# CEO's pay -- 300 times regular folks'! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 23, 2015, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259 "2015-06-23T16:59:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Dibbs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dibbs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dibbs)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/121 "2015-06-25T05:07:20Z")
> [@handsomeharry](#): > > If you think that people who accepted jobs offered to them voluntarily by companies that thought that they were worth the 300X pay… are snakes and piglets, I don’t think that you are serious when you say that you have no problem with CEOs that create their own corporations. > One grassroots activity that can get a bigger share of the pie is called “making one’s self more valuable to the corporation.” > BTW, why should they get more of the ‘corporate’ pie? Why not more of the ‘mom and pop’ pie? > You want to make disposal of monies that you have neither earned nor created. What is wrong with \*this \*picture? Be a sport and elaborate on this: “I don’t think that you are serious when you say that you have no problem with CEOs that create their own corporations.” ---
**Author:** ![Dibbs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dibbs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dibbs)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/122 "2015-06-25T05:11:06Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > They and I and you deserve what people are willing to give us through voluntary, mutually beneficial transactions. Please explain. ---
**Author:** ![Dibbs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dibbs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dibbs)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/123 "2015-06-25T05:57:45Z")
> [@ssgenius](#): > > Dibbs has some good points. > > My experience with CEO’s is that they often look at the bottom line first but not entirely > > As he mentioned, the lady in charge of his ex-company looked at the balance sheet and said that these positions are eliminated including his own. > > A lot of CEO’s wrongly think that they are the most important person in their organization. No doubt that they are important but a lot of them let their ego guide their way. > > All that a CEO can do is to slowly guide an organization in the direction they want to go in. > > Think of a large ship. All that a CEO can do it slowly guide it where it needs to go. The actual work is done by the crew. > > Yes, the right CEO can do wonders for a company but the wrong CEO can be devastating. > > And yes Dibbs is correct in that having some connections can be helpful but if the CEO is not as good as expected, they will soon be pushed out. > > The few CEO’s that I have met are very nice in person and have a general understanding of how things work but do not know the specifics. > > Take Ford for an example, Do you think the CEO of Ford knows how the fuel mapping for the fuel injection is done specifically with different parameters. I doubt it. > > I would guess that the CEO of Ford would know that the fuel and air is controlled by a computer with various feedback loops to control the process it and goes through fuel injectors but he would not know the specifics of the programming as they are very complicated programs. > > Dibbs may be a little bitter but I guarantee that he would be one who would bend over backwards to help someone out if he could. > > The problem is that his skill set as a janitor is not highly valued in today’s society even though he may have a LOT more common sense than the typical business graduate. > > Not sure what his background is, but depending on his knowledge and with some help, he might be just as good of a CEO as the one who fired him. > > One thing that I have learned is that these people like Dibbs are often much in tune with the real world and have a world of life experience that some of these newer business graduates just do not have. > > The only thing is that Dibbs may come across as very blunt and probably is not exactly the most diplomatic in many situations. I thank you for your friendly comments about me as well as your insights into the issue. But I must say that I’m not a bitter person at all, though I do have some “righteous anger” about certain types of CEOs and how so many people seem to act like cattle and just go along with the madness without so much as a peep, even if it hurts their own kids.☹ Also, I’m not a pugnacious person as I think your last (well meaning) sentence seems to suggest. Just a simple old geezer that’s trying to make sense out of what’s going on in the world is about all. 🙂 Over the years I’ve listened on the radio to dudes like Michael Savage, Larry King, and Roy Masters and sorta like to think that my writing “voice” is a blend of those guys. (If only I were even half as smart as any 'em!:D) And so while it’s great fun and somewhat cathartic to take the gloves off … I try to be mindful of making it a point to not get too ugly about expressing my views (though the snake, piglet hyperbole may have been cutting it close:o). I remember back in the '80s Lee Iaacola (sp?) along with several other auto-maker CEOs went with POTUS to Japan to confront the Japanese about them supposedly doing shady things that resulted in them getting a very sizable share of the American market while American cars didn’t fair so well in the Japanese market. And so I had to laugh because the Japanese CEOs simply pointed out to them that, besides not selling cars in Japan with steering wheels on the right side, their product’s quality was poor due to them hogging so much dough that there wasn’t much left for R&D. Plus they pointed out the numbers relevant to pay discrepancy … which while wasn’t the 300 x that we’re talking about now, but was very substantial just the same. And so those big important American CEOs got back on the plane and had egg all over their faces after having “told off” their Japanese counterparts, and with the whole world watching!🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Dibbs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dibbs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dibbs)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/124 "2015-06-25T06:07:42Z")
> [@Isamu](#): > > [The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers, New Study Says](http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/06/16/the-highest-paid-ceos-are-the-worst-performers-new-study-says/) > > "The study also clearly shows that at the high end, the more CEOs were paid, the worse their companies did; it looked at the very top, the 5% of CEOs who were the highest paid, and found that their companies did 15% worse, on average, than their peers. > > How could this be? In a word, overconfidence. CEOs who get paid huge amounts tend to think less critically about their decisions. “They ignore dis-confirming information and just think that they’re right,” says Cooper. That tends to result in over-investing—investing too much and investing in bad projects that don’t yield positive returns for investors.” Wow! If that’s not the embalming fluid then what is! ---
**Author:** ![Dibbs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dibbs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dibbs)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 6:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/125 "2015-06-25T06:11:13Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > Well, and back atcha. 🙂 > > In any case, I think Ford is outside the modern mold of CEO and it would be hard to compare him to anyone in today’s “mercenary management” model. I can’t say I disagree.🆒 ---
**Author:** ![Isamu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/7c8e57/32.png) [@Isamu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isamu)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 6:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/126 "2015-06-25T06:56:23Z")
> [@Dibbs](#): > > Wow! If that’s not the embalming fluid then what is! Unfortunately, it’s unlikely to be the nail in anyone’s coffin. We evolved from ape-like societies with alpha males leading the group. Some part of us deep down still wants to let the ones who talk a big game and carry a big stick lead the way. If they fail, we can join together and mock them. But by and large they usually get something done, and call that a success. It’s probably hard NOT to make a profit of some kind when you have thousands of bright staff at your beck and call. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 8:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/127 "2015-06-25T08:39:19Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > FWIW, wealth inequality seems if not directly at least partly correlated with [worker unions](http://i.imgur.com/I6w8oBG.jpg). Unions did the old turn-of-the-century robber barons in. Flash forward to the 60s, between the Cold War and anti-Commie sentiment on one hand and (some) unions having turned massively crooked and being used as boogeymen, trust in unions among Americans waned progressively. Flash further forward to today, and thanks to sterling PR efforts on the part of the wealthy not only are blue/white collar workers barely unionized any more but half of them vote for union-busting governors and business deregulators. > Queue massive, unchecked greed because fuck you that’s why and whaddayagonna do about it, peon ? > > Well ? What ARE you gonna do about it ? Perhaps this is a key point. As recently as the early 1980’s union organization was a big thing. I’m out-of-touch now (except for political news, mainly from SDMB) but today’s lower-earning Americans seem more glum (“Would you like Vaseline with that?”) and happy to vote for anti-labor politicians as long as they get to keep their guns. > [@Isamu](#): > > [The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers, New Study Says](http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/06/16/the-highest-paid-ceos-are-the-worst-performers-new-study-says/) > > "The study also clearly shows that at the high end, the more CEOs were paid, the worse their companies did; it looked at the very top, the 5% of CEOs who were the highest paid, and found that their companies did 15% worse, on average, than their peers…” An interesting refutation for some of the simplism in the thread. OTOH, isn’t [Forbes.com](http://Forbes.com) some pinko rag? 😛 ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/128 "2015-06-25T13:46:01Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > So, you think lots of people, especially internal people, would turn down the job if it only paid $20 million. Sure… > If Satya increases shareholder value he is worth something. If he decreases shareholder value he is worth a lot less. That raises a good point though- it’s not the CEO really being greedy in many of these cases, it’s boards of directors either being stupid, or having motivations that we’re not aware of in paying these guys as much as they do. I mean, if you were negotiating for a good job, would you take 90k and no guaranteed severance if you thought you could negotiate for 130k AND a sweet guaranteed severance package? Of course not- you’d take the second deal. The other thing is that I suspect CEOs negotiate these severance packages into their employment contracts because they’re fundamentally being judged on things they have limited control over, like say… per-share price. By that, I mean that a CEO can make his company as profitable as possible, but if for some reason, that profitability doesn’t translate into higher stock prices or acceptably higher dividends, the CEO’s still on the hot seat. Or if he does everything absolutely right, and one of their primary suppliers or customers has a total meltdown and fucks up business for that quarter, the CEO’s still on the hot seat. I personally would HATE having my job performance being judged based on things I can’t really control and can only influence. I can totally see why a CEO might like insurance against that kind of caprice. Now that’s not to say that I think it’s necessarily right for a CEO to make a crazy salary and deliberately or unthinkingly screw his workers just to make a quick buck, but if the workers are competitively paid, and the company’s still solvent, then I don’t really care how much more the CEO makes. That’s between him(or her) and the board, and none of my business. (and FWIW, Dad worked for the water department, and Mom was a teacher. Both happily retired now.) ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/129 "2015-06-25T14:00:26Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > They and I and you deserve what people are willing to give us through voluntary, mutually beneficial transactions. > [@Dibbs](#): > > Please explain. I read, “We don’t need a lot of rules and regulations on the market and business practices because if anyone is mean or unfair no one will do business with them and that will solve the problem.” First Corollary: “If people continue to do business with someone, it must mean they are fair and honest and worth whatever it costs to do business with them.” Second Corollary, Uber Paragraph: “Anyone who wants to do business with the people better watch their effin’ Yelp ratings.” Maybe I misread. ---
**Author:** ![ssgenius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@ssgenius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ssgenius)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/130 "2015-06-25T15:23:12Z")
> [@Dibbs](#): > > I thank you for your friendly comments about me as well as your insights into the issue. But I must say that I’m not a bitter person at all, though I do have some “righteous anger” about certain types of CEOs and how so many people seem to act like cattle and just go along with the madness without so much as a peep, even if it hurts their own kids.☹ > > Also, I’m not a pugnacious person as I think your last (well meaning) sentence seems to suggest. Just a simple old geezer that’s trying to make sense out of what’s going on in the world is about all. 🙂 > > Over the years I’ve listened on the radio to dudes like Michael Savage, Larry King, and Roy Masters and sorta like to think that my writing “voice” is a blend of those guys. (If only I were even half as smart as any 'em!:D) And so while it’s great fun and somewhat cathartic to take the gloves off … I try to be mindful of making it a point to not get too ugly about expressing my views (though the snake, piglet hyperbole may have been cutting it close:o). > > I remember back in the '80s Lee Iaacola (sp?) along with several other auto-maker CEOs went with POTUS to Japan to confront the Japanese about them supposedly doing shady things that resulted in them getting a very sizable share of the American market while American cars didn’t fair so well in the Japanese market. > > And so I had to laugh because the Japanese CEOs simply pointed out to them that, besides not selling cars in Japan with steering wheels on the right side, their product’s quality was poor due to them hogging so much dough that there wasn’t much left for R&D. Plus they pointed out the numbers relevant to pay discrepancy … which while wasn’t the 300 x that we’re talking about now, but was very substantial just the same. > > And so those big important American CEOs got back on the plane and had egg all over their faces after having “told off” their Japanese counterparts, and with the whole world watching!🙂 Dibbs, Based on what you have written here, you are very blunt and to the point. In respect to automobiles The Japanese and US markets are very different. Japan built their cars for the Japanese Market initially and struggled in North America in the 70s initially until they learned about the North America market and built cars more suited to the North American Market. Did the US automakers make some automobiles that were poorly designed? Yes, certainly they did but they were not as bad as they were perceived and the Japanese were not as good as they were perceived in retrospect. Did the North American automakers revise how they built cars - after the 80s. certainly. But as you can see often the engineering people were sometimes overruled by the business development types and that resulted in several high profile recalls that did not help the US market. How much of this is the result of the high CEO pay, I don’t know. However, structurally, the US automakers had a top down structure whereas the Japanese automakers structured their companies a little differently Take a look at the surviving cars out there still running from the 80s, Not many Japanese nor American vehicles left of either vintage. Now go to the year 2015, I don’t see a huge difference in quality between the Japanese and the North American vehicles so yes the North American automakers have learned somewhat. It is also more complicated with certain trade barriers and shipping costs as well. Of course, you can pick out examples to make your case on way or another ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/131 "2015-06-25T16:30:57Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > I read, “We don’t need a lot of rules and regulations on the market and business practices because if anyone is mean or unfair no one will do business with them and that will solve the problem.” First Corollary: “If people continue to do business with someone, it must mean they are fair and honest and worth whatever it costs to do business with them.” Second Corollary, Uber Paragraph: “Anyone who wants to do business with the people better watch their effin’ Yelp ratings.” > > Maybe I misread. You know, that’s the big annoyance I have with the “invisible hands ! Invisible hands !” crowd. Because while Adam Smith’s theory is fine and all, people forget that the Wealth of Nations is his second book - and building on the first, which was a treaty on ethics and morals. His entire financial/economic theory is predicated on the notion that once Enlightenment and proper education set in, people would naturally become all nice and moral because that’s what made sense to him. And it doesn’t work with amoral or immoral actors, or uninformed ones - only positive moral ones who know each other, their reputations and business history. His idea was that, since morality produces the best result in the long term, any short-term shenanigan would self-correct, in due time, as people turned more and more moral and shunned the speculators, the finance sharks, the unfettered greed and so on. And that would happen any minute now therefore, hence the wise reader will disregard the rampant (and very destructive) speculation happening in France due to the recent deregulation of the grain market at the time of writing f’r’instance, 'cause that’s just a dying spasm of the Old World. Which, you know, haaaaahahahhahaha. Haha. Haaa :(. Which, in turn, means that the “invisible hands” theory is BS, since it is built on fundamentals that just ain’t so (or at least, have yet to happen). Sort of like communism. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/132 "2015-06-25T16:38:30Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Which, in turn, means that the “invisible hands” theory is BS, since it is built on fundamentals that just ain’t so (or at least, have yet to happen). Sort of like communism. All political, social and economic theories that require all players to abide by some arbitrary but unenforced and unenforceable rules are BS. You can devise any set of rules you like, and like any logical construction they will work perfectly as long as all players abide by not only them but by the unwritten rule that no one will find any way to work around them. But sooner or later, someone shows up with a three-foot bowling ball or spikes on their shoulder pads or a 36-man outfield. All socioeconomic systems have to withstand the spectrum of real people in the mix. Here’s a touchstone for such policies: If they make a behaviorist laugh, they’re not gonna work. ---
**Author:** ![Dibbs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dibbs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dibbs)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/133 "2015-06-25T16:38:34Z")
> [@ssgenius](#): > > Dibbs, > > Based on what you have written here, you are very blunt and to the point. > > In respect to automobiles > > The Japanese and US markets are very different. Japan built their cars for the Japanese Market initially and struggled in North America in the 70s initially until they > learned about the North America market and built cars more suited to the North American Market. > > Did the US automakers make some automobiles that were poorly designed? Yes, certainly they did but they were not as bad as they were perceived and the Japanese were not as good as they were perceived in retrospect. > > Did the North American automakers revise how they built cars - after the 80s. certainly. But as you can see often the engineering people were sometimes overruled by the business development types and that resulted in several high profile recalls that did not help the US market. > > How much of this is the result of the high CEO pay, I don’t know. However, structurally, the US automakers had a top down structure whereas the Japanese automakers structured their companies a little differently > > Take a look at the surviving cars out there still running from the 80s, Not many Japanese nor American vehicles left of either vintage. > > Now go to the year 2015, I don’t see a huge difference in quality between the Japanese and the North American vehicles so yes the North American automakers have learned somewhat. > > It is also more complicated with certain trade barriers and shipping costs as well. > > Of course, you can pick out examples to make your case on way or another I made mention of what happened back then mainly to underline the fact that this CEO greed thing has been going on for a very long time, and sadly it remains the “irresistible force versus the immovable object” to this day with the evil ones winning. And as I’ve said a dozen times in here, a sludge hammer needs to be taken to this whole idea that unproven CEOs that haven’t themselves created a thing are not the little demigods that they’d like us regular folks to think they are; we need to stop with the worship of these people and demand that they stop acting like pigs. Btw, the Chrysler CEO Iaacola back around that time was hailed by many in the media for being something of a Mother Teresa on account of him going public and saying during one of his years of tenure that he’d only accept $1 for his salary for one year. But what was left out was the fact that the guy that gave the world the K car (after successfully begging the government for a bailout) had for several years prior to his big act of generosity been paid many millions!! I’m telling you these CEOs need to be called out in a major way for all of their despicable shenanigans! ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/134 "2015-06-25T16:51:23Z")
> [@Dibbs](#): > > I made mention of what happened back then mainly to underline the fact that this CEO greed thing has been going on for a very long time, and sadly it remains the “irresistible force versus the immovable object” to this day with the evil ones winning. And as I’ve said a dozen times in here, a sludge hammer needs to be taken to this whole idea that unproven CEOs that haven’t themselves created a thing are not the little demigods that they’d like us regular folks to think they are; we need to stop with the worship of these people and demand that they stop acting like pigs. > > Btw, the Chrysler CEO Iaacola back around that time was hailed by many in the media for being something of a Mother Teresa on account of him going public and saying during one of his years of tenure that he’d only accept $1 for his salary for one year. > > But what was left out was the fact that the guy that gave the world the K car (after successfully begging the government for a bailout) had for several years prior to his big act of generosity been paid many millions!! > > I’m telling you these CEOs need to be called out in a major way for all of their despicable shenanigans! This is selectively looking at Iacocca. THe K car was already in development when he took over. He also brought back the convertible, created the minivan class, and made airbags standard. He took over a company that was hurting big time, and turned it around. Perfect? Not by any means. Judge him by the fact that Chrysler still exists, made it through two bankruptcies, and the stock is still worth something. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/135 "2015-06-25T16:55:59Z")
> [@ssgenius](#): > > Japan built their cars for the Japanese Market initially and struggled in North America in the 70s initially until they learned about the North America market and built cars more suited to the North American Market. Japan built heavy, clunky, primitive cars until the later 1970s because that’s the best they could do. The body sheetmetal on many, for example, was twice the thickness it should have been (even if durability was the aim) because that’s all Japanese steel mills could produce. Not that what you say is wrong, precisely, but the truth is a bit more subtle than “they changed to meet NA expectations.” It wasn’t in any way that they were building the great cars of later decades and 'Murricans somehow didn’t want them. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/136 "2015-06-25T17:00:23Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > This is selectively looking at Iacocca. Is it possible to look at any complex individual or situation any other way? Even Jesus said and did some highly questionable things, according to the novel. > [@](#): > > THe K car was already in development when he took over. He also brought back the convertible, created the minivan class, and made airbags standard. He took over a company that was hurting big time, and turned it around. Perfect? Not by any means. Judge him by the fact that Chrysler still exists, made it through two bankruptcies, and the stock is still worth something. Chrysler brought the minivan to the US market but did not invent it. The rest of the world basically invented every kind of small car and related innovation long before we stopped making fun of the Nash Metro and choosing our cars by extra inches. Airbags were coming no matter who took the first steps. And Chrysler just might have been worth propping up and saving - and I agree that it’s an economic win in many ways - because they were a major manufacturer of defense hardware like tanks. ---
**Author:** ![Dibbs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/da6949/32.png) [@Dibbs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dibbs)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/137 "2015-06-25T17:00:46Z")
> [@Isamu](#): > > Unfortunately, it’s unlikely to be the nail in anyone’s coffin. > > We evolved from ape-like societies with alpha males leading the group. Some part of us deep down still wants to let the ones who talk a big game and carry a big stick lead the way. If they fail, we can join together and mock them. But by and large they usually get something done, and call that a success. It’s probably hard NOT to make a profit of some kind when you have thousands of bright staff at your beck and call. When I was at the place where I’d worked for all those years, before the treacherous CEO arrived, us peons were getting mere crumbs from the corporate hogs at the top. But then someone very brave among us decided to form a protest group and when that happened the heretofore stellar public image that the company had been enjoying for so long (because they’d give out little $5,000 gifts here and there to the local university and charities and such) began to get tarnished, and it wasn’t long before the day came when we walked in one morning and were told that there was going to be a meeting and we all had to be there. We got like $3.00 more per-hour on our paychecks because of putting some feet to the fire and we were all VERY happy about it, save for those slime-bags in their $1,200 Italian suits that had for years been cheating us! I guess it has to be one coffin at a time … as regular folks slowly wake up to their exploitation and take the bull by the horns, as distasteful as it may be. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/138 "2015-06-25T17:00:50Z")
Here’s some more grist for the mill. > [@](#): > > **CEO pay at US’s largest companies up 54% since recovery began in 2009** > > According to the latest annual survey by the Economic Policy Institute, a progressive think tank, CEOs at the 350 largest companies in the country pocketed an average of $16.3m in compensation each last year. That’s up 3.9% from 2013, and a whopping gain of 54.3% since the recovery began in 2009. > > The average annual earnings of employees at those companies? Well, that was only $53,200. And in 2009, when the recovery began? Well, that was $53,200, too. In other words, while the CEOs have seen their compensation soar by 54%, the typical worker’s paycheck hasn’t budged. > > SOURCE: [CEO pay at US’s largest companies up 54% since recovery began in 2009 | Executive pay and bonuses | The Guardian](http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/25/ceo-pay-america-up-average-employees-salary-down) I submit that workers _deserve_ a piece of that action. So either reduce profits and pay workers more or reduce CEO pay and give workers a share of his/her salary (or both). ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/139 "2015-06-25T17:02:28Z")
> [@bump](#): > > That raises a good point though- it’s not the CEO really being greedy in many of these cases, it’s boards of directors either being stupid, or having motivations that we’re not aware of in paying these guys as much as they do. > > I mean, if you were negotiating for a good job, would you take 90k and no guaranteed severance if you thought you could negotiate for 130k AND a sweet guaranteed severance package? Of course not- you’d take the second deal. > > The other thing is that I suspect CEOs negotiate these severance packages into their employment contracts because they’re fundamentally being judged on things they have limited control over, like say… per-share price. By that, I mean that a CEO can make his company as profitable as possible, but if for some reason, that profitability doesn’t translate into higher stock prices or acceptably higher dividends, the CEO’s still on the hot seat. Or if he does everything absolutely right, and one of their primary suppliers or customers has a total meltdown and fucks up business for that quarter, the CEO’s still on the hot seat. > > I personally would HATE having my job performance being judged based on things I can’t really control and can only influence. I can totally see why a CEO might like insurance against that kind of caprice. A couple of things. A new CEO is more under control of a board, but after a while the CEO brings the board under his control. And there is the factor of cognitive dissonance, so the board will think the CEO they have just chosen is great until evidence to the contrary is overwhelming. Compensation committees especially can be manipulated. They probably don’t want to take the risk of pissing the CEO off and causing a crisis. It is also easy for them to game the decision by setting the formula for compensation. If you are the CEO of a mid-tier company, and convince the board to compare your salary and bonuses to CEOs of big companies, you will do well. Gretchen Morgensen just wrote how some companies used net income as a metric, but included large amounts paid out in stock benefits, which changed mediocre results if they were included to excellent results if they were not. Sure the CEO is not in total control, but who is. Few workers laid off because of bad results had anything to do with getting those bad results. The captain of a ship is responsible - they don’t get to say not my fault some sailor screwed up. A supplier had a screwup? Did they know far enough in advance? Did they have a second source? And of the CEO is not responsible for bad stuff, how can they expect to get credit for good stuff. A VP I once worked for said anyone can do well in an upturn - the sign of a good manager is how you do in a downturn. SarbOx was all about not letting CEOs say “I didn’t know what was happening, don’t blame me that the company imploded.” I’ve worked for companies where stock options were given out to almost everyone, so the CEO, a founder, while very rich, was still worked liked. I’ve worked for companies that were very stingy so that the CEO, a founder and even richer, was not particularly well liked. The former company was better to work out. In the latter company people not getting the benefit of success tend to slack off. That’s how this stuff affects everyone. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2015, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259/140 "2015-06-25T17:12:06Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I submit that workers _deserve_ a piece of that action. So either reduce profits and pay workers more or reduce CEO pay and give workers a share of his/her salary (or both). I would not disagree, in principle. I would also not say that most companies could stand some objective adjustments to their pay structure and policies. But this is an area where “market forces” do have a strong hand, and while grossly overpaying one guy might be faulty thinking, so is overpaying every mope who can barely punch his time card. And most companies have a lot of clock-watching, corner-cutting, can’t-make-me mopes. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ceos-pay-300-times-regular-folks/723259.md?page=8)