this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2024
111 points (96.6% liked)

Business

472 readers
55 users here now

A place to share business news and insights.


Rules


  1. Follow lemmy.world rules
  2. Only post content related to business
  3. Do not use this community to promote your business

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But there it is... if the top took a hiar cut that would cover it. Lower entrance requirements to get the job.. means more eligible works.. it's a tuff one yes. Is there enuff workers maybe. But it's worth a try.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 8 months ago

I’m stuck in middle management, and have many middle and senior management peers, so I see both sides of the arguments here getting pushed back hard. I cannot begin to imagine the top willing to take a cut, there’s no benefit for them what so ever. Anything lower tries to justify will just be brushed off. On the flip side, I definitely do not want to reduce entrance requirements… bad hires hurts my team’s performance in non linear fashion.

If meaningful changes were to happen, it would have to be mandated by laws and regulations, but I don’t see a path for those laws and regulations to change without drastic societal changes that would support such.