By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JWeinCom said:
sc94597 said:

Fair wage = what the owner/manager of capital determines one's value to be?

Interesting argument which history has shown leads to the mass of people destitute and starving while the minority live in opulence. 

Personally I don't think those with capital or who manage capital should have a unilateral say over what is "fair" when it comes to remuneration. If they had their way we'd all be living on subsistence wages until our bodies or minds deteriorate, then we can just die.

SCABs typically made/make more than the workers they replaced on strike, just to add context.

No.

Relative to means correlated with. And those things are indeed correlated. The more value they perceive, the higher a fair price should be and vice versa. And it's hard to argue that's not the case. Unless you'd like to argue that perceived value of the service doesn't have anything to do with what a fair price should be. I would assume you wouldn't want to argue that because it would be pretty stupid, but you can surprise me if you want. 

But that doesn't mean the perceived value of the service to the employer is the only factor correlated with fairness, and it should have been pretty clear from the post that wasn't even in the ballpark of what I meant. If it wasn't, now it is.

You said, "Sounds like they just really did not want her to work, but would be willing to change their minds if she was able to do it much cheaper than a voice actress they think was more valuable. If that's the case, I don't really fault them."

Is the bolded an ethical and fair mechanism of employing people in your opinion, given that the other voice actress is covered by a union that has negotiated minimums equivalent to the raised offer? You seemed to think it is fine when you say, "If that's the case, I don't really fault them." But I don't know, it might be stupid of me to assume. 

Last edited by sc94597 - on 18 October 2022