>What happens to the guy in open salary co who is legit 50% better than everyone else?
The GP is right in that, that person doesn't have much choice but to move on.
I don't have experience with open salaries but I do have experience with collective agreements and seniority. They aren't meant to take into consideration the "super stars". That's not what they are meant to do. Seniority and collective agreements do suck if you're a "super star".
I don't think there's a system where everyone is a winner.
It depends on how you define winner. Does it really matter how much someone else earns as long as you're happy with your pay?
I have taken a lower paying job because of my preference for that job and workplace. Money is not my principal driver (nor is it most people's).
I also agree that an open pay system could encourage super stars to leave. I once hired a woman who earned almost 50% more than her peers because she was amazing (it's the one time I recall paying a premium for anyone). If her peers knew, it would have been a shit storm, especially her male boss (who earned well less than she did).
We are too obsessed about comparing ourselves to others. I would most probably pick a culture where there wasn't transparency because I don't think someone else's income is anyone else's business and the emphasis on money is unhealthy.
Is that "50 better than everyone else" measurable? If it is, then the higher salary along with the criteria and specific performance measures could be a good incentive for the rest of the employees to improve.
The GP is right in that, that person doesn't have much choice but to move on.
I don't have experience with open salaries but I do have experience with collective agreements and seniority. They aren't meant to take into consideration the "super stars". That's not what they are meant to do. Seniority and collective agreements do suck if you're a "super star".
I don't think there's a system where everyone is a winner.