LogFAQs > #932080191

DevsBro posted...

I honestly kind of like a proposal I heard a few years ago about imposing a limit on how large the difference can be between the best and worst paid employee. It's not perfect, but after thinking about it a little bit, it sounds better than the traditional minimum wage solution.

Now the cap would still be something like 100 times but you could find an hourly equivalent by dividing by 2000 (even though many salaried employees work a lot more than that) but it means that if the CEO is making $20M, the janitor is making $100/hr. Or more realistically, the janitor is making $20/hr and the CEO is making $4M, since you know, there are a lot more janitors in the company than CEOs.

Of course, then you would see a lot of companies contract out their unskilled labor, but even that has a nice silver lining since contract labor generally comes at a premium. Now better janitors can compete for better wages.

to play the devil's advocate, with respect to base pay the highest paid ceos seldom actually exceed 5m, and it's far less for most (e.g., 80k salary for bezos)

the gains in wealth for billionaires and successful executives tend to reflect increases in the valuation of business holdings over time

pushing for greater availability of stock options for lower level employees would not be a bad idea though, since cash is intrinsically worthless, especially in the long term; stock options also create a vested interest in the long-term well-being of the company so long as they're held

---

https://imgur.com/A0TAfek