6 ms·

It's not moral grandstanding. I don't think the exec team earns their keep. It would be one thing if they were leading a growing non profit (that owns a for pro

It's not moral grandstanding. I don't think the exec team earns their keep. It would be one thing if they were leading a growing non profit (that owns a for profit), but rather they're leading a quickly declining ship, all while their own salaries increase over time while they do a shitty job. The ceo of MSF, who imo does a great job, is paid 120k a year. Brian Chesky, AirBNB ceo, is paid $0 right now, because at least he can recognize how tone deaf talking about your companies financial struggles is whole you're still taking full comp.

true_religion 6y ago
AirBNB isn't even a public company yet. Brian Chesky is not merely the CEO of AirBnB, he is also the cofounder with a networth of 4.1 billion dollars. It is one thing for a literal billionaire, who owns the company to undergo 'hardship' in order to save the company they built over the past 10+ years. It is a whole other thing for a mere employee to sacrifice their salary during a company downturn. To do so is an act of pure charity---which while it may be inline with ethos of a non-profit worker, isn't something that we as total 3rd parties should expect. Mitchell Baker is just an "employee", despite her long years of service. She was even fired from Netscape during a round of layoffs, and served as a mere volunteer for years.
- kybernetikos 6y ago
  This is true, but on the other hand the justification for this compensation is that she is able to get much more elsewhere, so asking her to take less is a sacrifice. If that is true, then maybe she should go elsewhere rather than make the sacrifice. If it isn't true then maybe she is overpaid at present. Just because accepting the sacrifice might not make sense for the current ceo and family doesn't mean that asking for it doesn't make sense for mozilla.
  - true_religion 6y ago
    That’s just asking for Mozilla to fire her because the company did so poorly that other employees were laid off. I don’t really understand why we should do that... we aren’t stockholders in Mozilla, nor are we customers of them, or even employees. Why should we demand that anyone is fired?
    - feanaro 6y ago
      Are we forgetting that Mozilla was a non-profit and that the Corporation was spun off relatively recently to allegedly better support the non-profit's Foundation's mission? In the sense of that mission, all those interested in a decentralized, open web are stakeholders. If Mozilla is turning around to be a simple, ordinary business, that is quite the shark jump and will in turn lead to a large loss in advocacy. I have no interest in supporting a company just looking to make a quick buck if I'm not compensated.
      - notyourday 6y ago
        This is a rather typical structure of the non-profit world. Mozilla Corporation is a sub of Mozilla Foundation. Mozilla Foundation controls Mozilla Corporation shares. Mozilla Foundation should based on the bylaws of Mozilla Corporation either have the board fire the C suite or replace the board of the Mozilla Corporation with those that will fire the C suite. Mozilla Foundation is not doing that because it is not interested in changes. Running a large non-profit is a low effort, low risk, super lucrative job. The only way to affect Mozilla Corporation and Mozilla Foundation is for donors refuse to donate for Mozilla Foundation until it addresses the governance issues.
        phonon 6y ago
        >The only way to affect Mozilla Corporation and Mozilla Foundation is for donors refuse to donate for Mozilla Foundation until it addresses the governance issues. Un(?)fortunately, donations to the Mozilla Foundation are only a few million dollars a year--mostly because they don't do anything particularly interesting. (Seriously--look at https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/ https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/ )
