submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by [M] to c/news@lemmy.world
 

The historic UAW strike puts an exclamation point on more than a decade of efforts by Washington lawmakers to narrow the pay gap between top executives and workers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Jobs aren't paid based on how difficult or stressful they are

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 25 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    Retail in a nutshell. Get treated like shit but if you dare say something that could possibly be considered even mildly offensive, let alone stand up for yourself then you're the bad guy and get all the blame.

    So glad I got out of that, everyone should have to work retail for at least half a year to develop a bit of empathy. The bullshit you have to put up with on a near daily basis for poverty wages is fucking abysmal.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Well they're certainly not based on what value they bring, either, except maybe to themselves and the ever-useless shareholders.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    If the people paying did not believe they were getting their money's worth, they would stop paying that much. The problem is, the ceiling is set by whoever can realistically pay the most.

    My entire point is that CEOs are obviously overvalued, due to the ability of extremely large firms to pay exorbitant salaries via stock. This creates a negative ripple downstream that hurts a lot of smaller businesses.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If the people paying did not believe they were getting their money’s worth, they would stop paying that much.

    No they wouldn't. They're the same people as get paid that much elsewhere. They have no incentive to lower the bar.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    You're mixing up who is offering what

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    No, I'm not. Who do you imagine sets CEO pay?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Competing firms and to a lesser extent the CEOs themselves, all have input. It's a market.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It's nothing like a market. Who do you imagine the individuals are who set the CEOs pay, and how do you think their pay is decided?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Generally, but not always, the board will set a price range for CEOS. In smaller firms, the C-suite or President will, in some rarer cases the owner will have sole vote.

    You seem to think CEOs dictate their own wages, which makes no sense. That's not how getting a job works.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago

    Exactly

    Furthermore, the boards themselves typically include fellow C-Suite executives, leading to elite back-scratching as well as a never-ending upward spiral of executive compensation as companies compare their CEO salaries to others.

    They're not incentivised to get the best value for money. They're setting the benchmarks by which their own pay is decided.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Is that why doctor are so under paid/s they aren't based on skill or education?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago*

    Doctors are highly paid because they are scarce. You'll note that surgeons in the UK, as an example, make about a third or less of what a US surgeon makes.

    Our residency system, coincidentally, induces artificial scarcity of doctors

  • source
  • parent