U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Independence Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 10:31 AM
 
2,012 posts, read 519,230 times
Reputation: 3226

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
Oh how I love the use of the term overpaid in an arms length transaction.
[...]
And of course, reducing executive pay would add up to a few lousy dollars for most employees if their pay was split. But yet, you’ve convinced yourself that their pay is your problem and not your lack of ability to provide value.
Well, two things here. A while back, I had a good friend who was one of the most thoroughly brilliant and insightful people I've ever known (MS from UCLA in a tough discipline)... and ran a wrecking yard. One day, one of his young employees started spouting off about how too many people were overpaid (for doing nothing, for doing useless things, because they were six feet tall, all the usual blather). My buddy slowly boxed him in until his position was that everyone who was paid more than him — as a wrecking yard parts monkey — was overpaid.

That said, the degree of pay differential has, in many companies, reached toxic levels. You can't pay someone on the C level 500 or 1,000 times more than the average worker and not have consequences. It's not about "distributing their income to everyone else" (well, it is, but that's not the point) — it's about a corporate structure that does not vastly overvalue executives, C-level and board members (may peace and blessings be upon their holy names) at the expense of using every method to hold down general payroll costs.

And that's what's become endemic. A spreading toxicity of attitude up and down the ranks, across companies and industries, that no one really matters except the suits, and everyone else is a replaceable drone. "Fordism" caused riots in the 1920s and 30s, and we didn't learn the lesson well enough to keep from doing it again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 10:39 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
3,898 posts, read 1,029,629 times
Reputation: 2332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
it's about a corporate structure that does not vastly overvalue executives, C-level and board members
'Overvalue' is your conclusion/judgement - and completely irrelevant in the midst of salary negotiation (and agreed upon) between two parties.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:45 AM
 
2,012 posts, read 519,230 times
Reputation: 3226
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy View Post
'Overvalue' is your conclusion/judgement - and completely irrelevant in the midst of salary negotiation (and agreed upon) between two parties.
Thanks for the Biz 101 readout. Very helpful. Of course, the textbooks were written by business, so...

Biz/management is second only to econ in making up its own self-derived, self-referencing, self-serving rules.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:49 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
3,898 posts, read 1,029,629 times
Reputation: 2332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
Thanks for the Biz 101 readout. Very helpful. Of course, the textbooks were written by business, so...
It's not 'Business 101'; it's common sense. Your opinion i.e. what a top-level executive is worth is irrelevant, unless you are the person negotiating the salary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:32 AM
 
3,567 posts, read 2,257,353 times
Reputation: 8044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
Well, two things here. A while back, I had a good friend who was one of the most thoroughly brilliant and insightful people I've ever known (MS from UCLA in a tough discipline)... and ran a wrecking yard. One day, one of his young employees started spouting off about how too many people were overpaid (for doing nothing, for doing useless things, because they were six feet tall, all the usual blather). My buddy slowly boxed him in until his position was that everyone who was paid more than him — as a wrecking yard parts monkey — was overpaid.

That said, the degree of pay differential has, in many companies, reached toxic levels. You can't pay someone on the C level 500 or 1,000 times more than the average worker and not have consequences. It's not about "distributing their income to everyone else" (well, it is, but that's not the point) — it's about a corporate structure that does not vastly overvalue executives, C-level and board members (may peace and blessings be upon their holy names) at the expense of using every method to hold down general payroll costs.

And that's what's become endemic. A spreading toxicity of attitude up and down the ranks, across companies and industries, that no one really matters except the suits, and everyone else is a replaceable drone. "Fordism" caused riots in the 1920s and 30s, and we didn't learn the lesson well enough to keep from doing it again.
Why do you think only the c suite is valued? I haven’t seen that in either Blue chip I’ve worked for. Many many many people make good money. Talent is identified and groomed for leadership roles. Succession plans are very common and take years to unfold. If I were to put my notice in tomorrow, they would throw the vault and or a promotion at me to stay.

