@NS, interesing point about motivation vs. dangers on job vis-a-vis salary.
Salaries should not be based on motivation or amount of motivation. Teachers and firefighters and police can be equally motivated to join their profession and just a motivated to do a good job.
In terms of the job hazard: yes, fire and police work is more hazardous. But, these inviduals know of the hazards up front and accept them as part of the job. Also, if salary is based on hazard then truckdrivers and construction laborers should have higher salaries as these rate more hazardous than fire or police (based on dept of labor statistic). And these workers may be just as motivated as fire and police. http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfar0020.pdf
Thus, I am not sure that hazard or motivation should be the determiners of pay. At this point, I don’t know what should be. One answer may be to let the market determine the salary, but assure all salaries are a living wage.
@C_O wrote, “… I can't imagine websites pay "lawyers" that much money to drive messageboard "discussions".”
I’m not so sure. The “extra duty as assigned” job of messageboard poster extraordinaire takes a lot of motivation and one may be deserving of hazardous duty pay!
So should someone who works in a mine be paid as much as someone at mcdonalds? So what about the extreme danger of death. They are both doing menial tasks, right?
Should a “lawyer” who sits around all day posting crap on the Internet in an air conditioned room get paid more than those who make our children fit for the world or risk their lives protecting them? That’s what I’d like to know.
how bout this NS, you should be paid what the market dictates.
@NS, based on the pay scale for hazardous duty, the miner should be paid more than the McD employee. Also, I would argue that a miner is not doing a menial task.
The topic ‘Students blame Republicans’ is closed to new replies.