Its not. How would a workers actual real productivity be in terms of market value?
If I designed the graphics for some part of your website, how much did my graphic impact the profits of the company? How would you go about figuring out how the HR department brings in sales? Add up all the costs of lawsuits you imagine might have happened without them?
Yeah sure, but the labour always earns way more money then the employees actually get. I think that part is quite simple. It’s just abstract to people, because forcing workers to sell their time and health is so normalised.
An overly simplified calculation to show the rough scale of this is to take the reported annual net profit and divide that by the number of employees. This neglects many workers that work for subcontractors and capital reinvestment and so many things but let’s take Microsoft for an example in 2024. 92.75B / 228,000 workers = $406,798 per worker.
What is the purpose of bringing this up if it’s unusable for our needs?
let’s take Microsoft for an example in 2024. 92.75B / 228,000 workers = $406,798 per worker.
The original goal was to value a worker based on the value they actually produce, separate from the other workers.
If you are trying to force the top lawyers, sales people, and engineers to share the same salary as the average of everyone else around them you’ve done the exact opposite of what you set out to do.
i mean… trying to calculate an individual’s labor output is pointless.
nobody produces anything in a vacuum.
you can’t separate the office excel wizards economic output from the janitor’s, or the maintenance crew’s, or the accountant’s, or the sales person’s, and so on, and so forth.
labor, especially modern labor, is built entirely upon cooperative, mutually beneficial structures.
the part that isn’t working and parasitizes the worker’s economic accomplishments, that’s really 90% of the issue we have right now.
so the original calculation, which takes the entire profit of the company + CEO income - CEO salary (or the reasonable amount they should be getting) dividend by the number of employees does give you a reasonable baseline of compensation for all employees.
it doesn’t make much sense that one “class” of employee would make more than any other, when all of them rely on each other…
You could compare that 400k to the median salary, calculate how far that’s off, then apply that ratio to the individual salaries. It’s still just a ballpark number, but it isn’t a terrible way of looking at things
I mean I think it’s intentional that there’s not data on that sort of thing that is collected or made available. There are methods one could use to get a rough estimate; someone elsewhere in the comments suggested taking the reported yearly profit for the company and dividing it by the number of workers. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than what we’ve got right now which is just a big ol ‘shrug’.
But there is likely someone doing the math, even if they’'re just ballparking it and not making it public, because that’s how they justify paying everyone’s salary. It would not surprise me at all to learn that giant corporations have a pretty accurate accounting of the value created by each employee.
I wonder if that’s intentional…
Its not. How would a workers actual real productivity be in terms of market value?
If I designed the graphics for some part of your website, how much did my graphic impact the profits of the company? How would you go about figuring out how the HR department brings in sales? Add up all the costs of lawsuits you imagine might have happened without them?
Yeah sure, but the labour always earns way more money then the employees actually get. I think that part is quite simple. It’s just abstract to people, because forcing workers to sell their time and health is so normalised.
An overly simplified calculation to show the rough scale of this is to take the reported annual net profit and divide that by the number of employees. This neglects many workers that work for subcontractors and capital reinvestment and so many things but let’s take Microsoft for an example in 2024. 92.75B / 228,000 workers = $406,798 per worker.
What is the purpose of bringing this up if it’s unusable for our needs?
The original goal was to value a worker based on the value they actually produce, separate from the other workers.
If you are trying to force the top lawyers, sales people, and engineers to share the same salary as the average of everyone else around them you’ve done the exact opposite of what you set out to do.
i mean… trying to calculate an individual’s labor output is pointless.
nobody produces anything in a vacuum.
you can’t separate the office excel wizards economic output from the janitor’s, or the maintenance crew’s, or the accountant’s, or the sales person’s, and so on, and so forth.
labor, especially modern labor, is built entirely upon cooperative, mutually beneficial structures.
the part that isn’t working and parasitizes the worker’s economic accomplishments, that’s really 90% of the issue we have right now.
so the original calculation, which takes the entire profit of the company + CEO income - CEO salary (or the reasonable amount they should be getting) dividend by the number of employees does give you a reasonable baseline of compensation for all employees.
it doesn’t make much sense that one “class” of employee would make more than any other, when all of them rely on each other…
You could compare that 400k to the median salary, calculate how far that’s off, then apply that ratio to the individual salaries. It’s still just a ballpark number, but it isn’t a terrible way of looking at things
I mean I think it’s intentional that there’s not data on that sort of thing that is collected or made available. There are methods one could use to get a rough estimate; someone elsewhere in the comments suggested taking the reported yearly profit for the company and dividing it by the number of workers. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than what we’ve got right now which is just a big ol ‘shrug’.
But there is likely someone doing the math, even if they’'re just ballparking it and not making it public, because that’s how they justify paying everyone’s salary. It would not surprise me at all to learn that giant corporations have a pretty accurate accounting of the value created by each employee.