‘No defensible argument’: Anger boils over at CEO pay
politico.com
The historic UAW strike puts an exclamation point on more than a decade of efforts by Washington lawmakers to narrow the pay gap between top executives and workers.
You are viewing a single comment
Jobs aren't paid based on how difficult or stressful they are
Well they're certainly not based on what value they bring, either, except maybe to themselves and the ever-useless shareholders.
If the people paying did not believe they were getting their money's worth, they would stop paying that much. The problem is, the ceiling is set by whoever can realistically pay the most.
My entire point is that CEOs are obviously overvalued, due to the ability of extremely large firms to pay exorbitant salaries via stock. This creates a negative ripple downstream that hurts a lot of smaller businesses.
No they wouldn't. They're the same people as get paid that much elsewhere. They have no incentive to lower the bar.
You're mixing up who is offering what
No, I'm not. Who do you imagine sets CEO pay?
Competing firms and to a lesser extent the CEOs themselves, all have input. It's a market.
It's nothing like a market. Who do you imagine the individuals are who set the CEOs pay, and how do you think their pay is decided?
Generally, but not always, the board will set a price range for CEOS. In smaller firms, the C-suite or President will, in some rarer cases the owner will have sole vote.
You seem to think CEOs dictate their own wages, which makes no sense. That's not how getting a job works.
Exactly
They're not incentivised to get the best value for money. They're setting the benchmarks by which their own pay is decided.
Is that why doctor are so under paid/s they aren't based on skill or education?
Doctors are highly paid because they are scarce. You'll note that surgeons in the UK, as an example, make about a third or less of what a US surgeon makes.
Our residency system, coincidentally, induces artificial scarcity of doctors