4 ms·

Let's run the numbers again for a thought experiment: - $15600000 CEO compensation [0] - 69600 workers [1] - 1760 hours average per US worker per year [2] -

Let's run the numbers again for a thought experiment: - $15600000 CEO compensation [0] - 69600 workers [1] - 1760 hours average per US worker per year [2] - $20.12 hourly wage for the lowest paid John Deere employees $0.13/hour, 0.6%, or a bit over a dollar a day increase for the lowest paid group. That would be the increase if the JD CEO would work for $1, with all his previous pay evenly distributed to all employees. Not insignificant. Now let's have a slightly different thought experiment. What if the CEO pay is cut by 50%, and evenly distributed only to the bottom 10%? A $0.64/hour, 3.2% or $5.09/day increase. That would be a very significant number to all involved. I'm not saying this is what should happen or not. Just saying the number is significant. [0] https://eu.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/business/2021/10/31/john-deere-boosts-pay-retirement-benefits-new-offer-striking-uaw-labor-union-united-auto-workers/6225314001/ https://eu.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/business/2021/1... [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/278010/john-deere-number-of-employees-since-2002/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/278010/john-deere-number... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_annual_labor_hours https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_a...

oefrha 5y ago
Usually the lowest paid workers make up a significant percentage, not 10%, so raising pay for only 10% of workers doesn’t make sense. Of course you can run another experiment that distributes CEO salary to the lowest 0.1% and see an even more significant raise; that doesn’t mean anything.
robocat 5y ago
To add on your point, the people I know on low pay really care about what seems like a small pay rise e.g. $20 to $20.50. This makes sense because after living expenses a worker is left with say $40 discretionary money to spend, yet a $0.50 pay rise increases the worker’s discretionary spending by 50% (for this example). When you are financially struggling, a 10¢ raise (extra $4 for the week) can make a big difference. One of my friends worked 40 hours and had $20 to spend on herself after her bills (which were frugal, since she didn’t earn much). Low pay sucks when you earn a discretionary $0.50 for every hour of work.

oefrha 5y ago

Usually the lowest paid workers make up a significant percentage, not 10%, so raising pay for only 10% of workers doesn’t make sense. Of course you can run another experiment that distributes CEO salary to the lowest 0.1% and see an even more significant raise; that doesn’t mean anything.

robocat 5y ago

To add on your point, the people I know on low pay really care about what seems like a small pay rise e.g. $20 to $20.50. This makes sense because after living expenses a worker is left with say $40 discretionary money to spend, yet a $0.50 pay rise increases the worker’s discretionary spending by 50% (for this example). When you are financially struggling, a 10¢ raise (extra $4 for the week) can make a big difference. One of my friends worked 40 hours and had $20 to spend on herself after her bills (which were frugal, since she didn’t earn much). Low pay sucks when you earn a discretionary $0.50 for every hour of work.