6 ms·

> This lay-off is not because of Covid or racism. It is because of the overwhelmingly awful executive leadership at Mozilla. Yeah! They are cutting out key tec

> This lay-off is not because of Covid or racism. It is because of the overwhelmingly awful executive leadership at Mozilla. Yeah! They are cutting out key technical employees while not cutting top-level exec salaries. https://twitter.com/lizardlucas42/status/1293232090985705478 https://twitter.com/lizardlucas42/status/1293232090985705478

DangerousPie 6y ago
I never really understand why people ask for things like this. Presumably Mozilla is paying these salaries because that's what they need to pay to hire good people at that level. Why would those people stay at Mozilla if they suddenly had their salary cut? They are probably already making less than they could make in a comparable position elsewhere.
- belorn 6y ago
  In comparison, how much are eff paying Cindy Cohn to be CEO?
  - morelisp 6y ago
    If I read the 990 right, 257500. This is 2x the lowest officer salary and 30% higher than the second-highest. By comparison Mitchell is 8x the second-highest officer and 17x the lowest. There may be more comparable salaries at MoCo, but those are not on the 990s.
- dtech 6y ago
  Because people feel like C-level compensation is way too high, and people feel this is disconnected from actual performance. C-level compensation has risen way, way faster in the last decades than general employee compensation [1]. It doesn't change because upper management is all in the "cult", and there's no incentive to lower salaries. If all programmers (or any other profession) were in charge of their own salaries, I'd suspect something similar happening with people rewarding each other more and more compensation while pointing at other companies to justify it. [1] https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-2018/ https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-2018/
  - DangerousPie 6y ago
    I can see how one can argue that C-level compensation is too high (although there are also good arguments against that) but surely you can't expect Mozilla to solve this problem by themselves? If Mozilla cuts C-level salaries while the rest of the industry doesn't then why would any of them keep working for Mozilla?
    - dtech 6y ago
      This is a crap argument. Every company/NGO can use that and it doesn't solve the problem. Mozilla as a self-proclaimed altruistic ideologically-driven org should lead by example. If the current CEO, whom from the outside is not doing a great job, is not willing to. You find a different CEO. I am not convinced that no one wants to do the job for $500k instead of $2.5m. Whether that person would be good/bad/worse is pure speculation, but it's not like organizations are taking the chance.
      - mgkimsal 6y ago
        "Whether that person would be good/bad/worse is pure speculation" they'd probably have to have at least a negative $2m impact before it mattered right? revenue on its own may not even be the best measure, if the revenue comes via methods that conflict with the larger ideology. I don't know if Mozilla has that conflict with itself or not. Your point is accurate though, and I've held the same views for a while now. This sort of thinking would seem to dictate that the next Mozilla CEO will need to come in at around $2.5m - that's been defined as the floor now. Regardless of how well that person executes, they've got that base. And... you can't really judge them after 3 months. You'd need to give them a year to make a 'real' assessment... and you've just spent that money on someone, regardless of outcome.
LockAndLol 6y ago
An NGO has execs with salaries >1M??? How is that still an NGO?
- whiddershins 6y ago
  If you aren’t being sarcastic ... go research NGOs.
  - kindatrue 6y ago
    Fascinating stuff! https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/credit-cards/15-highet-paid-charity-ceos-12807750 https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/credit-cards/15-h...
- smsm42 6y ago
  NGO or non-profit doesn't mean they took a vow of poverty. It means the corporation does not distribute profits to shareholders (and may be exempt of some income taxes). It still can be loaded with money, and many NGOs are.
devy 6y ago
The current CEO of Mozilla Corporation and Chairwoman of Mozilla Foundation (the parent organization of Mozilla Corporation) earned a total compensation of $2,458,350 [1] on a $436 million company revenue on 2018, or half a percent of the company's revenue. I can't find 2019 stats, but on a company that's not doing well, CEO's comp seems high. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Baker#cite_note-14 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Baker#cite_note-14
- endemic 6y ago
  I can't think of a good reason why Mitchell Baker should keep her job. I'm fine with competitive executive compensation, but what has she done other than lay off the people doing the work?
  - waheoo 6y ago
    How else do you justify their salary. Increasing revenue? please.
    - devy 6y ago
      > Increasing revenue? Yes. Mozilla Corporation, The wholly owned subsidiary of Non-profit Mozilla Foundation, is a for-profit organization and taxable entity. [1] For any for-profit organization, increasing profit is one of the major responsibility of the CEO. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
      - stingraycharles 6y ago
        I think the parent means that she failed at this. At the very least, her salary went up while Firefox market share went down.
        waheoo 6y ago
        No I meant that I order to justify her salary she needs to either increase profits or reduce costs. Looks like she went with reducing costs ...

