> The OP did not care about these distinctions. If a CEO fires people, he should get a pay cut. If the CEO fires more than 5% of the people. If a business need

> The OP did not care about these distinctions. If a CEO fires people, he should get a pay cut. If the CEO fires more than 5% of the people. If a business needs to move some people around or eliminate a handful of jobs sometimes, it's no big deal. Beyond a certain threshold, it becomes a big deal. It means the company has missed the boat on something, or the economy has turned, or something else equally bad. Whatever the reason, it means the company needs to reduce expenses and everyone who is still at the company needs to work harder, with redoubled vigor, so that the company can get back on track. This is exactly the worst time to give the CEO outsize rewards both financially, and due to what it does to everyone else's morale. Instead freeze all C-suite pay increases, eliminate their bonus, no new stock grants, and no selling stock they already own for at least a year. If their efforts work out that stock will be worth even more later. If they don't, can they argue that it was unfair?