I’m paid fair for my skill set. I don’t care what the executives make. It reeks of envy. It’s absolutely irrelevant to me what they make. Why the hell is there focus on what the ceo makes from some random idiot 65 levels down the chain? Maybe they should make about 1 of the 1000 improvements they could make to their skill set to make more money for themselves somewhere in the world.

I also don’t see why you think these same boards who will do “every” method to cut down cost, are somehow incapable of seeing that these ceos are overpaid. I think they’d notice the 500 to 1000x...”overpaid” people. Also, most corporate boards aren’t even paid that much, and they also have extremely hard to find skill sets and are approving high level decisions. That’s what it takes to buy talent. And guess what...ceo talent is rare. For every 500 or 1000 people, you’d maybe find 1 who is qualified, if not even less.

Working hard is a low level way of looking at value. A ceo may not work 500 times harder, but they absolutely can drive 500x the value of the rank and file.

Let’s say my vp provided guidance on a merger and saved 25 million. He called in from the golf course to give the idea. I’m grinding 60 hours in my cube. Which one of us provided more value? He did.

Last edited by Thatsright19; Yesterday at 11:43 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:40 AM
 
2,012 posts, read 519,230 times
Reputation: 3226
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy View Post
It's not 'Business 101'; it's common sense.
Witness is thanked and excused.

And reminded that any statement boiling down to "it's just common sense" really means "but that's the way I was indoctrinated to think!" Your username does not help your case, here, either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:42 AM
 
2,012 posts, read 519,230 times
Reputation: 3226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
Why do you think only the c suite is valued?
Because a pretty much endless stream of reports and analyses show a vast difference between C-level and even "valued" upper management and senior/skilled positions... never mind the drones.

Most company salary profiles have a tremendous spike at the right end, no matter how high the previous decile might be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:46 AM
 
3,567 posts, read 2,257,353 times
Reputation: 8044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
Because a pretty much endless stream of reports and analyses show a vast difference between C-level and even "valued" upper management and senior/skilled positions... never mind the drones.

Most company salary profiles have a tremendous spike at the right end, no matter how high the previous decile might be.

So you call them drones(your term), but you expect senior leadership to pay more for them? Why?

Why does the pay difference matter? If I’m making 200k as a director, and getting rsu’s, bonus, etc why do I care if the ceo makes 60 times me. Who cares?

If you’re making 10 bucks an hour, maybe you should set your sights on the assistant manager role or something else. Why the he’ll do you care what the global executive is doing? While you punch out at 5, they’re on their way to Singapore to handle an m&a deal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:49 AM
 
2,012 posts, read 519,230 times
Reputation: 3226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
So you call them drones(your term), but you expect senior leadership to pay more for them? Why?
Sigh. Not every answer has to pass textbook quality, IMVHO. Make it "everyone not in senior management and above."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:09 PM
 
3,567 posts, read 2,257,353 times
Reputation: 8044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therblig View Post
Thanks for the Biz 101 readout. Very helpful. Of course, the textbooks were written by business, so...

Biz/management is second only to econ in making up its own self-derived, self-referencing, self-serving rules.
The self serving is the people who can only see the transaction from one side. They want to boost everyone’s income but don’t realize there’s a cost on the other side.

Everyone, including you, tries to maximize the value they get for their money. You don’t pay more for services than you have to. If it costs $100 for your lawn care spray, you don’t kick in an extra $100 to make sure they feel warm and fuzzy. If your doctor charges $350 for the visit, you don’t pay $450. Do you tip beyond the 20% on a meal? Why not?

If the employer needs 100 people and 100 people show up every day making $10 an hour, why would they pay $17 an hour?

If your hair dresser went from $20, to $40, your answer would be no. So when random employee x wants a raise because...hey they want it...what do you think the answer is? No. Don’t like it? Prove me wrong and get it elsewhere. Or make me afraid enough as an employer that if you do walk out the door, it’s worse for me than if I convince you to stay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top