News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.4K     0 

I've long been in favour of a legislation limiting total compensation at the top being a multiplier of the compensation of the lowest paid employee. A 20:1 ratio sounds good. If the lowest paid employee makes $50,000 in total compensation, the top exec can make $1,000,000 in total compensation. If that CEO/Board wants more money or make the job more attractive when searching for new execs, there's a simple solution; boost every one else's pay too.
Hear hear! I've long said the same thing!
 
In many big companies, the pay grades now start at levels 4, 5, 6 etc. because all of the work they previously used to hire for at levels 1, 2 and 3 has been outsourced. Think janitorial, food service, routine clerical, mail room, etc. None of those people are employed in the business they're performing services for.
 
Aside from being completely irrelevant and incomparable, no one says CEOs should be removed for one-time payments to employees. Companies need CEOs, it's the pay disparity and "maximizing shareholder value trumps all"-mentality that's the problem.
I've seen that line of thinking several times on reddit and even in person with people I know.
 
I think what people are more upset about is the absurd disparity of pay between a CEO and regular employees. Moreover, CEO pay routinely gets ratcheted up, while worker pay is held flat or increased under the rate of inflation, causing real wage decreases.

That’s what’s driving those “fire the CEO” comments.
Ironically, a major driver of price inflation since 2022 has been the tight labour market and the resulting above inflation wage increases that have created excess demand.
 
Even easier loophole. They will just pay the CEO in stock options.

There a couple of jurisdictions that have outlawed stock options as compensation. I would tend to support this. Its not even a social equity argument. Its actually a shareholder's interest argument.

The value in stock options is the ability to buy shares at a set price, where that set price is below the market price. This comes with two serious issues for shareholders.

1) The incentive to the CEO to goose short-term earnings to inflate the stock price to exercise said options to greater personal gain, but at the expense of long-term company performance.

2) The exercise of options automatically carries a dilutive effect that lowers everyone else's share value.

Its a poorly thought out form of compensation.
 
Ironically, a major driver of price inflation since 2022 has been the tight labour market and the resulting above inflation wage increases that have created excess demand.
Presumably that will only get worse with the moves to reduce the number of people coming to the country that will work.
 
Hear hear! I've long said the same thing!
There a couple of jurisdictions that have outlawed stock options as compensation. I would tend to support this. Its not even a social equity argument. Its actually a shareholder's interest argument.

The value in stock options is the ability to buy shares at a set price, where that set price is below the market price. This comes with two serious issues for shareholders.

1) The incentive to the CEO to goose short-term earnings to inflate the stock price to exercise said options to greater personal gain, but at the expense of long-term company performance.

2) The exercise of options automatically carries a dilutive effect that lowers everyone else's share value.

Its a poorly thought out form of compensation.
are you aware of how private equity works? It’s literally in their best interests at times to basically tank the value of the company as long as sales or some other KPI is hit
 
are you aware of how private equity works? It’s literally in their best interests at times to basically tank the value of the company as long as sales or some other KPI is hit
You can dislike something even if you are aware of why it happens. But as felix123 has said, we should get back to the subject at hand.
 
That's alot of deficiencies.
1709853921228.png1709853938893.png
 
created excess demand
This is actually coming from wildly irresponsible monetary policy since 2010 and especially during covid.

Presumably that will only get worse with the moves to reduce the number of people coming to the country that will work.

The labour shortage is not real.


What they really mean is that there's a shortage of people who will work shit jobs for shit pay. Who would have thought?

The real shortage is in the STEM and other difficult, technical professions, because few people have the desire or ability to educate themselves to a point where they qualify for the high end jobs.

Everyone wants to be in the cushy, mushy middle office job class. Which is exactly where we have an oversupply of labour.
 
Last edited:
i can understand scattered sections here and there but to have it for this huge stretch is unacceptable. its not the first time theyve done paving and theyve had years to figure this out.
I know this is in regards to sidewalks but a massive amount of the actual needs to be fixed, the newly paved sections were done terribly, sunken sewers etc
 
It is and it isn't. They aren't tearing up every meter of sidewalk that they've installed. But they are (and have already) torn up and redone several sections of sidewalk - particularly at intersections.

In fact, most of the stretch is done now. There's only a couple more areas that they need to do before they can call it done and dusted.

Dan
 

Back
Top