Should CEOs earn as much as they do?

Post Reply New Topic

I don't.


CEO's are not more important than any other employee of a company. A company's success is in its products, employees, and customers. All of those factors contribute to a company's success. A company is suppose to benefit society. It's suppose to sell good products for the well being of society. Alot of the companies that offer bad services and products are rewarding executives bonuses after they do not deserve it. People say that CEOs get paid money because of excessive capital that their companies receive. Everyone who is part of a company is responsible for its success. CEOs are not anymore important than other factors of a company.

I believe that a company should make sure that its customers are 100% satisfied with its goods/services before it rewards its executives. I also believe that it should make sure its workforce is in good health. By doing that, society as a whole will prosper.

I think they should be paid minimum wage, basic health insurance and the same stuff the average worker has, no perks, no office, and only if your company is actaully doing well (Google) then you can justify your million dollar paychecks.

Pay on performance, not on reputation.


M.

any employee should be paid whatever he or she can negotiate as long as the company can afford it. if i were negotiating for a ceo position i would try to get the highest possible salary with the fewest possible responsibilities and a large severence package at the end of the contract - larger still if i am fired.

any ceo search committe worth its own pay would see that as a plan for corporate disaster. failure to do so says a lot about the people that screen and hire their ceo's.

Which is why, given those criteria and priorities, I would never hire such a person to run my company. You're right, in that it is incumbent upon those hiring to do a better job... however, when a system is left open to abuse, and the nature of fear is utilized, then there will be those who take and take and take.


M.

How is it decided how much a person doing a job ought to get paid?

That's a question, there... and I have no good answer, save that I find the practice of gross indulgence to be rather disgusting. Greed is such a troublesome and difficult trait.


M.

I doubt there even could be a way to determine objectively how much someone ought to be paid.

there is. it is called "whatever the traffic will bear." it involves negotiations between the potential employer and the potential employee.

unfortunately it is often tainted by putting too much emphasis on the old saying that "you get what you pay for." this means that some people believe that the ceo candidate asking for ten million usd per year is worth ten times as much as the ceo candidate asking only one million usd per year. even though both ceo candidates are the same age and have the same scholastic qualifications and similar career experiences.

That doesn't seem objective to me, though, since it is an agreement between the person paying and the person being paid (probably the two people least likely to be objective about it, since they both have a huge interest in the sum).

Forgive me if I've misunderstood what the term means, because I only just did a search on the internet for a definition as I hadn't heard of it before.

you got it right.

objectivity involves an external standard whether or not anyone agrees with it.

subjectivity involves mutual agreement with or without an external standard.

my bad.