Thanks for the post, Seema! Staying at a higher-paying less directly impactful job may make sense to donate more. Impact can be doubled by donating 10 pp more of gross income to interventions 10 times as cost-effective as one’s own direct work.
You’re thinking about a different question (is the employee doing the most good they can?) than I am (is the employer doing the most good they can?). Paying less and donating the remainder is in the employer’s choice set, so I don’t think the employee’s charitable contributions are a justification for paying more than peers do.
I agree @Vasco Grilo🔸 in principle, although I really doubt this is a strong consideration for very many workers, even at aligned places like GiveWell. I think few give away large proportions of their salary.
Thanks for the post, Seema! Staying at a higher-paying less directly impactful job may make sense to donate more. Impact can be doubled by donating 10 pp more of gross income to interventions 10 times as cost-effective as one’s own direct work.
You’re thinking about a different question (is the employee doing the most good they can?) than I am (is the employer doing the most good they can?). Paying less and donating the remainder is in the employer’s choice set, so I don’t think the employee’s charitable contributions are a justification for paying more than peers do.
True! Employers paying more will more easily attract people who want to donate more, but I do not think this plays a meaningful role in setting pay.
I agree @Vasco Grilo🔸 in principle, although I really doubt this is a strong consideration for very many workers, even at aligned places like GiveWell. I think few give away large proportions of their salary.