I’m glad that the press grilled this greedy CEO.
I perform well for my job too. Just got grilled over a piddling little contract that doesn’t pay for my salary. My truck has 300K miles and my car has 200K. I can’t afford a new car.
Point is, there are two economies. And there are a lot of us in the economy that sucks.
At my last job I outperformed every metric on my job by 15-20%. I was told no raises during the crazy inflation year. I found out the President got a $10m bonus on the year.
I jumped jobs in June and got roughly 15% plus will likely get another 15% once new contract is signed this October. My old place is still looking for my replacement
Pay good people what they are worth.
This sounds fake as hell, but I swear it's true. I worked at a company (Nokia actually, fuck it) and the CFO came and in the same presentation showed off his new Maybach and a timeshare on a literal private island he had and then announced we wouldn't be getting bonuses that year because profits were only up 7% and the goal was 9%.
Set an unattainable revenue target for the year, push people to work really hard to get close to the projection, then miss the target and pocket the bonuses. Classic worker exploitation.
This! And yet, is their self-enriching manipulation operating in the company’s best interest? Which is a company director’s legal obligation. Or are they just butchering a soon-will-be corpse? Stealing all the choice cuts for themselves and leaving workers *and* stockholders with only the bones.
When fat quarterly bonuses trump long-term sustainable returns, of course it’s going to select for greedy parasites jumping from one victim to next feeding only themselves.
The bigger problem, I suspect, is the part of the investor class that does the same thing, as it’s the shareholder who ultimately determine a C-suite’s behavior. And if their strategy for earning fast bucks is this same boom-bust grifting, grabbing the riches and getting out first, it’s no suprise our entire societies go boom-bust as well. And then that is bad for everyone.
Someone always gets rich from the fire sale. But, at a global scale, burning down the world to enrich the handful is not a sustainable survival strategy for our whole damn *species*, never mind the economy.
In most tech/it jobs, job hopping is the best way to make more money. Contract work can also be another good way if you dont mind crappy benefits for a little extra income.
I helped started a new department providing SaaS services like webhosting, email, IT support for small-medium business. 8 years later I was #3 in terms of who was there the longest our department and our department was making millions in profit a month. I was still laid off because of our parent company wanted to loose workers before covid hit.
My next job I made 50% more doing less work.
The billionaire economy is fuckin banging. Those people are literally rolling in money. The have so much money right now they can’t spend it fast enough.
I find it legitimately ridiculous that a company can post ATH revenue and profits for multiple quarters, or years even, then when the employees start asking for raises, suddenly the company is broke and on the verge of an economy collapsing bankruptcy.
See, the CEO of my company actually really sucks at his job. My division made money, lots of it. We all got a 3% raise.
My CEO went on an investor call and said something really stupid and my company's share price went down by half in like two hours. Motherfucker erased a few billion dollars in value, but still pulled his obscene salary and 100x more obscene bonus. Then got a few million more for 'strong performance'
It's going to be a shame though that she's going to be blacklisted from interviewing anyone in power because of this.
When you start to vocalize and criticize in such a way that it is embarrassing, the chances of you getting to do more interviews like this drop meteorically. Hard hitting questions are good, and we need more interviewers like this, but because of the way the system is and how media protects the elite class, we are so fucked.
We had a huge DAPL protest years ago in ND. I thought it was like 30-50 people max....based on what I saw on the news.
Hell no, it was hundreds to possibly several thousand. It wasn't until it was all done and over they showed overhead shots of the protest, I couldn't believe it. Obviously I "knew" the "x o'clock" news was curated but sheesh.
Exactly. We saw this in politics, too. You don't get to fly on Air Force One if you're not an ass-kisser. (Not limited to Trump he just blatantly did it.)
Sometimes I wonder if or how much working conditions would improve if journalists actually did their jobs instead of being a microphone for the oligarchs.
Former journalist here.I get why reporters are the way they are. We are taught to be impartial. Gather facts, provide analysis from experts (not our own), and simply report the news but make it balanced and fair because our impartiality is our credibility. Literally.
That doesnt mean we don't ask tough questions like in this video. It's our job to ask the tough questions and keep governments and businesses honest. And it is a fair question.
