Stallion Spotlight

Zucchero Gold - Wandres, Frederic - 838-BC18_REU2723-foto_reumann

Real Estate Spotlight

IMG_3487
  • Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

discussion of pay forbidden

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    This "What did you make before hand?"
    is to be countered with What are you offering?... then the silence begins

    Comment


    • #42
      I'd guess they've lost an employee after a couple of employees were comparing notes on who makes how much.
      They're trying to prevent this from happening again. Silence is Golden in their eyes. hinky way to start out a job.
      "There is no fundamental difference between man and animals in their ability to feel pleasure and pain, happiness, and misery." - Charles Darwin

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by Gardenhorse View Post

        The NPR article explicitly stated that discussing pay was covered. From the article: 'Compensation is one of those things you can talk about. The National Labor Relations Board, says Estlund, "has long held that these pay secrecy policies that many employers have in writing violate the National Labor Relations Act."'

        (Although, again, not clear that OP is covered since agriculture jobs are excepted from the NLRA.)
        I don't care what NPR says I do care about what the NLRA says. And how it has been interpreted. If the speaker says that the NLRA outlaws employers terminating employees for discussing salary I want to see the citation. Just 'cause an "expert" says something doesn't mean it's correct.

        G.
        Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by Guilherme View Post

          I don't care what NPR says

          G.
          oh my god you spoke evil of NPR

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by clanter View Post

            oh my god you spoke evil of NPR
            Indeed. I guess I'd best not go out into any thunderstorms for a while!!!

            G.
            Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

            Comment


            • #46
              I'm sorry that I didn't realize I needed to re-post the entire NPR article here. The article does actually cite a case where the NLRB found that someone was fired inappropriately for discussing salary. The company was ordered to offer to reinstate the worker, pay back wages, and rescind its policy prohibiting workers from discussing wages.

              https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/n...yee-discussing

              Yes, this is only one case. As I am not a lawyer, I cannot quote any other relevant court cases, legal analyses, or law review articles. But as a layperson, I found the multiple articles that have been cited in this post fairly convincing.

              Comment


              • #47
                Well, if women never discussed pay with colleagues, they would never discover they're a victim of gender based pay inequity. Social rules and professional rules are different. It is certainly tasteless to discuss your salary at a cocktail party or backyard barbeque, it is certainly NOT tasteless to discuss why your male coworker in the same job title, with the same qualifications and experience earns $15K more a year than you. Employers tend not to volunteer their own pay biases and inequities, even when they're aware of them.

                Many organizations (the smart ones with good HR departments) are removing the pay secrecy clause from handbooks and policies and opting for more transparency in their compensation strategy.
                The plural of anecdote is not data.

                Comment

                • Original Poster

                  #48
                  ok folks thanks again. ( Even the NPR blasphemers!!!


                  I look forward to my next employment related question. A good topic for all, it seems.
                  "Friend" me !

                  http://www.facebook.com/isabeau.solace

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by Gardenhorse View Post
                    I'm sorry that I didn't realize I needed to re-post the entire NPR article here. The article does actually cite a case where the NLRB found that someone was fired inappropriately for discussing salary. The company was ordered to offer to reinstate the worker, pay back wages, and rescind its policy prohibiting workers from discussing wages.

                    https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/n...yee-discussing

                    Yes, this is only one case. As I am not a lawyer, I cannot quote any other relevant court cases, legal analyses, or law review articles. But as a layperson, I found the multiple articles that have been cited in this post fairly convincing.
                    Maybe so and maybe not. This page is interesting because it goes a lot farther than the what I was taught. https://www.nlrb.gov/rights-we-protect I don't have to time to follow up on the NPR report but it's not fully compatible with this page and it's a 2013 decision. If this is ONLY case anyone can find that suggests that it's either an "outlier" or something that got reversed later on. If I have some time later I might try and follow up.

                    G.
                    Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      I can't f*cking believe this is secret salary stuff is happening/praised/legal.

                      I write this as a Marxist** and member of the Proletariat who thinks that the power differential between Labor and Corporate America is way, way unbalanced.

