UAW Strike

[Spekulatius]

2 hours ago, stahleyp said:

Such BS. You could use that same argument for literally any job. The "theory" is probably championed by scammer CEO pay consultants.

 

The crazy high CEO pay actually hurts performance.

This is correct. You could use the same logic for a janitor job.

 

There are many issues. Studies have shown that high CEO pay is actually correlated with worse stock performance.

 

Second issue is that boards are not independent in that US and mostly run by the CEO and it’s the board who sets comps, so essentially this becomes circular.

 

In my opinion, boards should be indepedent.

[james22]

11 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

You could use the same logic for a janitor job.

 

No, you couldn't.

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, james22 said:

 

No, you couldn't.

 

 

Please expalin why not. 

[Viking]

When it comes to pay, you get what you are able to negotiate. If you have leverage, you earn more. If you have no leverage you earn less. From my perspective, there is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ amount. In a tighter labour market, like today, it makes sense labour has a little more leverage (in general) and therefore will attempt to extract more. No idea how it all plays out.

[james22]

1 hour ago, stahleyp said:

 

Please expalin why not. 

 

Because the organization has no one to underpay (to come out ahead) if they overpay the janitor.

[james22]

4 hours ago, stahleyp said:

So...no evidence, I take it?

 

Are you arguing there is no such thing as Tournament Theory?

 

4 hours ago, stahleyp said:

You could still pay the CEO far less and the other executives would make less still. Were there no CEOs when executive pay was 20x the average employee? Did they work less hard?

 

Are you arguing organizations don't compete with others for top talent?

[Guest]

11 hours ago, james22 said:

 

Are you arguing there is no such thing as Tournament Theory?

 

 

Are you arguing organizations don't compete with others for top talent?

 

There is a "flat earth theory". Should I believe that? Same evidence exists for both.

 

I think organizations kind of compete for top talent. They pay higher wages (far, far higher) than what is necessary. 

[Guest]

14 hours ago, james22 said:

 

Because the organization has no one to underpay (to come out ahead) if they overpay the janitor.

 

They can have junior janitors who make $30,000 a year and head janitor who make $200,000. Tournament theory in action! 

[Dinar]

What is so great about Mary Barra or the clowns running Ford, or United Airlines, or most large US companies?  L'Oreal has been crushing Estee Lauder while paying a fraction to top management, similarly Safran vs RTX, and the list goes on.  What is so great about Sundar Pinchai at Google?  Does Satya Nadella really deserve $200MM per annum or would he work less hard for $100MM per annum?  

[Castanza]

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/odd-lots/id1056200096?i=1000628747870
 

Very good episode