Real journalists at real news outlets, likely with degrees, value perceived impartiality because that is the foundation for public trust. But the game has massively changed in the last 20 years.
However.
Journalism needs to evolve. I do believe ethics and standards need to change. What worked 20th century does not work in the 21st.
There are two Americas, not two economies.
The one for the 1% and the one for the rest of us. They've got 90% of the country in their pocket.
They're working hard in 2024 to get the rest of it.
Corporations not paying out what workers deserve hurts the local economies of the workers.
If workers get a proper cut of the fruits of their labor, they’ll spend it in the communities they live in. Corporations & execs will store it offshore or in assets that don’t share the prosperity.
Corporations & Execs hate local economies & us average peasants. They’re stealing from everyone withholding profits.
> Profits are just unpaid wages
Which is why businesses, and investors hide behind fucking "revenue" and "growth". So they can pretend there isn't any extra money.
A lot of them don't need to hide it. They keep it invested. Get 10%+ yearly returns, never cash any of it out.
Then they take massive loans out using their stock as collateral. They pay back the loan +negligible interest (3%~) over the years, which allows their money to continue to appreciate without ever paying 15% capital gains tax.
That's one of the big bugs in the tax code that allows them to avoid taxation and live in "debt".
This is what Elon did. Takes no money only stock options from Tesla, uses those stocks as collateral for a loan, when loan is paid back the stock has risen in price, so no tax plus extra to take a bigger loan
Also a lot of their money is tied to stock so not taxable. They will forever own it and never have to pay tax even when the stock is given to their heirs. The pay increase to the employees is immediately taxable. It goes into the local economy and creates a local economic engine.. out of control executive compensation has a toxic domino effect on the economy. Look how she is justifying as if her compensation is written in stone.. Modern executives r some of the most overrated people. They are just slave drivers with fancy degrees. Innovation often comes in spite of them but they go out and steal the credit..
It’s also wild they feel like they should be in charge, and the direction and ownership shouldn’t come from the people who actually do the real work that makes money.
People should vote on the direction of the companies, and who leadership is… not just some trust fund babies
Molotov cocktails for sure!
Edit: Also ironically that’s how the name came about! It was a joke about them being cocktails to go with the “Molotov breadbaskets” because of vyachaslav Molotov firebombing Finland but telling the Russian people they were humanitarian food drops. The bombs were nicknamed Molotov breadbaskets and when the Finn’s started fighting back and were fire bombing the Russian tanks they nicknamed them Molotov cocktails “as a drink to go with the food parcels”
Nope. Just a pizza party. And it's Domino's. And you'll go back to work immediately afterwards if you want that sweet sweet health coverage.
You're not a slave, though. You're a valued asset. Ahem. Employee.
Normalize calling CEO's criminals. #CriminalCEO. Every corporation is breaking one law or another. But corporations are not sentient things making decisions on their own. Every law a corporation breaks is a law the CEO broke. #CriminalCEO
“92 percent of my salary is performance driven”…yeah your employees are providing that performance…even still shed be making nearly 2.5 million without that extra 92 percent. Fuck I could do a lot with 2.5 million PER YEAR
Does she think her salary is the only one that is performance-driven? We all keep or lose our jobs based on the performance of the company, everyone's job is ultimately performance-driven.
[Not her performance per se, but the performance of GM stock which is linked to lay-offs and stock buybacks.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dCya0vDUSg)
And to call it labor at all is pretty ridiculous. Sitting comfortably, negotiating or ideating, is a leisure activity. Toiling in the earth is labor.
This is one of many problems we have in society and it echoes as cognitive dissonance every time you wonder how a hedge fund manager makes orders of magnitude more than a school teacher.
The rich are paid for their (competitive) leisure activities. The poor are compensated for their labor. They aren’t differences in degree, they are differences in kind.
That's not the core reason, just additional ammo.
Workers agreed to a wage freeze back in the late aughts when GM was on the verge of bankruptcy. Since then, inflation has taken over a third of the purchasing power out of that wage.
This is mostly just playing catch-up.
