If you were a boss, which employee of these you will pay him more?

Avatar image for ccthor
Posted by CCThor (2298 posts) 14 days, 4 minutes ago

Poll: If you were a boss, which employee of these you will pay him more? (35 votes)

Can do almost everything very well but only if you pay him enough. 60%
Learning things very slow but has a heart always do it best. 11%
Neither, they both fired. 11%
I pay them same. 17%
Avatar image for socajunkie
#1 Posted by SocaJunkie (9685 posts) - - Show Bio

1st option is better for the company.

Online
Avatar image for ccthor
#2 Posted by CCThor (2298 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for flashkings
#3 Posted by Flashkings (465 posts) - - Show Bio

Like someone already said the first option is better for the company, so I'd pay him more

If you use your heart to much in a company you might end up having loses instead of gains

Avatar image for ccthor
#4 Posted by CCThor (2298 posts) - - Show Bio
Avatar image for spareheadone
#5 Posted by SpareHeadOne (7550 posts) - - Show Bio

I would pay the first one to whip the second one so that he will work faster

Avatar image for socajunkie
#6 Posted by SocaJunkie (9685 posts) - - Show Bio
Online
Avatar image for ccthor
#7 Edited by CCThor (2298 posts) - - Show Bio

@socajunkie: Because if you have a much better one, why bother to have other one that much worse?

Avatar image for socajunkie
#8 Edited by SocaJunkie (9685 posts) - - Show Bio

@ccthor: I didn’t realise one had to get sacked.

Online
Avatar image for flashkings
#9 Edited by Flashkings (465 posts) - - Show Bio

@ccthor: he deserves, but he doesn't deserve to be paid more that the other

Avatar image for abstractraze
#10 Edited by AbstractRaze (3248 posts) - - Show Bio

Qualifications first, that's the golden rule in the West and the main reason for Western success.

If you have the qualifications and the experience you get the job and you're well paid.

Avatar image for arranvid
#11 Posted by ArranVid (2860 posts) - - Show Bio

I'd give more money to the one that can do almost everything very well only if you pay him enough. Yeah the other person has a heart to do his/her best and that's good but I want everything to be done to the best and I have to choose who to pay more to make the business get to the best it can be and paying the second person won't be as effective to my business as paying the first person

Avatar image for mimisalome
#12 Posted by mimisalome (5877 posts) - - Show Bio

I would pay base on what stated in the contract

If the person failed to produce results for whatever reasons whether due to incompetence or deliberate act of under-performance (because he believes he is entitled to some compensation not stated on the contract) then I would fire them for underperforming and/or breach of contract.

Avatar image for deactivated-5d7ad417f1919
#13 Posted by deactivated-5d7ad417f1919 (115 posts) - - Show Bio

The first guy is obviously better suited for most jobs.

Avatar image for danieldaripper
#14 Posted by DanielDaRipper (6043 posts) - - Show Bio

Neither, they both fired.

Avatar image for indomitableregal
#15 Posted by IndomitableRegal (17710 posts) - - Show Bio

The first one. It's a meritocracy dammit.

Avatar image for Penguin-Dust
#16 Posted by PenguinDust (9948 posts) - - Show Bio

First one. Talent, experience and skill are highly prized in the business world. The second one should stick to it and rise up within the company from the results he provides. Proving that you're an asset is worthwhile, too. Good intentions alone only go so far.

Avatar image for richubs
#17 Posted by Richubs (7529 posts) - - Show Bio

1st.

If you're good at something never do it for free.

Avatar image for jagernutt
#18 Posted by jagernutt (17842 posts) - - Show Bio

@ccthor said:

@socajunkie: Because if you have a much better one, why bother to have other one that much worse?

The worse one bags groceries. The better becomes supervisor. That's the way that actually works IRL.

Avatar image for xlr87t3
#19 Posted by XLR87T3 (10394 posts) - - Show Bio

@ccthor said:

@socajunkie: Because if you have a much better one, why bother to have other one that much worse?

The worse one bags groceries. The better becomes supervisor. That's the way that actually works IRL.

Arent both of them terrible jobs? Lol

Avatar image for jagernutt
#20 Posted by jagernutt (17842 posts) - - Show Bio

@xlr87t3 said:
@jagernutt said:
@ccthor said:

@socajunkie: Because if you have a much better one, why bother to have other one that much worse?

The worse one bags groceries. The better becomes supervisor. That's the way that actually works IRL.

Arent both of them terrible jobs? Lol

I think you might've missed the point.lol

Avatar image for jgames
#21 Posted by Jgames (8426 posts) - - Show Bio

Second option since I am that guy :-p and it would be like looking at a mirror XD.

Avatar image for jotun
#22 Posted by Jotun (291 posts) - - Show Bio

The first one is how it should be. Expecting someone to do extra work for no extra pay is an absurd practice.

Avatar image for insomnimaniac
#23 Edited by Insomnimaniac (462 posts) - - Show Bio

No I'm just going to pay the hot chick the most.

Avatar image for crevanille
#24 Edited by Crevanille (802 posts) - - Show Bio

@abstractraze:

Nah.It's not what you know. It's who you know. I've seen many people who actually fit the ideal job description they're applying for just to get blackballed by nepotism or referrals from a friend working a sister company. Experience doesn't mean jack most of the time. If it did, many people would get hired.

Avatar image for crevanille
#25 Posted by Crevanille (802 posts) - - Show Bio

@jotun:

Blue collar jobs laughs at your statement.