Scooby_Doo
Honorary Master
Why don't we just put a cap on everyone's salary.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: What is your non-negotiable item, device, or app for international travel?
Should CEO's salaries be capped?
- Thread starter MartinGB
- Start date
Pegging
Honorary Master
- Joined
- May 17, 2004
- Messages
- 26,665
- Reaction score
- 42,980
CEO to worker pay ratio in the U.S.| Statista
In 2024, it was estimated that the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio was about ***** in the United States.www.statista.com
In 1980 CEO compensation was 37 times worker pay, a good amount. One good CEO takes home 37 normal salaries. Today it sits at 398. At what point are we peasants and lords again out of curiousity. I don't care what people say, its broken, and wrong. If you own the company that is different. I am not talking about that. CEO's are just employees like the rest of us by how come they get to earn 400 times their average worker? Are CEO's today 10 times more productive than 1980's CEO's? I doubt it.
Do you want to pay Elon Musk 37 times the average salary to run Tesla, or would you rather pay one of the regular workers a "normal" salary to be CEO?
RedViking
Nord of the South
They should do it for free and only draw dividends.
Cius
Honorary Master
Elon Musk owns most of those companies. The fact that he is CEO is immaterial. I am talking as mentioned earlier about employee CEO's, not owner CEO's.
Stonemason
Expert Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,425
- Reaction score
- 1,593
A good CEO is very hard to find. A CEO that can consistently bring in good profits for a company is almost impossible to find. If the company does not pay them well he/she leaves for greener pastures and the company and all the workers at the company suffers for it.
Only a fool interferes in market forces or tries social engineering.
Only a fool interferes in market forces or tries social engineering.
homeboy
Expert Member
what about the people that help you get there. they don't need to get your salary give them a decent salary to make a living not the scraps you feed them.
Cius
Honorary Master
Lol, I used to believe this, then I saw how often CEO's take ridiculous pay packages even while running companies into the ground. CEO pay is seldom linked to performance anymore. Elon Musk is a big exception. He made most of his package link to share price performance and hit it out the park.
Stonemason
Expert Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,425
- Reaction score
- 1,593
If you make yourself indispensable at a company they will pay you well. If you just coast along they will do their very best to pay you as little as possible.
grok
Honorary Master
Politicians, union bosses and Eskom's salaries should be capped instead..
Stonemason
Expert Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2017
- Messages
- 1,425
- Reaction score
- 1,593
I think if you dig a little deeper you will find most of the 'excessive' part of their income is linked to performance.
Pak Fa Fui
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2021
- Messages
- 11,840
- Reaction score
- 5,314
Andre de Ruyter was only 7 million, most ceo salaries are under 20 million, the incentives and bonuses takes it close to the 50 million mark
Pegging
Honorary Master
- Joined
- May 17, 2004
- Messages
- 26,665
- Reaction score
- 42,980
Then those CEO’s you “saw” first hand won’t be around long nor will the company . The Board that appointed the ceo will find a replacement.
Thestealth
Expert Member
State owned/funded = capped. Private sector = let the workers and share holders give input (not necessarily decide)
dj_jyno
Executive Member
Shareholders
Mike Hoxbig
Honorary Master
The shareholder is the owner, the CEO is just another employee. It's an operational role tasked with realising the board's vision, whose role in turn is to deliver shareholder value.
For some garage operations, the shareholder, director and CEO are all the same person. This wouldn't apply to them, because even if their CEO salary is capped, their profits are not by virtue of being the shareholder...
They shouldn't be capped - they should be scaled based on the lowest 5% of employees' paycheques.
If you're paying workers R200 per day while making R1 billion profit, then your priorities are wrong.
I don't think everyone deserves to be paid amazingly. If you flunked out of high school and aren't providing value why should you get anything? But if you do your work, you should always be able to afford food and safe shelter. On the other end, if a CEO increases profits and, subsequently, creates employment opportunities and increases salaries, then they should be rewarded handsomely for it.
CEOs should be paid more, but only if they recognise that so should all of their company's employees. Employment > profit. Employees over automation and outsourcing.
If you're paying workers R200 per day while making R1 billion profit, then your priorities are wrong.
I don't think everyone deserves to be paid amazingly. If you flunked out of high school and aren't providing value why should you get anything? But if you do your work, you should always be able to afford food and safe shelter. On the other end, if a CEO increases profits and, subsequently, creates employment opportunities and increases salaries, then they should be rewarded handsomely for it.
CEOs should be paid more, but only if they recognise that so should all of their company's employees. Employment > profit. Employees over automation and outsourcing.
I often argue that the high CEO compensation accomplishes the opposite in many corporations. The CEO's get compensated so well for 2-3 years of service that many do not plan on being at the company for longer and thus are not as motivated to work towards long term goals.
This results in poor decisions for short term profitability to maximise bonusses in the 2-3 years that they intend to be with the company.
There are exceptions, but they seem to be fewer of late.
One example I can think of is a company that have had 4 CEO's in the last 5 years. They've all been compensated very well to go and "turn the ship around" or "because the company is less attractive than it's competitors".
These CEO's have sold off assets, deferred maintenance and replacement of machinery, kept old tech far too long and each just leaves a bigger hole for the next.
homeboy
Expert Member
not you never indispensable there is always someone to replace you. they might not do the job as good as you only to keep the boat floating.