more than a 2% annual raise.

[z3ncyberpunk]

You're "value" is entirely subjective and based on imaginary nonsense. Machine learning engineers making $500k are certainly not worth $500k just because its a hot trend right now. Gucci, Louis Vouton, etc, high fashion items are most certain not worth their price tags, much like diamonds. Eggs at Erawan aren't any different than likewise organic eggs elsewhere and are only $30 because someone decided they could rip off rich people and rich morons happily swallow it hook line and sinker. Value is entirely subjective and only quantifiable in the most abstract, opinionated manner and the richer people are the more often they are terrible at discerning any actual or reasonable value out of something.

If you think it's reasonable to pay exorbitant rent, food, gas, utilities, simply because you live in some concrete jungle then you are blind. It doesn't justify you actually deserving to make that much other than someone choosing to pay you that much.