No, the fear would be that employees look at someone with a 3x salary differently than they would if they didn't know what his salary was. It's just a distraction. I don't know how much my boss makes. It could be half what I make, it could be triple. I don't really care. If I found out suddenly that it's triple what I make, then maybe I'd look at him differently. Does he bring in 3x value to the company compared to me? Maybe in my opinion he doesn't--do I talk to the CEO to say "hey, we can replace this guy cheaply"? It just seems like pandora's box at that point.
Perhaps this is a good thing? One of the leading factors in wage disparity between men and women (other than outright sexism) is a difference in negotiating style. Men ask for more, more aggressively, and more often. If a female employee sees that her direct counterpart is making 15% more than her for some reason, perhaps this would cause her to ask for parity. Or, better yet, by making salaries a function rather than the outcome of a negotiation (as much as one can) perhaps the disparity never arises.
I had the same thought. I think approaches like this would go a long way to closing gender disparity gaps. The bottom line is that this is simply more information.
Another side benefit of this approach is recruiting. I've always felt that "salary negotiable depending on experience" is such a waste of ink. Being transparent let's individuals who have expectations way out of alignment opt-out entirely. Then you get a nice clean signal for when your pay is out of alignment with the market...good candidates don't apply.
I remember hearing about a Brazilian company where employees could pick their own salary, and everything was totally transparent. The catch, of course, is that you have to continue to show you're "worth" that salary. And if you don't hit deliverables, well, maybe your salary or expectations should change.
