There is a market reason for doing that. If not there competition would’ve hired the budget CEO.
Comment on Charities of Employees from "non-profit" I was going to donate too
madcaesar@lemmy.world 2 weeks agoI always hear this argument, and it seems like straight up CEO propaganda. I remember how failing businesses HAVE TO hire multi million dollar CEOs and fire employees becuase how else will they get good leadership!
Motherfucker, your previous CEO also had the same salary and sent you into bankruptcy.
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
madcaesar@lemmy.world 1 week ago
The the amount of work and responsibilities the presidency is actually waaay underpaid. CEOs on the other hand get paid like they run the world, while in reality they are just sucking dick.
Centaur@lemmy.world 1 week ago
In fact CEOs run the world. Think of Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Tesla… You name it.
oo1@lemmings.world 1 week ago
Thre must be an equivelent to “ate the onion” for “ate the Arrow-Debreu (1954)”
Carrolade@lemmy.world 1 week ago
No, a company definitely doesn’t have to pay their CEOs generously, and not all do. The median pay for a CEO is actually about 250k/yr.
www.bls.gov/oes/2023/may/oes111011.htm
Though if we just look at CEOs from S&P 500 companies, that jumps up to 16 million. There’s going to be a lot of factors involved, from the size of the company to the cost of living in the area. A CEO in San Francisco is probably going to make a lot more than one in Milwaukee.
It’s less propaganda and more just understanding how the capitalist system is intended to function. It applies to other jobs as well, a software engineer can make quite a wide range of pay, depending on who they work for. Then they can also get increased pay for advancing up the ranks of their organization, as promotions often involve raises.