I see this theme a lot when this topic comes up, and I feel it misses the point.
Does the CEO provide 700x the value (based on $21.2M / 2000 hrs = $10600 "hourly rate") of a warehouse worker earning $15/hr? They absolutely provide critical input and decisions at the helm of a large ship, but if you break down their input versus the input of everyone under them...is it actually such a huge disparity of mental and physical effort to warrant a 700x difference in pay?
Secondly, if the company wasn't spending that much on CEO compensation, the money could go plenty of places beyond sprinkling pennies at warehouse workers. Infrastructure investment, product development, or other ways to grow the business. Employee wellness programs, crisis/hardship assistance, etc to support the workforce.
Looking at it as only CEO salary divided by employee count is a very limiting perspective that ignores a lot of potential ways that pile of money can be used besides making a very rich person a bit richer.
> I would be willing to bet the CEOs of these ultra-large, ultra-powerful tech firms provide far more than 700x the value of their average worker.
This assertion is amusing given this ultra-powerful tech firm has been systematically wasting resources to ensure their employees are both worked to death and not paid even a living wage.
Eh I'd bet you could train just about any worker to do the role of CEO because it's barely work at all. Source shovelling sand all day is 1000x more difficult than sitting in an air conditioned space hypothesizing about bs and making a bunch of decisions. Have done both. Running a company is in no way as difficult as being on the tools. Come do a days labour for me concreting and tell me your CEO works harder. Come do 13 hour shifts of a drill rig lifting 16 ton of steel by hand and tell me your job as a CEO is harder. Lol you'll die from exhaustion in one job and maybe get slightly disgruntled in the other.
I bet there are far more than 700 people that can do the warehouse worker's job for every 1 that both can and is qualified to do the CEO's job.
The point of that theme is primary to point out that the worker's wages aren't low because of the C-level pay. The worker's wages are low because almost anyone can do their job.
CEOs simply control more powerful tools so their output is multiplied. Someone driving a tractor might produce 400x the output of someone with hand tools, but its not because of the person, its the tool. Swap the two people and there will still be a 400x difference in output. It doesn't mean the tractor driver, or business leader is some sort of outlier genius.
Right. Just like the CEO, a fair amount of people could theoretically drive the tractor, but few have the experience. If you let the wrong person drive the tractor, they might just drive it right in to a river.
Eh your only focused on output from CEO end for estimates and your not doing it well. As mentioned by someone earlier I think the numbers were what 7000 years before a worker on 15 an hour doing 10 hours a day can equate to the 212 million pay packet mentioned? CEO wage is way out of proportion. The CEO doesn't provide 7000 years worth of min wage labor output over his 10 year pay package. Your cooked if you think it's even close.
CEOs can be replaced by algorithms largely. And society will be all the better once they are. Their job literally is just decision making based on input and output of information.
Does the CEO provide 700x the value (based on $21.2M / 2000 hrs = $10600 "hourly rate") of a warehouse worker earning $15/hr? They absolutely provide critical input and decisions at the helm of a large ship, but if you break down their input versus the input of everyone under them...is it actually such a huge disparity of mental and physical effort to warrant a 700x difference in pay?
Secondly, if the company wasn't spending that much on CEO compensation, the money could go plenty of places beyond sprinkling pennies at warehouse workers. Infrastructure investment, product development, or other ways to grow the business. Employee wellness programs, crisis/hardship assistance, etc to support the workforce.
Looking at it as only CEO salary divided by employee count is a very limiting perspective that ignores a lot of potential ways that pile of money can be used besides making a very rich person a bit richer.