3 ms·

> Overpaid executives failed Their failure has already dropped a huge amount of their stock-based compensation. Their base salary shouldn't be determined by th

by chii 4y ago

> Overpaid executives failed Their failure has already dropped a huge amount of their stock-based compensation. Their base salary shouldn't be determined by the company's failure (only their _future_ salary). What if you applied this to a worker instead of a CxO? Would you yourself take a pay-cut, after the fact, if the company fails to perform?

bsuvc 4y ago
> What if you applied this to a worker instead of a CxO? Would you yourself take a pay-cut, after the fact, if the company fails to perform? Yes. Yes I would take the CEO's total compensation package. I am skeptical that the CEO is worse off than any employee.
- chii 4y ago
  > Yes. Yes I would take the CEO's total compensation package. As in you would accept, without knowing ahead of time, a cut to your salary when the company's performance drops? I'm not talking about performance based bonuses or commission based pay. I'm talking about a salary that was pre-negotiated at the time of your employment, but upon the company performing badly, your salary is dropped. This is what the OP is saying - that high CxO pay is the problem, and that they should have been paid less (after the company's performance dropped).
chillfox 4y ago
Employees are already paying for the failure by getting laid off. That's a 100% pay cut, the Executives who caused the fuck up still get paid.
LeafItAlone 4y ago
Plenty of ordinary sales people are 100% commission based. Plenty of CEOs already do (or did during their tenure) take no material base salary and their compensation is tied entirely to the performance of the company. Is that not reasonable for large, profitable businesses. It has its own issues, but what compensation plan doesn’t?
- chii 4y ago
  > Plenty of ordinary sales people are 100% commission based. that's not what i meant. The question is whether you would take a pay cut _after_ the company performed poorly, but you didn't know ahead of time that it would cut your pay. Performance based bonuses or commission is obviously pre-negotiated and thus, not subject to post-fact alteration.

by chii 4y ago

bsuvc 4y ago

> What if you applied this to a worker instead of a CxO? Would you yourself take a pay-cut, after the fact, if the company fails to perform? Yes. Yes I would take the CEO's total compensation package. I am skeptical that the CEO is worse off than any employee.

chii 4y ago
> Yes. Yes I would take the CEO's total compensation package. As in you would accept, without knowing ahead of time, a cut to your salary when the company's performance drops? I'm not talking about performance based bonuses or commission based pay. I'm talking about a salary that was pre-negotiated at the time of your employment, but upon the company performing badly, your salary is dropped. This is what the OP is saying - that high CxO pay is the problem, and that they should have been paid less (after the company's performance dropped).

chillfox 4y ago

Employees are already paying for the failure by getting laid off. That's a 100% pay cut, the Executives who caused the fuck up still get paid.

LeafItAlone 4y ago

Plenty of ordinary sales people are 100% commission based. Plenty of CEOs already do (or did during their tenure) take no material base salary and their compensation is tied entirely to the performance of the company. Is that not reasonable for large, profitable businesses. It has its own issues, but what compensation plan doesn’t?

chii 4y ago
> Plenty of ordinary sales people are 100% commission based. that's not what i meant. The question is whether you would take a pay cut _after_ the company performed poorly, but you didn't know ahead of time that it would cut your pay. Performance based bonuses or commission is obviously pre-negotiated and thus, not subject to post-fact alteration.