Just capping CEO pay as some percentage as the lowest paid employee at the company would solve some of this; which I think Sanders suggested before. I suppose it would have to extend to every “contractor,” and “gig worker” they use too. The “ranked” income suggestion could cause problems because it ignores supply/demand. I find “ranking” kind of dubious too, because some “unskilled” labor is much harder and undesirable for the worker to do than other work that requires degrees; so these workers should be paid more, IMO. I’m also fine with somewhat predictable inflation; prevents people from hoarding wealth.
SabinStargem@lemmy.today 3 days ago
That is why an ERK metric would have to be standardized: how many hours are spent on exertion, what environmental conditions that are involved with that career, the odds of dying horribly, how many years of education to be competent, and so forth. That is why I would consider Lumberjacks should have the highest pay grades - their job is not just requires physical effort, intelligent tree management, and so forth - they also tend to have the highest fatality rate among professions. Trees are unpredictable when they fall down, and a hardhat won’t prevent getting brained.
In any case, I think supply/demand being ignored would be a good thing. It is by manipulating that, companies can exploit their workers. We lose some of capitalism’s efficiency, but it feels like much of it is wasted already - just look at the paychecks of the wealthy. What I am proposing is replacing the distortion presented by excessive wealth and power, with another that balances the scales. What we lose in potential profit, we instead replace with certain stability.
I did write a bit on shares and stuff. Might reply later, right now I have chores and things to do.