Reply #22: Corporations have systems that enforce wealth disparity -- my own personal example

[lostnfound]

Several years of no raises combined with some "salary compression" due to the types of people leaving (higher paid subgroups had left, leaving lower paid colleagues behind), the average salary for my staff had actually fallen by perhaps 10% - 15% in 6 years.

Last year our company finally allowed us to offer raises. Just like years previous, and just like most other companies, raises are based on percentages of pay, with a sliding scale for performance.

With the consent of my own boss, I tried to allocate my own raise to my staff instead, because I had seen their standard of living fall from solid middle class to struggling working class, while I personally haven't had any worries.

For example, instead of 5% for the guy making 120K -- an extra $6000 per year -- you can give an EXTRA 5% ($1500 per year) to each of 4 guys making 30K. When combined with the 5% they were going to get anyway, you can really make a difference in 4 people's lives.

"HR" absolutely prohibited it. I'm sure that "HR" everywhere has manuals and "HR textbooks" that give all kind of reasons why this shouldn't be allowed, but like many such professional truths, they are likely based on hidden social principles which are rotten at their core.

Before someone suggests just handing over the cash, problem #1 is that the people are too proud and problem #2 is that many things are tied to base salary such as pension and next year's salary.

A raise ripples through for many years. The rules made by capital prohibit middle management from tipping the scales in favor of the lower classes.