Singapore Expats Forum

Microsoft's new Indian-American CEO sticks his foot innit!

Discuss about any latest news or current affairs in Singapore or globally. Please DO NOT copy and paste news articles from other sources without written permission.
User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:22 am

PNGMK wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:Surely, you jest. American HR practices, beginning with the large MNC's, are a horror show, based not on the needs of the workers and company, but on the needs of HR.


Agreed. American companies (and I am sure MS) are absolutely draconian in their treatment of people and I would NOT trust them to make sure me and women are paid the same. One of the key KPI's for most HR departments in MNC's is keeping salary costs low afterall.


I spent most of my career in US MNCs, and have no idea what you're alluding to. They seemed to bend over backwards (and then some) to ensure all staff were treated the same. That said the stint I did with them on Wall Street was memorable for the daily absolute race/gender paranoia present in the workplace. To the point it was quite intimidating... you know maybe if you accidentally crack the wrong joke, you get sacked. Or you refer to a colleague and mention his ethnicity, rather than overlooking that and seeing him a merely 'another American'. Just you don't know what's 'wrong to them' and all interactions are patrolled by plains clothes behaviour-police (esp. if you lunch with people from HR!). America > Land of the free? Beacon of free speech? No: Closest I've seen to a corporate version of East Germany.
lol!

PNGMK
Director
Director
Posts: 4857
Joined: Thu, 21 Mar 2013

Postby PNGMK » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:38 am

JR8 wrote:
PNGMK wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:Surely, you jest. American HR practices, beginning with the large MNC's, are a horror show, based not on the needs of the workers and company, but on the needs of HR.


Agreed. American companies (and I am sure MS) are absolutely draconian in their treatment of people and I would NOT trust them to make sure me and women are paid the same. One of the key KPI's for most HR departments in MNC's is keeping salary costs low afterall.


I spent most of my career in US MNCs, and have no idea what you're alluding to. They seemed to bend over backwards (and then some) to ensure all staff were treated the same. That said the stint I did with them on Wall Street was memorable for the daily absolute race/gender paranoia present in the workplace. To the point it was quite intimidating... you know maybe if you accidentally crack the wrong joke, you get sacked. Or you refer to a colleague and mention his ethnicity, rather than overlooking that and seeing him a merely 'another American'. Just you don't know what's 'wrong to them' and all interactions are patrolled by plains clothes behaviour-police (esp. if you lunch with people from HR!). America > Land of the free? Beacon of free speech? No: Closest I've seen to a corporate version of East Germany.
lol!


Is an MNC HR drone going to offer a woman the same pay as a man who negotiates harder than the woman (who - in my experience - do NOT push as hard in hiring for better salaries) just because she's a woman? Absolutely not. Is the same drone going to give the woman the same increment as the main who raises hell for one? No way. THAT's the fallacy in the MS CEO's argument.

User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:57 am

PNGMK wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:
zzm9980 wrote:...it seems pretty obvious it is aimed at everyone to "trust HR" to make sure things are fair. At least in large US MNCs, I'd say he's right.


Surely, you jest. American HR practices, beginning with the large MNC's, are a horror show, based not on the needs of the workers and company, but on the needs of HR.


Agreed. American companies (and I am sure MS) are absolutely draconian in their treatment of people and I would NOT trust them to make sure me and women are paid the same. One of the key KPI's for most HR departments in MNC's is keeping salary costs low afterall.


Exactly, and I believe they screw all non-mgmt equally with a blind eye to gender, race, or anything else.

User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:59 am

PNGMK wrote:
JR8 wrote:
PNGMK wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:Surely, you jest. American HR practices, beginning with the large MNC's, are a horror show, based not on the needs of the workers and company, but on the needs of HR.


Agreed. American companies (and I am sure MS) are absolutely draconian in their treatment of people and I would NOT trust them to make sure me and women are paid the same. One of the key KPI's for most HR departments in MNC's is keeping salary costs low afterall.


I spent most of my career in US MNCs, and have no idea what you're alluding to. They seemed to bend over backwards (and then some) to ensure all staff were treated the same. That said the stint I did with them on Wall Street was memorable for the daily absolute race/gender paranoia present in the workplace. To the point it was quite intimidating... you know maybe if you accidentally crack the wrong joke, you get sacked. Or you refer to a colleague and mention his ethnicity, rather than overlooking that and seeing him a merely 'another American'. Just you don't know what's 'wrong to them' and all interactions are patrolled by plains clothes behaviour-police (esp. if you lunch with people from HR!). America > Land of the free? Beacon of free speech? No: Closest I've seen to a corporate version of East Germany.
lol!


Is an MNC HR drone going to offer a woman the same pay as a man who negotiates harder than the woman (who - in my experience - do NOT push as hard in hiring for better salaries) just because she's a woman? Absolutely not. Is the same drone going to give the woman the same increment as the main who raises hell for one? No way. THAT's the fallacy in the MS CEO's argument.


Maybe I missed it, but is the movement for "equal pay for women" basically saying that if someone (a man in your example) negotiated better then the woman who didn't should be brought up to pay parity?

I thought it was an assumption that raises and pay scales were lower for the women.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:06 am

PNGMK wrote:Is an MNC HR drone going to offer a woman the same pay as a man who negotiates harder than the woman


HR don't offer it. The person hiring, the hiring manager, 'offers it'. Besides HR is 100% staffed by women [irony]. So watcha think, the gatekeepers/enforcers are going to scalp their own sisters?


PNGMK wrote:(who - in my experience - do NOT push as hard in hiring for better salaries) just because she's a woman? Absolutely not. Is the same drone going to give the woman the same increment as the main who raises hell for one? No way. THAT's the fallacy in the MS CEO's argument.


