this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
703 points (99.4% liked)

Work Reform

9976 readers
107 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

These companies paid their employees a median wage of $31,672 in 2022, while their CEOs took home an average $15.3m

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 134 points 1 year ago (4 children)

A good reason to have laws regulating the maximum pay gap between executive and the lowest paid peon. And make sure to include all types of pay like stock options so companies can't squirm out of it.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Why do we not have a maximum wage when we have a minimum wage?

[–] Steeve@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

Hey I said this like 6 years ago on Reddit and I got downvoted and called a fucking idiot lol

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm ok with this, but it's essentially just a step toward socialism which is the better option (but will never happen). Because all this will do is make CEOs less wealthy from the company itself. The investors still make tons more than the CEOs already and they don't do anything. You need to force revenue sharing essentially which is just socialism with extra steps. Cause CEOs will just end up investing in other companies and still be wealthy and get less compensation from the company itself.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Exactly. Increasing pay would be really, really nice. But we can do that and have more control over our workplaces. Worker owned companies would prevent huge disparities in pay from reoccurring, regardless of what the government does.

Like a wise and angry man once said: "Fuck the G rides, I want the machines that are making them."

[–] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

Socialism is the abolition of social classes. Regulating capital is usually called Social Democracy, or Marxism. Honestly, sieze the means of production.

[–] AnotherPerson@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (14 children)

I'd be absolutely ecstatic for a 1:4 ratio.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] _number8_@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago (1 children)

if you've ever worked food service in your life you should instantly be able to calculate how fucked wages are. in 1 hour you make dozens of meals that cost $10+ while getting paid maybe $10 or $15 per hour. it's obscene

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Good sentiment but not really a true conclusion. Most restaurants sell their food for a little over cost. The majority of their sales profits come from the drinks. It's insane. A 5 gallon bag of Coke syrup is good for $1,000+ in drink sales but costs most businesses less than $100. Regardless, I agree that workers should be paid more, but not because the food is so expensive.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But they bring so much value for that $601. Like figuring out how many people to fire to maximize revenue for shareholders. Come on, doesn't that deserve a $15 million salary?!

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's ironic, they're the one position that I think at most companies provides no value at all. They think they'll be the ruling class in an apocalypse, but they don't realize that they have no marketable skills whatsoever.

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes and no. They can't do what everyone else can do and not many can do what they do. You only see the darker side of thing and yes most are incredibly evil in many ways.

However, someone has to organize. Someone has to delegate. Someone has to decide. Do they deserve that much money? No. Does the position need to exist? In many ways it seems so.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Perhaps it's more accurate to say that they don't have a unique skillset. You're right that someone does need to delegate, organize, and decide, but the ability to do so isn't special at all. You could probably put any given technical worker in that position and they'd do just fine too.

Experience of course is what really shines here, but the problem is the same as politics. They may have more experience, but the decisions they're making aren't for everyone's best interest. They're biased towards the newer, richer friends.

This experience vs corruption duality is tough. It's also there when you have the government making policy. The experts you want to consult on how X is made and what regulations there need to be are those who are experiences in making X -- but those same groups also want money and clout, and will try to get that into the regulations. I'm not sure what a good solution is.

[–] sfgifz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

Do they deserve that much money?

As long as the employees are paid fair and well for their work, and the company is financially sound, they should.

The problem is almost all of them rake in millions at the cost of employees/customers/business or all.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Feels like this is actually a way to make it seem like less of a gap? Hourly workers (the workers discussed here for the most part) think of wages in, you guessed it.... hours. To keep it clear, tell them, "You make $10 an hour, but your CEO makes $6,000 an hour."

Or even better, "Your CEO makes more in a single day than you do in an entire year of full time work - Almost double what you make in a year in fact. And that day your CEO 'works' is a fairly relaxing day with a long lunch break, a private office and air conditioning,"

[–] Candybar121@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

Disgusting.

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

If the CEO is making that much wait'll you find out how much the shareholders are making off those employees!

It makes for a decent example I guess, but it's really silly how fixated on CEOs Joe Public is. They're hired by the board of directors, who are elected by the shareholders. It's not like the CEO straight up owns the company (usually).

[–] CCL@links.hackliberty.org 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

Unemployment for all

[–] ineedaunion@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

Everyone in the country should strike, keep your homes and others should take them from corporations . Move in and squat, literally millions of us.

[–] Ryan213@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Ugh. I forgot to apply for the CEO position again!

[–] Tolstoshev@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

They all just need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and become CEOs. Doesn’t anyone want to work anymore? When I became a CEO I had to walk up hill both ways and put in 2,000 hours a week. Just kidding, I got a loan from daddy. /s

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm sure this is even less awful than the disparity with Big Lots employees and employers. Store managers make 100k a year, most employees are making less than 15 an hour. Absolutely the worst conditions and employment terms of any retail I've ever worked.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which side of the fence are you putting store managers on? At a minimum that's $48 an hour (or a little over $3 for every $1 by the lower employee), but it's likely worse than that as often store managers work more than 40 hours a week and are not allowed overtime, so their pay doesn't change. Just saying I can't tell based on your wording if you think the gap between managers and employees is a problem, as I guess it's debatable, but definitely nowhere near the numbers above. So just wondering if you could clarify your point a bit.

[–] ineedaunion@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

The Home Depot here in Montana pays the store manager more than that and hes raped an underaged cashier and was protected by corporate.

Fuck all corporations and their enablers.

[–] curiousaur@reddthat.com 5 points 1 year ago

By their metrics that's a resounding success.

[–] EfficaciousSkink@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What percentage of the US economy is low wage firms?

load more comments
view more: next ›