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

Every company should be owned by its employees

elysian.press

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 1001 posts

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#41

Post by cess11 »

infotainment wrote: post #26
xmprt wrote: post #18

I think the most surprising thing about trends in modern executive class pay is just how steep it is compared to the median employee. It makes me wonder why shareholders outside the company are happy with it. For example, the Boeing CEO made 22M in 2022 and 32M in 2023. I'd argue that he did a much worse job in 2023 than in 2022 but somehow got paid almost 50% more. Even Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, is "only" being p…

It's so bizarre, considering that the modern CEO's only job is to issue meaningless positive statements to shareholders. If you look at many top CEOs resumes, they are almost always devoid of any real experience. People talk about replacing various jobs by AI, but I'm pretty sure an LLM could replace most CEOs and no one would notice.

It's someone who can take blame to protect branding and is easily replaced.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#42

Post by infotainment »

cess11 wrote: post #41
infotainment wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so bizarre, considering that the modern CEO's only job is to issue meaningless positive statements to shareholders. If you look at many top CEOs resumes, they are almost always devoid of any real experience. People talk about replacing various jobs by AI, but I'm pretty sure an LLM could replace most CEOs and no one would notice.

It's someone who can take blame to protect branding and is easily replaced.

Exactly; is someone who is essentially a replaceable scapegoat really worth millions per year in salary?

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#43

Post by b800h »

TomK32 wrote: post #30
oleg_antonyan wrote: post #3

It's insane how socialism is growing in the west after defeat of soviet union

The Soviet Union was just the same old russian feudalism with a new name tag and leadership. In a sense even modern-day russians are still not emancipated citizens like we are in the West.

Absolute rubbish.

This is a classic trope of the fully-brainwashed. The bread queues that resulted from collectivised agriculture that couldn't respond to market conditions had nothing to do with feudalism.

The mass-murder of the middle-classes in Cambodia had nothing to do with feudalism.

Communism is a brutal, oppressive system that has to erase individual liberty in order to force people to comply with its absurd, unfair rules. If it was so great, why didn't the Russians just vote it back in again?

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#44

Post by oneshtein »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #7
Murky3515 wrote: post #5

>Every year, those employees get a percentage of their salaries in company stock. Ok? Anybody can choose to do this if they work at a public company. But what happen if it's mandatory and the stock goes down? Now your labor was stolen at below market rate! Then we will hear "employees compensation should be resilient to market fluctuations."

People are lazy. You can always sell your grant as you get it, they can’t make holding stock mandatory, but a lot of people (including me) just hold the stock in a really undiversified portfolio.

This will tank price of shares.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#45

Post by _thisdot »

xmprt wrote: post #18

I think the most surprising thing about trends in modern executive class pay is just how steep it is compared to the median employee. It makes me wonder why shareholders outside the company are happy with it. For example, the Boeing CEO made 22M in 2022 and 32M in 2023. I'd argue that he did a much worse job in 2023 than in 2022 but somehow got paid almost 50% more. Even Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, is "only" being p…

Counter point. Most of salary is decided based on how much of a loss it would be if you left. A CEO leaving a company can immediately lead to serious consequences whereas an individual employee can leave and no one might bat an eye

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#46

Post by [deleted] »

cess11 wrote: post #41
infotainment wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so bizarre, considering that the modern CEO's only job is to issue meaningless positive statements to shareholders. If you look at many top CEOs resumes, they are almost always devoid of any real experience. People talk about replacing various jobs by AI, but I'm pretty sure an LLM could replace most CEOs and no one would notice.

It's someone who can take blame to protect branding and is easily replaced.

[deleted]

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#47

Post by creato »

xmprt wrote: post #18

I think the most surprising thing about trends in modern executive class pay is just how steep it is compared to the median employee. It makes me wonder why shareholders outside the company are happy with it. For example, the Boeing CEO made 22M in 2022 and 32M in 2023. I'd argue that he did a much worse job in 2023 than in 2022 but somehow got paid almost 50% more. Even Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, is "only" being p…

Hiring a Boeing CEO must be pretty hard right now because whoever takes the job is signing up for some miserable work (like testifying to a hostile congress and dealing with criminal liability on behalf of Boeing), and is likely to be blamed for decades of mismanagement coming to the surface now.

Said another way: I’d demand a lot more in compensation to be CEO of Boeing than NVIDIA (or any other role for that matter).

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#48

Post by timschmidt »

throwaway4pp24 wrote: post #25
sofixa wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're confusing some entities, often private equity or similar corporations buying assets, often to rent, sometimes just to park, being able to buy, and the general public being able to afford to buy. In many desirable metro areas, you need two high incomes (two people in tech or lawyers or finance) to be able to afford to buy anything. What about everyone else?

Why does everyone else need to live in a desirable metro area? That sounds infeasible with so few of them. If there was more desirable metro areas, the prices of those few wouldn't be so high.

> Why does everyone else need to live in a desirable metro area?

Jobs, mostly. Along with increased access to all the things people like, like food, other people, activities, etc.

Re: Every company should be owned by its employees

#49

Post by twelve40 »

teaearlgraycold wrote: post #34
talldatethrow wrote: post #8

The company I work for sucks. I rather take more cash and just by stocks in companies I believe in more.

Why not work for a company that sucks less?

That's beside the point: the idea of hedging your bets has its place. You already sink 8 hours every day into one company, it makes sense to invest parts or all your compensation into other things instead of dumping it all into the same company. Unless you are balls-to-the-wall bullish on this one business.
Post reply on HN