DangerousPie 6y ago

I never really understand why people ask for things like this. Presumably Mozilla is paying these salaries because that's what they need to pay to hire good people at that level. Why would those people stay at Mozilla if they suddenly had their salary cut? They are probably already making less than they could make in a comparable position elsewhere.

belorn 6y ago
In comparison, how much are eff paying Cindy Cohn to be CEO?
- morelisp 6y ago
  If I read the 990 right, 257500. This is 2x the lowest officer salary and 30% higher than the second-highest. By comparison Mitchell is 8x the second-highest officer and 17x the lowest. There may be more comparable salaries at MoCo, but those are not on the 990s.
dtech 6y ago
Because people feel like C-level compensation is way too high, and people feel this is disconnected from actual performance. C-level compensation has risen way, way faster in the last decades than general employee compensation [1]. It doesn't change because upper management is all in the "cult", and there's no incentive to lower salaries. If all programmers (or any other profession) were in charge of their own salaries, I'd suspect something similar happening with people rewarding each other more and more compensation while pointing at other companies to justify it. [1] https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-2018/ https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-2018/
- DangerousPie 6y ago
  I can see how one can argue that C-level compensation is too high (although there are also good arguments against that) but surely you can't expect Mozilla to solve this problem by themselves? If Mozilla cuts C-level salaries while the rest of the industry doesn't then why would any of them keep working for Mozilla?
  - dtech 6y ago
    This is a crap argument. Every company/NGO can use that and it doesn't solve the problem. Mozilla as a self-proclaimed altruistic ideologically-driven org should lead by example. If the current CEO, whom from the outside is not doing a great job, is not willing to. You find a different CEO. I am not convinced that no one wants to do the job for $500k instead of $2.5m. Whether that person would be good/bad/worse is pure speculation, but it's not like organizations are taking the chance.
    - mgkimsal 6y ago
      "Whether that person would be good/bad/worse is pure speculation" they'd probably have to have at least a negative $2m impact before it mattered right? revenue on its own may not even be the best measure, if the revenue comes via methods that conflict with the larger ideology. I don't know if Mozilla has that conflict with itself or not. Your point is accurate though, and I've held the same views for a while now. This sort of thinking would seem to dictate that the next Mozilla CEO will need to come in at around $2.5m - that's been defined as the floor now. Regardless of how well that person executes, they've got that base. And... you can't really judge them after 3 months. You'd need to give them a year to make a 'real' assessment... and you've just spent that money on someone, regardless of outcome.

LockAndLol 6y ago

An NGO has execs with salaries >1M??? How is that still an NGO?

whiddershins 6y ago
If you aren’t being sarcastic ... go research NGOs.
- kindatrue 6y ago
  Fascinating stuff! https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/credit-cards/15-highet-paid-charity-ceos-12807750 https://www.thestreet.com/personal-finance/credit-cards/15-h...
smsm42 6y ago
NGO or non-profit doesn't mean they took a vow of poverty. It means the corporation does not distribute profits to shareholders (and may be exempt of some income taxes). It still can be loaded with money, and many NGOs are.

devy 6y ago

The current CEO of Mozilla Corporation and Chairwoman of Mozilla Foundation (the parent organization of Mozilla Corporation) earned a total compensation of $2,458,350 [1] on a $436 million company revenue on 2018, or half a percent of the company's revenue. I can't find 2019 stats, but on a company that's not doing well, CEO's comp seems high. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Baker#cite_note-14 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Baker#cite_note-14

endemic 6y ago
I can't think of a good reason why Mitchell Baker should keep her job. I'm fine with competitive executive compensation, but what has she done other than lay off the people doing the work?
- waheoo 6y ago
  How else do you justify their salary. Increasing revenue? please.
  - devy 6y ago
    > Increasing revenue? Yes. Mozilla Corporation, The wholly owned subsidiary of Non-profit Mozilla Foundation, is a for-profit organization and taxable entity. [1] For any for-profit organization, increasing profit is one of the major responsibility of the CEO. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
    - stingraycharles 6y ago
      I think the parent means that she failed at this. At the very least, her salary went up while Firefox market share went down.
      - waheoo 6y ago
        No I meant that I order to justify her salary she needs to either increase profits or reduce costs. Looks like she went with reducing costs ...