    - Lev1a 6y ago
      Replacing the leadership of a failing company instead of firing the normal employees who had and have no influence on the decisions driving the companies would actually be a really good idea. Instead they fired a whole bunch of people to better their finances in the short-term while damning the company in the long-term. CEO what's-her-face and the other C-level parasites most likely are only trying to press as much money as they can from the company before either the company is completely run into the ground or they're fired. And fired they should be. WITHOUT golden parachutes.
- fauigerzigerk 6y ago
  What I would like to know is how much of Mozilla's executive pay is linked to performance and how that performance is measured. I don't think many would complain about their salaries if what they did actually worked. But Mozilla is being run into the ground before our eyes. If the availability of people with a non-profit ethos affects competitive pay for non-profits, then that should be taken into a account. Maybe such a person exists to lead Mozilla. But the primary goal should be to find someone who can turn the organisation around. I haven't seen anything that makes me believe that current management can do it.
  - sam_goody 6y ago
    I really think Brendan Eich would have done an excellent job had he been given a chance. After all, as much as there are complaints about Brave, he managed to make a legitimately well known contender from scratch in a world that already has seen many other browser attempts go nowhere (and of course, he in some form created and grew Firefox). Of course, "cancel culture" means you have to throw out someone from being CEO, even if that means the whole internet will suffer greatly, because he had a different opinion than whatever was woke. Which is a shame, because the net loss to everyone is much much much greater than the $1000 dollars he gave as a donation, even if it is acceptable to destroy someone's life because they have a opinion that disagrees with yours.
    - true_religion 6y ago
      What, Brendan Eich, did was comparable to opposing the fair housing act in 1966. At the time, he was a member of the majority vote, fighting to continue oppressing a minority group. While, he no doubt would find support, since he is part of the status quo, it’s still reasonable to protest his actions. I don’t think his life was destroyed. He remained a multimillionaire, and immediately founded another competing company. The people whose lives were destroyed were the millions who didn’t have basic marriage rights for decades, and who were systematically humiliated merely for openly being in love.
      - afiori 6y ago
CobrastanJorji 6y ago
Well sure, he owns a 15% share of a company whose current market cap is somewhere around $50 billion. IF, as CEO, he can raise the value of AirBNB by 1%, that's equivalent to a $75 million per year salary.
bjo590 6y ago
> The ceo of MSF, who imo does a great job, is paid 120k a year. I know a few organizations that might fall under that abbreviation. Can you be more specific?
- phonon 6y ago
  https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/2018%20Form%20990%20PUBLIC%20DISCLOSURE%20COPY.pdf https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/sites/default/files/20... page 7. $63,504 a year for a $400 million organization.
nandhinianand 6y ago
By MSF do you mean medicine sans frontiers(https://www.msf.org/ https://www.msf.org/) ??
- phonon 6y ago
  https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/2018%20Form%20990%20PUBLIC%20DISCLOSURE%20COPY.pdf https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/sites/default/files/20... page 7. $63,504 a year for a $400 million organization.

