4 ms·

Pay should be relative to your value to the company and the CEO is not providing said value. You are allowed to run a company that gasp drives down average CEO

• room500 6y ago
  I disagree. Pay should be relative to the market rate for their skills - capped at your value to the company. If a company needs to buy some widget - and this widget is worth $100 to the company - the company would be foolhardy to ignore the market and pay $100. Instead, the company should be looking at different suppliers and choosing one with the best quality, price, etc. If there is a lot of supply, it might be able to get the widget for $10. If the supply is limited, it might be forced to spend $90. In both cases though, the value to the company is $100. If this CEO is not performing adequately in his role, then he should be fired. Full stop. But bringing his pay into the picture (which isn't all that much higher than high-level employees at FAANG) is just trying to incite anger in the mob.
  • dingaling 6y ago
    If the widget provides $100 of value, just buy it for $100 and save all the manhours wasted in tendering. Tendering encourages reduction of quality in order to minimise cost. It wastes time, and time is money. And quite often it means that opportunities are lost whilst wading through tedious processes.