                      **Heck, I could write this as a pure Capitalist and still believe that Labor not allowed a tool for negotiating and standardizing wages while Corporations get so much help from the government is wrong and contrary to a healthy/functional/moral economic system.
                      The armchair saddler
                      Politically Pro-Cat

                      Comment


                      • #51
                        And another thing!

                        I can't believe someone is arguing in favor of a company's policy of legislating secrecy of pay because it's "bad for morale" if folks know they are being paid unevenly. Really? The solution is not.... wait for it..... paying people equitably so that no one has anything to be butt-hurt about?
                        The armchair saddler
                        Politically Pro-Cat

                        Comment


                        • #52
                          Originally posted by mvp View Post
                          And another thing!

                          I can't believe someone is arguing in favor of a company's policy of legislating secrecy of pay because it's "bad for morale" if folks know they are being paid unevenly. Really? The solution is not.... wait for it..... paying people equitably so that no one has anything to be butt-hurt about?
                          Equitable???? One person's "equitable" is another's "underpaid."

                          I personally don't really want anyone, including my parents, to know how much (or how little) I earn. None of their business.

                          People will be people.....not wanting to be "butt-hurt"????? In what dream world is that going to happen?

                          I have just been accused of insulting/being rude to someone because I asked her a simple question in a meeting. If you want to see "butt hurt" just look at the drama in most any barn.

                          Oh.....and if I want to bust my chops and work my ass off to earn more, I certainly don't want a "standard wage."
                          Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress.
                          Alfred A. Montapert

                          Comment


                          • #53
                            Originally posted by pluvinel View Post

                            Equitable???? One person's "equitable" is another's "underpaid."

                            I personally don't really want anyone, including my parents, to know how much (or how little) I earn. None of their business.
                            That's your choice. But there should be no rule (and I believe, at least in CA, that there can be no rule) against consenting employees discussion their compensation. As someone above pointed out, there can be massive pay inequities between male and female workers doing the same jobs, and/or long-time employees and new hires. There is no reason why management should be able to fail to address this when it arises. It is vastly worse for morale when such inequities are pointed out (as they almost inevitably are)...

                            Comment


                            • #54
                              Originally posted by pluvinel View Post

                              Equitable???? One person's "equitable" is another's "underpaid."

                              I personally don't really want anyone, including my parents, to know how much (or how little) I earn. None of their business.

                              People will be people.....not wanting to be "butt-hurt"????? In what dream world is that going to happen?

                              I have just been accused of insulting/being rude to someone because I asked her a simple question in a meeting. If you want to see "butt hurt" just look at the drama in most any barn.

                              Oh.....and if I want to bust my chops and work my ass off to earn more, I certainly don't want a "standard wage."
                              Cool.... you think you can gain in arguing for opacity in wage scales because you are sure you're superlative work will be recognized and compensated. The world, then, is an orderly meritocracy for you. But is it? How do you know? Do you think that all the stats showing that women get paid less for equal work is because all of those ladies are slackers?

                              Again, I don't see why any employee would argue for this; I do see why employers would.
                              The armchair saddler
                              Politically Pro-Cat

                              Comment


                              • #55
                                Originally posted by mvp View Post

                                Cool.... you think you can gain in arguing for opacity in wage scales because you are sure you're superlative work will be recognized and compensated. The world, then, is an orderly meritocracy for you. But is it? How do you know? Do you think that all the stats showing that women get paid less for equal work is because all of those ladies are slackers?

                                Again, I don't see why any employee would argue for this; I do see why employers would.
                                Meritocracy??? Ha....that's a laugh. Don't make assumptions on what you think I believe....

                                I happen to KNOW that women DO NOT get paid equitably.......I don't have to talk or gossip about who is getting paid what.....I just look at how many females are CEO's in the Fortune 500 listing. That is a proxy for who is in the pipeline for high-level jobs.

                                I still don't think it is anyone's business what I do or don't earn.

                                I take a job clearly knowing what I am going to get paid. I have the freedom to refuse the job if I think the offer is too low.
                                Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress.
                                Alfred A. Montapert

                                Comment


                                • #56
                                  Originally posted by mvp View Post
                                  I can't f*cking believe this is secret salary stuff is happening/praised/legal.

                                  OK.

                                  I write this as a Marxist** and member of the Proletariat who thinks that the power differential between Labor and Corporate America is way, way unbalanced.

