- Joined
- Apr 8, 2019
- Messages
- 1,093
- Reaction score
- 229
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
I'm puzzled at how you can conclude that the third party has no stake in making accurate assessments. Its own business depends completely on the extent to which clients and the public trust and rely on its information.
What such businesses do is gather data on transactions that actually took place. The prevailing rate that is deemed correct corresponds to a group average or a group median value. In other words, the final arbiters are the many employers and employees who agreed to trade together, not a remote agency who tallies statistics on those transactions.
Moreover, their services will never include either providing or using as complete and detailed a dataset as possible. The things I listed regarding attitudes, cultural background and the like are known to be hard to measure and are not as readily available as data drawn from existing public surveys, though they're important ways to evaluate how useful someone can be in a specific context. And, with regards to analysis, I might find clients who wish to pin down in fine details mean or median values for specific groups of people or specific regions. However, this is quite a different task than to claim Joe, specifically, is worth more than Jane. Manifestly, I might very track various statistics of the labor market and sell this information, but it's also obvious that I'll make mistakes, sometimes even very ample mistakes, in pinning down the value of a specific worker doing a very specific set of tasks. However, if my business is not about being right in advance of all transactions about every person I will never lose a single client over it -- and their business definitely is not about pinning down the value of every last person.
On the other hand, you really have an incentive for employees to look for the best opportunity for selling their services. Their considerations will include wage, benefits, working conditions, distance from his home, security, and even perhaps the personality of the manager. No one but that worker can make a call as to how much any of these items should be weighed against the others and he has every bit of motivation for getting a good deal by his own account of what this means. Granted, the implied search is not free and it is likely he will stop short of the absolute best deal. But again, he's in a better position than anyone else to judge when searching becomes too costly, too risky, etc. Likewise, an employer has every incentive to be able to identify workers that will give them the kind of service they want at a price which is congruent with their objective of turning a profit. There is a limit to how rapacious they can be and that limit is set by poaching: you're never alone in the labor market looking for the best, the brightest, the most enjoyable or the most responsible people.
If you ever participated in the evaluation of prospective employees, their training or in partook the hiring process yourself as an employer, you would know that not everyone who calls themselves electrician, cook, welder, carpenter, computer scientist, etc. are the same, even though their nominal titles and nominal skill sets are the same. An employee who shows up on time, who learns well, and who do not require constant supervision to operate as you would like them to operate are employees you want to keep. For one thing, the guy or girl you see working every day is known to be as good as you what you see whereas pulling people out of unemployment is always subject to some uncertainty.