Earlier this year, Seattle-based Gravity Payments CEO Dan Price announced he was setting the minimum wage for his workers at $70k. About 70 of the company's 120 employees would be receiving the raises over a 3 year period and Price cut his salary from $1m to $70k to make the change happen. His reasoning: He read an article that more money for people who make less than $70k leads to increased happiness.
His plan may have backfired:
What few outsiders realised, however, was how much turmoil all the hoopla was causing at the company itself. To begin with, Gravity was simply unprepared for the onslaught of emails, Facebook posts and phone calls. The attention was thrilling, but it was also exhausting and distracting. And with so many eyes focused on the firm, some hoping to witness failure, the pressure has been intense.
More troubling, a few customers, dismayed by what they viewed as a political statement, withdrew their business. Others, anticipating a fee increase - despite repeated assurances to the contrary - also left. While dozens of new clients, inspired by Price's announcement, were signing up, those accounts will not start paying off for at least another year. To handle the flood, he has had to hire a dozen additional employees - now at a significantly higher cost - and is struggling to figure out whether more are needed without knowing for certain how long the bonanza will last.
Two of Price's most valued employees quit, spurred in part by their view that it was unfair to double the pay of some new hires while the longest-serving staff members got small or no raises. Some friends and associates in Seattle's close-knit entrepreneurial network were also piqued that Price's action made them look stingy in front of their own employees.
To make matters worse, Price's brother and company co-founder Lucas filed a lawsuit less than 2 weeks after the raise increase announcement, accusing his brother of violating his rights as a minority shareholder.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04 2015, @02:40PM
I can see he is having some rough spots.
Mostly like others pointed out he announced it because he wanted some sort of fame for it apparently.
I say lets see in a year how it turned out. At the moment it looks like it is not working. But that could change. He had some customers leave because they do not want to be associated to anything even slightly controversial (most businesses are like that).
My guess is this is possible to do. But he did it too quickly and at a rate the business can not sustain. If you can not sustain then all of your workers will be out of a job. Then what?
Not sure he can undo the damage either. As at this point if you lower the pay the people who were getting it will now leave feeling they are being ripped off.
It is an interesting experiment. But one that is possible to ruin the whole business over. I can see why the brother sued.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday August 04 2015, @07:24PM
Was that his motivation, or did he want to set a good example? We can't know. But would that more people would try to gain attention by doing things that are good, instead of doing things that make their existential penis look larger.
Washington DC delenda est.