true_religion 6y ago

AirBNB isn't even a public company yet. Brian Chesky is not merely the CEO of AirBnB, he is also the cofounder with a networth of 4.1 billion dollars. It is one thing for a literal billionaire, who owns the company to undergo 'hardship' in order to save the company they built over the past 10+ years. It is a whole other thing for a mere employee to sacrifice their salary during a company downturn. To do so is an act of pure charity---which while it may be inline with ethos of a non-profit worker, isn't something that we as total 3rd parties should expect. Mitchell Baker is just an "employee", despite her long years of service. She was even fired from Netscape during a round of layoffs, and served as a mere volunteer for years.

kybernetikos 6y ago
This is true, but on the other hand the justification for this compensation is that she is able to get much more elsewhere, so asking her to take less is a sacrifice. If that is true, then maybe she should go elsewhere rather than make the sacrifice. If it isn't true then maybe she is overpaid at present. Just because accepting the sacrifice might not make sense for the current ceo and family doesn't mean that asking for it doesn't make sense for mozilla.
- true_religion 6y ago
  That’s just asking for Mozilla to fire her because the company did so poorly that other employees were laid off. I don’t really understand why we should do that... we aren’t stockholders in Mozilla, nor are we customers of them, or even employees. Why should we demand that anyone is fired?
  - feanaro 6y ago
    Are we forgetting that Mozilla was a non-profit and that the Corporation was spun off relatively recently to allegedly better support the non-profit's Foundation's mission? In the sense of that mission, all those interested in a decentralized, open web are stakeholders. If Mozilla is turning around to be a simple, ordinary business, that is quite the shark jump and will in turn lead to a large loss in advocacy. I have no interest in supporting a company just looking to make a quick buck if I'm not compensated.
    - notyourday 6y ago
      This is a rather typical structure of the non-profit world. Mozilla Corporation is a sub of Mozilla Foundation. Mozilla Foundation controls Mozilla Corporation shares. Mozilla Foundation should based on the bylaws of Mozilla Corporation either have the board fire the C suite or replace the board of the Mozilla Corporation with those that will fire the C suite. Mozilla Foundation is not doing that because it is not interested in changes. Running a large non-profit is a low effort, low risk, super lucrative job. The only way to affect Mozilla Corporation and Mozilla Foundation is for donors refuse to donate for Mozilla Foundation until it addresses the governance issues.
      - phonon 6y ago
        >The only way to affect Mozilla Corporation and Mozilla Foundation is for donors refuse to donate for Mozilla Foundation until it addresses the governance issues. Un(?)fortunately, donations to the Mozilla Foundation are only a few million dollars a year--mostly because they don't do anything particularly interesting. (Seriously--look at https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/ https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/ )
  - Lev1a 6y ago
    Replacing the leadership of a failing company instead of firing the normal employees who had and have no influence on the decisions driving the companies would actually be a really good idea. Instead they fired a whole bunch of people to better their finances in the short-term while damning the company in the long-term. CEO what's-her-face and the other C-level parasites most likely are only trying to press as much money as they can from the company before either the company is completely run into the ground or they're fired. And fired they should be. WITHOUT golden parachutes.
fauigerzigerk 6y ago
What I would like to know is how much of Mozilla's executive pay is linked to performance and how that performance is measured. I don't think many would complain about their salaries if what they did actually worked. But Mozilla is being run into the ground before our eyes. If the availability of people with a non-profit ethos affects competitive pay for non-profits, then that should be taken into a account. Maybe such a person exists to lead Mozilla. But the primary goal should be to find someone who can turn the organisation around. I haven't seen anything that makes me believe that current management can do it.
- sam_goody 6y ago
  I really think Brendan Eich would have done an excellent job had he been given a chance. After all, as much as there are complaints about Brave, he managed to make a legitimately well known contender from scratch in a world that already has seen many other browser attempts go nowhere (and of course, he in some form created and grew Firefox). Of course, "cancel culture" means you have to throw out someone from being CEO, even if that means the whole internet will suffer greatly, because he had a different opinion than whatever was woke. Which is a shame, because the net loss to everyone is much much much greater than the $1000 dollars he gave as a donation, even if it is acceptable to destroy someone's life because they have a opinion that disagrees with yours.
  - true_religion 6y ago
    What, Brendan Eich, did was comparable to opposing the fair housing act in 1966. At the time, he was a member of the majority vote, fighting to continue oppressing a minority group. While, he no doubt would find support, since he is part of the status quo, it’s still reasonable to protest his actions. I don’t think his life was destroyed. He remained a multimillionaire, and immediately founded another competing company. The people whose lives were destroyed were the millions who didn’t have basic marriage rights for decades, and who were systematically humiliated merely for openly being in love.
    - afiori 6y ago

CobrastanJorji 6y ago

Well sure, he owns a 15% share of a company whose current market cap is somewhere around $50 billion. IF, as CEO, he can raise the value of AirBNB by 1%, that's equivalent to a $75 million per year salary.

bjo590 6y ago

> The ceo of MSF, who imo does a great job, is paid 120k a year. I know a few organizations that might fall under that abbreviation. Can you be more specific?

phonon 6y ago
https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/2018%20Form%20990%20PUBLIC%20DISCLOSURE%20COPY.pdf https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/sites/default/files/20... page 7. $63,504 a year for a $400 million organization.

nandhinianand 6y ago

By MSF do you mean medicine sans frontiers(https://www.msf.org/ https://www.msf.org/) ??

phonon 6y ago
https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/2018%20Form%20990%20PUBLIC%20DISCLOSURE%20COPY.pdf https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/sites/default/files/20... page 7. $63,504 a year for a $400 million organization.