> There is a very real salary range between "low enough that I'll think about applying for other jobs" and "so low I'll actually start applying for jobs". Employers are aware of this and are paying salaries accordingly.
This is the difference between employers who play the game at a low level and employers who play the game at a high level. If you play at a low level, then you view your workers as interreplaceable cogs in the machine. You charge for soda at vending machines and balk at shelling out a few hundred bucks for a ping pong table. Sure, it's "expensive" when people leave, since their replacements are more expensive (not to mention ramp-up costs), but your perspective on your employees is how much they cost you to employ, so you try to keep that number as low as possible for as long as possible.
Higher-level players order dinner to the office every night because they understand that the price of food is so ridiculously cheap compared to the additional productivity that the only way it doesn't make sense is if you manage your employees by what they cost and not by the value of their employment. Higher level players grant their employees large raises without being asked because they understand that defensive raises prevent your employees from searching for new work in the first place. Higher level players understand that loyalty has value, trust has value, and tenure has value.
Are lower-level players rational? Sure. They're also either stupid, or of low enough relative productivity that the market will subsume them soon enough.
This is the difference between employers who play the game at a low level and employers who play the game at a high level. If you play at a low level, then you view your workers as interreplaceable cogs in the machine. You charge for soda at vending machines and balk at shelling out a few hundred bucks for a ping pong table. Sure, it's "expensive" when people leave, since their replacements are more expensive (not to mention ramp-up costs), but your perspective on your employees is how much they cost you to employ, so you try to keep that number as low as possible for as long as possible.
Higher-level players order dinner to the office every night because they understand that the price of food is so ridiculously cheap compared to the additional productivity that the only way it doesn't make sense is if you manage your employees by what they cost and not by the value of their employment. Higher level players grant their employees large raises without being asked because they understand that defensive raises prevent your employees from searching for new work in the first place. Higher level players understand that loyalty has value, trust has value, and tenure has value.
Are lower-level players rational? Sure. They're also either stupid, or of low enough relative productivity that the market will subsume them soon enough.