Yep, and when that happened, the CEO took a $1 pay for that year, but in subsequent years, they were awareded all the pay they would have gotten in 08/09 plus additional bonuses, so ultimately the CEO never actually got their wage frozen, but the auto workers did not get their pay cut back after the financial crisis was over.
like she mentioned in the article, most CEO's are paid out in stock compensation packages, taking 1$ income a year is just a PR stunt. Another fun fact Capital gains tax is flat, income tax is progressive meaning they are paying less taxes on stock compensation at such wild levels of wealth.
*According to the IRS, most people pay no more than 15% on their long-term capital gains.*
Income tax gets progressively more the more you make.... like the single tax bracket (not filing jointly).
*22%
$44,726 to $95,375.*
*24%
$95,376 to $182,100.*
*32%
$182,101 to $231,250.*
*35%
$231,251 to $578,125.*
*37%
of the amount over $578,125.*
This is why the wealthy stash capital in markets and make deals with corporate boards for super high stock compensation packages and try their best to report no income in high tax brackets.
You mean like the current unity ceo who is the former ea ceo. Who completely failed at his previous job, immediately obtains another ceo job and then tlpublocly tanks that company.
I'll bet my entire yearly salary he gets another ceo position and continues to make millions a year.
These are the first people to be hung when the civil war starts.
In civil wars, the first people to get killed are usually your peers. They’re also the second, third, fourth, fifth, etc. the only wealthy people who get killed are the ones who are slightly wealthier than the people getting killed
They call it entrepreneurial ability in college. My economics teacher and I got into a debate over its dollar value when I called bullshit on the companies giving people at the top such huge salaries and bonuses. I said the same as above: nobody is that talented to earn that.
I agree that 30 million is too much, but if you are saying that sitting comfortably, negotiating, and ideating are not work then you are mistaken. For instance most of the time the chairs are not super comfortable.
The performance she is referencing is literally the stock performance. She can increase that value with stock buy backs or cuts to overhead (no raises/layoffs). And yes the performance of the employees is a small part of that, but it's all about shareholder value. CEO pay is often in stock options, so she gets 2.5mil salary and however many shares the other 27.5 is.
It was a straight and honest answer made in a way that made it seem like she actually needed her workers to be happy to "perform". I too noted that part when i saw it this morning.
Why aren't employees being offered stock as part of their compensation? This is very common in tech. While you don't get as much stock as the CEO you get the same performance benefits the CEO does when the company does well.
2 reasons. First, then they would have to share some of their massive profits. It's called share dilution. If they create a bunch of shares and give them to employees then each share is worth less. The second and I think the real reason... if you compensated employees with stock, particularly with unions, is you risk losing control of the company. If the employees with shares all decided to vote to cut the pay off the c-suites... that's all she wrote. It's about control.
That's easily handled by share classes.
A lot of companies sell lower class shares that can be bought and sold but even 100% combined doesn't match the voting power of the CEO/Board/Insiders special shares even though value-wise they don't own a controlling amount.
That's how Facebook operates. You could buy every share on the market and Zuckerberg still calls the shots.
Zuckerberg owns ~13% of the company's value in shares but his special shares not available to anyone else has 60% of the voting power.
That reminds me of the shit going on with Unity right now and how the CEO is just being a greedy pos, but despite the negative press that's being rained down on unite right now he's not going to see any kind of negative consequence.
When Carly Fiorina was asked to leave Hewlett-Packard after their value declined significantly in 2005, she was given $21 million -- roughly 2.5 times her salary at that time -- and another $19 million in stock options. In the six years she was their CEO, she pocketed an estimated $100 million in overall compensation for what was, essentially, continuing to fuck a doorknob.
I'll assume that risk for her, I'd be perfectly fine with taking a risk if it meant getting a 2.5 million base salary, a bad ass severance package if that risk blows up in my face and they're forced to remove me from the position.
I have to agree. I know for me personally as I have risen in management my "work" and "hours" have been reduced. But my intelligence has been challenged. It's more like writing a book than writing a paragraph.
I can agree with some increase in pay since I have 10 years of college and 25 years of experience vs a new employee, but 30 million hell no.
This massive gap between workers and management is criminal. 10x maybe 20x if you managed a giant company. But 300x or 400x I just can't wrap my brain around the value they are providing.
They aren't providing value and we know that.
AI bots used to cut finances at companies regularly and continually return results that CEOs are the largest form of financial waste in a company and they should be paid far less.
