Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It doesn't inspire much faith in article's author when its title is:

    1 in 20 workers will quit if transparency laws reveal they are paid less than co-workers
and that is expanded lower down to be:

    4% will quit if revealed co-workers earn more money
Maybe it's all otherwise true and accurate, but it raises a warning flag for me about how good their methodology might be.


Is it the people who ran the study claiming 1 in 20 is 4% or the person who wrote the article.

Either way, it's a heck of a rounding error.


For clarity:

- 1 in 20 is 5%

- 1 in 25 is 4%


Probably just casual rounding of a quantity and its reciprocal, without realizing that 4% vs 5% is a large difference.


Maybe it's actually 4.48%, which would be about 1 in 22, and they rounded in opposite directions.


Indeed, 4.5% would be 5% when rounded in decimal, but it's 1 in 22.222 in fractional, so 1 in 20 and 5% both are valid choices with normal rounding.


For a company of 70,000 people, 4% leaving is 2,800 people and 5% would be 3,500.


I might be missing something, but what's the difference between those two statements?

I suppose that given the first sentence, you could argue that the number of would-be quitters would be different if they learned their coworkers earned more money through means other than transparency laws, but I'm guessing that's not what you're alluding to.


4% is 1 in 25, not 1 in 20 (which would be 5%, or a full 25% more than 4%).




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: