Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 611 posts

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#81

Post by skyyler »

cj wrote: post #44
tysam_and wrote: post #9

There is an equation with an equilibrium: CEO's pay rate = (some multiplier) * median salaried worker's pay rate OR CEO's pay rate = (some multiplier) * minimum salaried worker's pay rate We've been conditioned to think it's not fair somehow, but the discrepancy is just....engorgingly terrible. I'm not arguing for how this metric would be enforced, only that it would be a good one to have. Especially in a time when g…

IMO an equation like that would be fine as long as you made it possible for CEOs of larger companies to make more money than CEOs of small and medium sized companies. There’s a job market for C-Suite employees (whether we care to admit it or not). At a certain point you won’t get qualified candidates if you can’t reward them enough, same as engineers or any other role. The answer for how much CEOs should be paid is t…

Well that's simple, larger companies that want to pay their CEO more can pay their lowest paid employees more.

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#82

Post by mortureb »

vadym909 wrote: post #15
mortureb wrote: post #3

40%? I sincerely wish them the best of luck and I hope they get what is their due but this is probably good news for India, Mexico and China.

If it was that easy it would’ve happened already. And software engineers jobs would have moved first due to savings and low effort and low infrastructure changes required.

40% of IT work is already outsourced and that’s a number that is rapidly growing and that’s only over a decade and a half. It doesn’t even take into account foreign employees that now just work remotely.

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#83

Post by fallingfrog »

71a54xd wrote: post #37

This kind of logic doesn't help anyone - yes, CEO pay is insane but its that way because of how much risk they take ownership of and shoulder day in day out. If one line worker forgets to tie a wire-harness it's not like the entire company will end up in financial ruin... However, the CEO making serious mistakes can and has cost GM millions.

Yeah but these guys typically fail upwards such that they are immune to failure, and take almost no personal risk at all.

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#84

Post by astrange »

mortureb wrote: post #3

40%? I sincerely wish them the best of luck and I hope they get what is their due but this is probably good news for India, Mexico and China.

US market car manufacturing isn't in India/China because of NAFTA. And because cars are big and heavy, of course.

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#85

Post by yunohn »

71a54xd wrote: post #37

This kind of logic doesn't help anyone - yes, CEO pay is insane but its that way because of how much risk they take ownership of and shoulder day in day out. If one line worker forgets to tie a wire-harness it's not like the entire company will end up in financial ruin... However, the CEO making serious mistakes can and has cost GM millions.

> CEO making serious mistakes can and has cost GM millions

So despite GM paying the CEO millions, they couldn’t prevent him from making mistakes?

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#86

Post by nerdponx »

cj wrote: post #44
tysam_and wrote: post #9

There is an equation with an equilibrium: CEO's pay rate = (some multiplier) * median salaried worker's pay rate OR CEO's pay rate = (some multiplier) * minimum salaried worker's pay rate We've been conditioned to think it's not fair somehow, but the discrepancy is just....engorgingly terrible. I'm not arguing for how this metric would be enforced, only that it would be a good one to have. Especially in a time when g…

IMO an equation like that would be fine as long as you made it possible for CEOs of larger companies to make more money than CEOs of small and medium sized companies. There’s a job market for C-Suite employees (whether we care to admit it or not). At a certain point you won’t get qualified candidates if you can’t reward them enough, same as engineers or any other role. The answer for how much CEOs should be paid is t…

> The answer for how much CEOs should be paid is the amount of money you would need to pay to employ the most optimal person to run the company.

"Should" by what standard? Minimizing deadweight loss?

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#87

Post by aaomidi »

astrange wrote: post #38
econperplexed wrote: post #8

> From 1978 to 2021, CEO pay grew by 1,460%, adjusted for inflation, versus just 18.1% for the typical worker. Why has the supply of CEOs not kept up with the demand for them? Surely, with the improvement in education and in increase in MBA programs, there must be far more CEOs today than in 1978. Why has the ratio of CEOs to Companies fallen by 14x for their wages to rise this much? /s As many argue, wages are only…

It depends how they're counting. There was an example in Money Stuff this week where a CEO got a pay package "worth $110 million". It's actually made of stock options that vest if the share price went above $150, but the expected value was $110 million so that's what was reported. …But the share price only reached $66. So in fact he was paid zero, and he quit. (Well, $1.5 million in cash.) https://www.wsj.com/busines…

Right, but in general the CEO doesn’t really do much to the stock price. If the general market is up, it’s going up. If the market is down, it’s going down.

How many companies really break that relationship in their market sector?

So tldr, ceo pay is based on the economic cycle rather than how the company does.

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#88

Post by drt5b7j »

econperplexed wrote: post #8

> From 1978 to 2021, CEO pay grew by 1,460%, adjusted for inflation, versus just 18.1% for the typical worker. Why has the supply of CEOs not kept up with the demand for them? Surely, with the improvement in education and in increase in MBA programs, there must be far more CEOs today than in 1978. Why has the ratio of CEOs to Companies fallen by 14x for their wages to rise this much? /s As many argue, wages are only…

Because the number 1 quality that you want in a CEO is that he has experience being CEO, and there aren't that many openings for you to get in on it, and the ones that are are given to people who's been CEO before.

Obviously.

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#89

Post by lnxg33k1 »

hinkley wrote: post #58
astrange wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you underpay elected officials then 1. they just start taking bribes 2. only rich people will run in the election. This is why Singapore pays them even more than we do. Anyway, minimum wages (despite being ok policies) aren't what people are actually paid, and of course aren't especially what non-working people are paid. And remember that non-working people, namely children and the elderly, are poorer than workers…

THEY ALREADY DO Nobody said the multiple has to be 5. It could be whatever the current ratio for Singapore is.

I am always suprised at how people think that elected official then have to get bribes in order to survive like its a doctor prescription, and how it seems that when they do we can’t do anything about it ffs

Re: Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same rate their CEOs’ pay grew

#90

Post by astrange »

mschuster91 wrote: post #7
mortureb wrote: post #3

40%? I sincerely wish them the best of luck and I hope they get what is their due but this is probably good news for India, Mexico and China.

So what, nothing prohibits the US and Europe from raising tariffs on industrial products. The pendulum of globalization is bound to swing backwards for a multitude of reasons.

Tariffs, which are just a regressive tax increase on car consumers, are a very bad industrial policy. You want to do export promotion instead.
Post reply on HN