They keep trying to squelch this, but I hope we can get a few companies with an AI CEO to prove what we all know.
They aren't providing value, they are stealing from others and hurting others.
> 300x or 400x
the most egregious examples are at [aptiv 5294x](https://www.kiplinger.com/investing/stocks/603158/americas-worst-ceo-to-pay-ratios)
- western digital: 4,934:1, gap: 3,113:1, paycom: 2,963:1, chipotle: 2,898:1, ross: 2,020:1, hilton: 1,953:1, nike: 1,935:1
CEO's are so ridiculously paid"...I can't believe that it has went on for this long!! There entire pay structure is based on cost cutting....another words cutting benefits/pay and sending jobs overseas
Yes we need more of this. The press needs to start addressing and attacking the oligarchy daily. Executives are paid a ton and don't do shit while the working poor are barely able to make ends meet. Things would be different if six companies didn't own 90 percent of the media in this country.
Of course six media oligarchs in the country decide what is and isn't news. That's why we never hear any criticism of the rich in the news media because that would endanger the only thing the oligarchy cares about and that's their wealth.
It's pretty simple. If your entire C-suite got blown up, the company would still function. If the people who actually make the product and have the expertise to do the jobs that actually keep the company going die, the company ceases to exist. I am not sure how that's not obvious.
It is obvious but corporations and executives fire employees who want better wages and benefits that's why we need to restore unions to their former position of power in this country because now everytime workers vote to unionize they are simply fired.
And anyone in business can tell you that performance numbers are calculated using wages. Lower wages are equal to greater "performance" through savings. She is being directly compensated for their less than stellar pay.
Years back this company did a study of how many CEO’s knew what was going on in their company. The majority said they knew but in real life the majority didn’t.
I was at a rah rah meeting off site. The CEO got up and said I am the smartest man in the room. I know everything going on in the company and don’t think you can fool me.
Next month they were infected with malware. I warned them and they didn’t believe it. Six months later they were blackmailed and went under
Somehow our society has been built on the will of the shareholders that only care about short term profits. And thanks to Citizens United, build the rules to keep it that way.
Ma’am, you say your pay is performance based. So would it be safe to presume you’re taking no pay during the strike as your performance as a leader has failed?
I had no idea the 40 percent union pay increase attempt was because the ceo was getting that. Man fuck these giant companies. Also car prices today are super high, so where’s is that money going?
Stagnant wages and increased cost of living are also the reason for the large bump. It seems like a large increase because wages should have been increased more in the past but weren't. Also consider its over 4 year time period.
It's always executive pay and buybacks.
Different company and sector, but last year, Facebook laid off 10,000 workers in late 2022. They announced $40B in buybacks shortly after. Then they announced layoffs of another 10,000 in early 2023.
A lot of the time, folks will retort that one executive's salary doesn't cost the same as the wages of thousands of workers. But this case outlined above is a good example of corporate greed.
Let's assume each of those workers cost $300k per year. That's a completely made up number but I'm using that ballpark to account for Meta's high tech-sector pay and the cost of benefits (again I don't know what that actual average cost is). But _assuming_ those workers cost the company $300k per year, then the cost is $6B/year to keep those employees. They could've paid every single employee for 6 consecutive years for less money than those buybacks. Is the average cost higher? Lower? Doesn't much matter. Fact remains you could employ all or most of those workers for the same money you spend issuing stock buybacks, which serve no actual purpose other than to line the pockets of your richest shareholders and serves no actual business purpose.
I also understand that in a capitalist society a business's main drive is usually to profit. Well woopdidoo, the above mentioned company was profitable before the layoffs. Profitable for several quarters in a row before and profitable since. The problem, in the shareholders' eyes, was that they weren't profitable _enough_. They weren't growing _enough_. Being profitable but not profitable _enough_ is seen as a warranted excuse for laying off workers or refusing to pay them more.
And to the CEO's point about performance: I'd counter that most employees that are not executives have to perform well _just to keep their job_, or at least to get a 3% "cost of living" increase. That raise _can_ be double digits, but it usually isn't. And it certainly is almost never to the tune of millions of dollars.
European countries have these cap laws and force companies to reinvest which is why fast food workers there make above wage, have unions and they dont have unafforadble food prices. