3 ms·

Is shouldering the burden of running the company really 312 times as stressful as the average worker's job though? https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/au

Is shouldering the burden of running the company really 312 times as stressful as the average worker's job though? https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/16/ceo-versus-worker-wage-american-companies-pay-gap-study-2018 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/16/ceo-versus-...

aantix 8y ago
Stress is part of the comp. What is needed in a restructuring - access to the right people with capital, long hours to get the deals done, offloading of dead inventory, answering to shareholders, nervous employees, continue making payroll. It's an outlier job. There's not an average employee that has that pedigree and access to take over the job. Nor would the average employee ever want the hours nor are they productive enough.
- lovich 8y ago
  > There's not an average employee that has that pedigree and access to take over the job. Either this is a tautology or citation needed here. So far the argument for this has been that they bring in the big bucks so of course they deserve high compensation. The empirical evidence so far is that they have the title so they get high compensation, and their performance has little to no affect on that compensation. Risk is normally commensurate with reward, thus if we are observing that there is little to no difference in reward, there must be no little to no risk. I would need to see concrete proof that an exec was worth this high pay beyond, "well what if they weren't there, maybe it would be worse!?!?" Before I believed the argument again
aantix 8y ago
Steve Easterbrook earns $21 million, the average worker just $7,000. But Steve Easterbrook's corporate and branding directives scale across the company and produce 2billion in profit. While local employees service just the customer. Paying someone $21 million that can decisions that result in 2 billion in profit is solid business.
- lovich 8y ago
  If you put a random person in his place at average employee price for that firm, would the difference in revenue make up for the difference in compensation? You don't know, so these Re all theoretical questions that's the executive class have decided need an concrete answer in the form of them getting paid tons while everyone else gets little to nothing. Argue thats how it should be, but don't try and tell me evidence supports it when the only support is conjecture

aantix 8y ago

Stress is part of the comp. What is needed in a restructuring - access to the right people with capital, long hours to get the deals done, offloading of dead inventory, answering to shareholders, nervous employees, continue making payroll. It's an outlier job. There's not an average employee that has that pedigree and access to take over the job. Nor would the average employee ever want the hours nor are they productive enough.

lovich 8y ago
> There's not an average employee that has that pedigree and access to take over the job. Either this is a tautology or citation needed here. So far the argument for this has been that they bring in the big bucks so of course they deserve high compensation. The empirical evidence so far is that they have the title so they get high compensation, and their performance has little to no affect on that compensation. Risk is normally commensurate with reward, thus if we are observing that there is little to no difference in reward, there must be no little to no risk. I would need to see concrete proof that an exec was worth this high pay beyond, "well what if they weren't there, maybe it would be worse!?!?" Before I believed the argument again

aantix 8y ago

Steve Easterbrook earns $21 million, the average worker just $7,000. But Steve Easterbrook's corporate and branding directives scale across the company and produce 2billion in profit. While local employees service just the customer. Paying someone $21 million that can decisions that result in 2 billion in profit is solid business.

lovich 8y ago
If you put a random person in his place at average employee price for that firm, would the difference in revenue make up for the difference in compensation? You don't know, so these Re all theoretical questions that's the executive class have decided need an concrete answer in the form of them getting paid tons while everyone else gets little to nothing. Argue thats how it should be, but don't try and tell me evidence supports it when the only support is conjecture