[DarkTree]

No, not at all. I think it would have made more sense to give each employee a raise based on a percentage of their income. That way, everyone gets a pay raise, and you can give more money to the lower earners without offending employees because it is an equal percentage increase.

[jkestner]

Well, the company does have a finite amount of money, and he wanted to get the minimum pay to the $70K that studies say make the most difference.

I hope CEOs don't use the same thought process to keep their pay at 300x their minimum wage workers when the minimum wage is raised to $15.

[jsprogrammer]

The "higher earners" would receive an even larger increase in that case.

[hueving]

They would need a slightly larger raise to offset taxes, but you're a percentage match is probably too much.

[DarkTree]

Not if you take into account taxes.

[jsprogrammer]

Taxes won't matter.

The higher earners receive a larger increase than they would have under a different regime (where everyone receives a constant $ increase [normalized for the "lowest earner"]).