A story was doing the rounds last week that was drawing praise and admiration from various quarters:
The idea began percolating, said Dan Price, the founder of Gravity Payments, after he read an article on happiness. It showed that, for people who earn less than about $70,000, extra money makes a big difference in their lives.
The idea began percolating, said Dan Price, the founder of Gravity Payments, after he read an article on happiness. It showed that, for people who earn less than about $70,000, extra money makes a big difference in their lives.His idea bubbled into reality on Monday afternoon, when Mr. Price surprised his 120-person staff by announcing that he planned over the next three years to raise the salary of even the lowest-paid clerk, customer service representative and salesman to a minimum of $70,000.
If it’s a publicity stunt, it’s a costly one. Mr. Price, who started the Seattle-based credit-card payment processing firm in 2004 at the age of 19, said he would pay for the wage increases by cutting his own salary from nearly $1 million to $70,000 and using 75 to 80 percent of the company’s anticipated $2.2 million in profit this year.
Those doing the praising were generally of a left-wing bent, and some went so far as to say this was a vision of the future and an example for other firms to follow. Me, I’m not so sure, and I think Mr Price’s company is going to run into trouble over this at some point.
Now I’ll start by saying that Mr Price is perfectly within his rights to distribute his own salary among the workforce in such a manner. And as I understand he is the owner, hell he can pay them $1m per year to watch TV for all I care. I just don’t think he’s thought through the implications. There are several problems which I think will arise, all of them to do with incentives.
The paychecks of about 70 employees will grow, with 30 ultimately doubling their salaries, according to Ryan Pirkle, a company spokesman. The average salary at Gravity is $48,000 a year.
His idea bubbled into reality on Monday afternoon, when Mr. Price surprised his 120-person staff by announcing that he planned over the next three years to raise the salary of even the lowest-paid clerk, customer service representative and salesman to a minimum of $70,000.
Firstly, if the lowest paid clerk is now on $70,000 per year there is almost no incentive for anyone to grow professionally by taking on more responsibility, tackling harder tasks, volunteering for the shit jobs, and putting in additional hours to increase their own value within the company. If the clerk is on $70k, why would somebody from the middle-ranks with marketable skills and a higher education apply themselves if they were on similar wedge, or work extra hard just to earn $80k when by loafing he can earn $70k? Better to take it easy and spend more time with the family. And this will be made worse by the plan being phased in over 3 years. Who is going to be interested in the new night manager role now the main incentive to take the crap hours is gone? This will be felt even more keenly in sales: how much effort is the junior salesman going to put in now he’s on $70k per year?
Hayley Vogt, a 24-year-old communications coordinator at Gravity who earns $45,000, said, “I’m completely blown away right now.” She said she has worried about covering rent increases and a recent emergency room bill.
“Everyone is talking about this $15 minimum wage in Seattle and it’s nice to work someplace where someone is actually doing something about it and not just talking about it,” she said.
From the above quotation I think it is safe to assume that Hayley Vogt will never leave Gravity of her own free will because she is now paid 55% above market rate for being a communications coordinator. Nobody above her is going to leave either, so it is an equally fair assumption that as long as Gravity exists, Ms Vogt – currently 24 – will be a communications coordinator. So by the time she’s 40, Ms Vogt will still be a communications coordinator. Do you see the problem here? She’s undergone no professional growth. She can’t be promoted internally because her superiors – also being paid well over market rate – will hang onto their jobs for all they’re worth. So if Gravity goes tits-up in the future, Ms Vogt will find herself on the job market not only facing a severe cut in her income but also competing against people much younger from whom she cannot differentiate herself in any meaningful way. For those on the lower rungs doing jobs which don’t require much skill or training, and thus youth, energy, and flexibility are major selling points, this could be a problem.
Of course, many people doing those kind of jobs aren’t looking for a career anyway, they just want to pay the bills. Which brings me onto the third problem: with nobody leaving, how do you get rid of the underperformers? Normally these people would leave because, having been passed over for promotion and higher pay for a few years running, want to try their luck somewhere else. Now Mr Price is stuck with them.
Finally, how does Mr Price intend to bring new talent into the company? Nobody is leaving, so that means only newly created positions will bring outsiders in. Aside from not being a very healthy environment for any company, this creates an additional problem. If a new position is created and advertised, every store clerk within 200 miles is going to apply for the job if it pays $70k per year. Having an avalanche of CVs hit your desk is not helpful. When I worked in Dubai we advertised for an assistant accountant position and put an advert up somewhere. Even though we were a small, unknown company we were receiving CVs by the thousand, mostly from Indians. The problem was almost all the CVs were from labourers, forklift drivers, and other unskilled workers chancing their arm having seen a “big” salary (and indoor work) on offer. Sifting through them all, trying to identify who was genuinely interested in the position and had the matching skills was a hopeless task. Gravity Payments is going to find themselves with a similar problem: how many of the tens of thousands of CVs they will receive are from people who aren’t motivated solely by the incredible pay and couldn’t care less about the actual job? And even those who are qualified, are they confident they will secure a suitable candidate from a shortlist all of whom are overwhelmingly motivated by the pay above everything else (and know they can likely loaf once they get in)? HR departments in major oil companies will recognise this problem.
Despite his obvious success in business thus far, having set up Gravity Payments at he impressively young age of 19, I can’t help think Mr Price is still a bit wet behind the ears:
“Is anyone else freaking out right now?” Mr. Price asked after the clapping and whooping died down into a few moments of stunned silence. “I’m kind of freaking out.”
Whilst I might be persuaded that executive pay is too high in the US and the disparity between the lowest and highest paid is too wide in some companies, progressive pay scales are used and market rates adhered to for good reasons which might not be immediately obvious. As Tim Worstall is fond of telling us, incentives matter. Mr Price might end up learning this the hard way.