Well see above. IME it is nothing to do with HR. Not least until the end of any and the entire process when they're asked to adjust payroll/etc.

Your comment about women not driving a hard bargain is both demeaning and sexist.

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 34273
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:08 am

Methinks my wife would tell you "not very". :P

Boy, you quickly edited that post didn't you! :tongue:

PNGMK
Director
Director
Posts: 4857
Joined: Thu, 21 Mar 2013

Postby PNGMK » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:27 am

JR8 wrote:
PNGMK wrote:Is an MNC HR drone going to offer a woman the same pay as a man who negotiates harder than the woman


HR don't offer it. The person hiring, the hiring manager, 'offers it'. Besides HR is 100% staffed by women [irony]. So watcha think, the gatekeepers/enforcers are going to scalp their own sisters?


PNGMK wrote:(who - in my experience - do NOT push as hard in hiring for better salaries) just because she's a woman? Absolutely not. Is the same drone going to give the woman the same increment as the main who raises hell for one? No way. THAT's the fallacy in the MS CEO's argument.


Well see above. IME it is nothing to do with HR. Not least until the end of any and the entire process when they're asked to adjust payroll/etc.

Your comment about women not driving a hard bargain is both demeaning and sexist.


No - it's not. It's real and this is why people are bitching about this guys comments! I live with and work with women. They (typically) just don't push that hard on salaries and benefits. Unless someone pushes back her or his salary WILL slip from the day he or she starts (for not having pushed as hard) and every year going forward unless the pay rates are completely fixed (and yes admittedly they are in some International Schools for example but rarely in higher level careers). If there's any negotiation or flex in the pay rates the winners will be the hard negotiators... which may not be the women and probably AREN'T the women based on what statistics we know about women's pay rates.. that's why the MS CEO is full of BS to say "trust the system".

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16514
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010
Location: K. Puki Manis

Postby JR8 » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:28 am

sundaymorningstaple wrote:Methinks my wife would tell you "not very". :P

Boy, you quickly edited that post didn't you! :tongue:


Yeah sorry, I see we're on a thin ice-rink here. And I don't want to risk offending anyone's 'more PC than you' sensibilities.


p.s. with PNG as the torch-bearer for feminist-rights, what should one expect next? .... ;

User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 12:45 pm

PNGMK wrote:
No - it's not. It's real and this is why people are bitching about this guys comments! I live with and work with women. They (typically) just don't push that hard on salaries and benefits. Unless someone pushes back her or his salary WILL slip from the day he or she starts (for not having pushed as hard) and every year going forward unless the pay rates are completely fixed (and yes admittedly they are in some International Schools for example but rarely in higher level careers). If there's any negotiation or flex in the pay rates the winners will be the hard negotiators... which may not be the women and probably AREN'T the women based on what statistics we know about women's pay rates.. that's why the MS CEO is full of BS to say "trust the system".


So are you advocating for women to have a 'handicap' in salary negotiations? What about men who are bad negotiators? F'em? Or shall we just pay everyone the same salary by grade and seniority, comrade?

PNGMK
Director
Director
Posts: 4857
Joined: Thu, 21 Mar 2013

Postby PNGMK » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 2:38 pm

zzm9980 wrote:
PNGMK wrote:
No - it's not. It's real and this is why people are bitching about this guys comments! I live with and work with women. They (typically) just don't push that hard on salaries and benefits. Unless someone pushes back her or his salary WILL slip from the day he or she starts (for not having pushed as hard) and every year going forward unless the pay rates are completely fixed (and yes admittedly they are in some International Schools for example but rarely in higher level careers). If there's any negotiation or flex in the pay rates the winners will be the hard negotiators... which may not be the women and probably AREN'T the women based on what statistics we know about women's pay rates.. that's why the MS CEO is full of BS to say "trust the system".


So are you advocating for women to have a 'handicap' in salary negotiations? What about men who are bad negotiators? F'em? Or shall we just pay everyone the same salary by grade and seniority, comrade?


No... it's not an easy situation to fix.

The MNC I work for uses bands to set salary levels - I guess poor negotiators end up on the bottom part of the band and those with better skills on the top part.

User avatar
zzm9980
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6837
Joined: Wed, 06 Jul 2011
Location: Once more unto the breach

Postby zzm9980 » Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:49 pm

PNGMK wrote:
zzm9980 wrote:
PNGMK wrote:
No - it's not. It's real and this is why people are bitching about this guys comments! I live with and work with women. They (typically) just don't push that hard on salaries and benefits. Unless someone pushes back her or his salary WILL slip from the day he or she starts (for not having pushed as hard) and every year going forward unless the pay rates are completely fixed (and yes admittedly they are in some International Schools for example but rarely in higher level careers). If there's any negotiation or flex in the pay rates the winners will be the hard negotiators... which may not be the women and probably AREN'T the women based on what statistics we know about women's pay rates.. that's why the MS CEO is full of BS to say "trust the system".


So are you advocating for women to have a 'handicap' in salary negotiations? What about men who are bad negotiators? F'em? Or shall we just pay everyone the same salary by grade and seniority, comrade?


No... it's not an easy situation to fix.

The MNC I work for uses bands to set salary levels - I guess poor negotiators end up on the bottom part of the band and those with better skills on the top part.


Same as my company. I know offers are sometimes made in different parts of the band based on skill-set. Adjusting one demographic's salary inside of the band seems unfair to the others. I can guarantee you even between middle-aged white males the salaries vary greatly based on their perceived experience and negotiation skills.


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Latest News & Current Affairs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests