Are you suggesting that this should have no influence on pay?
Danger money of sorts is paid to get people to do a job that involves greater risk - I brought this up as it was mentioned that the greater responsiblity and life in hands of a pilot was cited as a factor justifying higher pay by another poster. I am saying that all element of this has eroded.
I am simply saying that so many people want to do it that salary has eroded as a result - you cannot justify a higher salary if many people are willing to replace you for a lower one. Hence start a campaign to convince everyone that it is a rubbish job - my tongue in cheek suggestion from above.
lets say that you are earning 50K and all the beancounters bosses around the world decide that all beancounter salaries should be cut to 30K. What you say suggests that this is acceptable just because the entire market has allowed it even though your job has not in fact changed
Absolutely. Your example would be illegal employer collusion, but the principle of the market is the same. But if so many people wanted to do it that the salaries fell then yes. That's what happened when Andersen collapsed and the market was flooded with people looking for work. Life carried on even though market rates remained static or reduced for accountancy labour.