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

601–610 of 611 posts

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

#601

Post by ajross »

Alupis wrote: post #140
ajross wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone thinking a C-Suiter clocks out at 5pm and doesn't work after hours has no experience in the C-Suite That's not the standard, though. The criteria is cost above replacement, and quite frankly modern executives show up extremely mediocre on that measure. Companies flip executives all the time, and it almost never results in significant changes to revenue (and when it does, it's down as often as up). In fact th…

Flipped on it's head - 2 thoughts: 1) You cite cost of replacement - yet these companies are unable to replace their C-Suite with anyone costing less. Therefore, they can command the compensation levels they do (not to mention compensation != in pocket pay). 2) UAW employees are indeed readily replicable with little or no training on average. Offshoring is very realistic, and there is no shortage of high-school educa…

Yes, exactly. You can flip the argument on its head and it works symmetrically. So why was it OK for executives to get huge salary increases over the last decade but not workers, since it's based on the same moral ("fairness") calculus?

It's not. The moral ground has been ceded. Now it's just about "I got mine".

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

#602

Post by hellojesus »

hellojesus wrote: post #584
ipaddr wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public union leadership is determined by a member vote. Union leadership represents the worker. The external accountability comes from you regardless if your elected official is dealing with a union or a private company

> Public union leadership is determined by a member vote. Correct. But unlike private businesses, I can not vote by taking my business elsewhere. > The external accountability comes from you... Sure. It does via voting. Fair point. > regardless if your elected official is dealing with a union or a private company These are two separate things. The gov only affects private companies by regulating. It cannot negotiate…

This is a good listen as to the problem with public unions:

https://youtu.be/6PI_EldBehU

1. The gov doesn't haven't to turn a profit, so there is no alternative if prices are driven too high by union negotiations.

2. The union members get to vote on both sides of the table: both for their union wages and for the elected "neutral" party, that is obviously not so neutral.

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

#603

Post by nataliste »

abeppu wrote: post #588
nataliste wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The paradox of worker-coops is that workers capable of successfully running businesses together are also capable of running businesses independently, so why create more failure points?

I don't think it's a given that what a group can do, the constituent individuals can do? You probably need a team to build and ship a meaningful product regardless of the type of organization that develops it. It's a little weird that tech-folk are generally ok with the idea that groups can yield good predictions in the context of a non-owner community that is harnessed to improve a product, or in the context of a pr…

I'm not a tech worker. I'm someone that spent eight years working in cooperative ventures. Regardless of venture, the Pareto members (i.e. the 20% of people that did 80% of the meaningful business logic) were consistently outvoted by the majority that were not willing to vote the sacrifices necessary for the business to continue. In addition, they'd frequently vote on the basis of individual member's popularity to the extent that they'd vote to retain members that were a net revenue loss. This isn't a dynamic unique to worker cooperatives (democracy in general falls prey to this), but it is one that co-ops amplify. If you have only pro social and competent members, it doesn't really matter what the system is, but if you don't, structuring cooperatively is rife with pitfalls that conventional structuring avoids or at least allows mitigation.

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

#604

Post by skyyler »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #593
skyyler wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you come to that conclusion? The cleanliness of an office space is a gigantic force multiplier for productivity. I wouldn't be surprised if janitors had a bigger impact.

value is about opportunity cost. If anyone off the street could replace you your value is the lowest amount a competent person would demand on the market.

Do you really think anyone off the street could be a top-performing janitor?

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

#605

Post by hollerith »

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 board and the investors don't want just any MBA to be their CEO: they want a person with a record of success in leading organizations (or at least collaborating closely with such a leader).

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

#606

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

smugma wrote: post #529
IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defined benefit plans?? The only defined benefit plan left is social security , which is fast going into insolvency in exactly a decade, and where it will automatically be cut 25% once that happens!

“contrary to a common misunderstanding. In 2035, if nothing else is done, the program could pay 80 percent of scheduled benefits, mostly out of workers’ ongoing contributions, a figure that would slip to 74 percent in 2096” https://www.cbpp.org/blog/social-security-is-not-bankrupt

actually, you are not correct either.

The exact figure is 77.5%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States...

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

#607

Post by daddylongstroke »

orange_joe wrote: post #397
ummonk wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would workers in the global south feel any solidarity towards workers in the wealthiest country on earth who earn global top 5% wages?

well, the unions pushed for wage requirements in the auto industry within the USMCA (NAFTA2) and required Mexico to (effective) legalize unions alongside lots of other rights enshrining measures. So Mexican workers benefited greatly from the work of these unions.

Other than the 10 million+ of Mexican farmers impacted.

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

#608

Post by vel0city »

astrange wrote: post #574
ramranch wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't spend a percentage, you spend a fixed amount. $1.5 million is enough to live in a nice house, eat what you want, send your kids to nice schools, Aruba in the summer and Aspen in the winter, and still have enough to buy a very fast car. It's easier to focus on EV once you live this life.

Everyone read that as $1.5 million in salary but I didn't mean to say he got that every year. He got it once.

So? It's still more than most families will make in a decade. How many years was that $1.5M compensation for? What other compensation did he get?

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

#609

Post by throwaway14356 »

nataliste wrote: post #535
abeppu wrote: post #183

Just to point out a demonstrated, viable, successful reality achieved under different values and assumptions, the Mondragon Corporation/cooperative produces car parts, among many other things, and has pre-agreed ratios for wages for executives relative to the lowest wages paid to workers, and this tops out at 9:1. Studies have found that worker-owned coops have a greater survival rate than conventional businesses, an…

The paradox of worker-coops is that workers capable of successfully running businesses together are also capable of running businesses independently, so why create more failure points?

economy of scale doesn't seem paradoxical?

There is also the thrill of making something happen together. Like barn raising with 200 people is quite different from building a shed alone.

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

#610

Post by throwaway14356 »

nataliste wrote: post #583
r00fus wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment seems ignorant of basic economics - you might as well ask why mergers/acquisitions happen at all.

Corporations under a board and a CEO staffed by hired labor have very little in common with worker-co-ops and workplace democracy. My point is that a person competent enough to successfully run a business will almost certainly do so solo. The value-add of worker co-ops is moot if you already have the knowledge and capacity to run and staff a business, whereas the drawbacks and risk are monumental. I've been in and st…

people are more annoying than anyone. you need a good set of rules for the game.

My funniest attempt involved 2 friends of mine who are both in a league of their own in their field. both of them kept sticking their nose in what the other was doing endlessly moaning that it couldn't be done. Eventually they just got angry that some noob would question their expertise.

Post reply on HN