                                  I'm a Marxist, too. I've studied the writings of Groucho extensively! He's a lot smarted than Karl, and that's a fact. Frankly, I don't care much about salary discussions. I figure it's "cum se, cum sa" issue. But I'm not in favor of the State decreeing the rule one way or the other.

                                  **Heck, I could write this as a pure Capitalist and still believe that Labor not allowed a tool for negotiating and standardizing wages while Corporations get so much help from the government is wrong and contrary to a healthy/functional/moral economic system.
                                  Standardization is one of those swords that cuts both ways. Under Democrats it can go one way and under Republicans another. So be careful of what you wish for.

                                  G.
                                  Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

                                  Comment


                                  • #57
                                    Originally posted by mvp View Post
                                    I can't f*cking believe this is secret salary stuff is happening/praised/legal.

                                    I write this as a Marxist** and member of the Proletariat who thinks that the power differential between Labor and Corporate America is way, way unbalanced.

                                    **Heck, I could write this as a pure Capitalist and still believe that Labor not allowed a tool for negotiating and standardizing wages while Corporations get so much help from the government is wrong and contrary to a healthy/functional/moral economic system.
                                    This!!!!
                                    "You'll never see yourself in the mirror with your eyes closed"

                                    Comment


                                    • #58
                                      Actually, you don't have to be a "Marxist" to support transparency in pay......it seems to be more a generational thing where GenY is reshaping policy.

                                      According to one business owner,, meritocracy and pay transparency is is at the basis of capitalism....
                                      https://www.businessinsider.com/sala...s-work-2017-10

                                      According to a survey conducted by The Cashlorette, a personal finance site run by Bankrate, people 18 to 36 years old are far more comfortable discussing their salaries with coworkers, friends, and family than workers in older generations.

                                      This preference for pay transparency has resulted in a number of companies amending their policies to encourage people to speak up when they think something is amiss in how they or others get paid.
                                      .......

                                      Employers have taken notice. As workforces have started to skew younger, a growing number of companies are deciding to make their pay transparent to all employees.

                                      At SumAll, a marketing and analytics company, CEO Dane Atkinson decided after founding the company in 2012 that payroll information ought to be freely available. Employees can consult an internal Google Doc that lists everyone else's salary.

                                      Atkinson has said the move levels the playing field in two ways: First, it helps people understand how their role fits into the company's priorities. Second, it lets people who think they're paid unfairly voice a concern that could result in a raise.

                                      "It's kind of crazy that in America, which is founded on this capitalistic vision of meritocracy, that we've obfuscated one of the core components of it," Atkinson told Business Insider in May.
                                      .........

                                      Along with casual dining and napkins, the salary discussion taboo could soon become the latest thing millennials have killed.
                                      Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress.
                                      Alfred A. Montapert

                                      Comment


                                      • #59
                                        Originally posted by pluvinel View Post
                                        Actually, you don't have to be a "Marxist" to support transparency in pay......it seems to be more a generational thing where GenY is reshaping policy.

                                        or you could belong to a union, working a unionized job... every one knows the pay rate for each task as the pay rates have been negotiated then finalized into the labor contract

                                        or work in the public sector, it may take some effort but you can learn that your school district superintendent make $287,454 plus benefits which is a little harder to decipher

                                        Comment


                                        • #60
                                          This "What did you make before hand?"
                                          is to be countered with What are you offering?... then the silence begins
                                          The question about previous compensation is illegal in certain, but not all states:

                                          https://www.bna.com/ask-salary-history-n73014470106/

                                          Asking this question in the recruiting process is the sign of a lazy or ineffective HR department. Your offer should be based on market data, not on your salary history. If the organization isn't participating in one of the major comp surveys, the data on Glassdoor.com and Salary.com is reasonably accurate.

                                          If you're talking to a recruiter and they ask this question, the correct response is "My target is between $xx and $yyy, depending on the total benefits package. Is this job within that range?"

                                          If they ask again, a possible answer is "What I was paid at XYZ company isn't relevant to the skills and experience I could bring to this position. Why don't we talk about what I can bring to the table?"
                                          Last edited by McGurk; Mar. 17, 2019, 05:27 PM.
                                          The plural of anecdote is not data.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X