3 ms·

He paints the boss/owner as such a stress free and secure position. The reason an owner is entitled to higher pay is that they are also entitled to no pay or n

He paints the boss/owner as such a stress free and secure position. The reason an owner is entitled to higher pay is that they are also entitled to no pay or negative pay. My father in law is a partner in a law firm. For the past year he has made less money than his non-partner associates, working on half salary to compensate for a lack of revenue. The working drone is much more protected against speed bumps. A bad month generally won't result in a pay cut or layoffs for the bottom of the food chain. It does directly affect the business owners. That's the risk/reward payoff.

_delirium 16y ago
That's often not the case in larger businesses, though: if the business does well, the boss wins (bonuses, stock options); if it does badly, the boss also wins (eased out with a golden parachute). In that case the owner still shoulders the risk, but that owner (the stockholders) is too diffuse and hands-off to really be functioning as a boss, so the company is de-facto run by an executive management that gets a lot of pay while not shouldering much risk. I can see people getting a stuck-in-a-machine-with-a-stacked-deck feeling at a lot of large companies, because many sort of are giant, dysfunctional, bureaucratic machines. Coupled to that, many people see working for a large corporation as their only practical option.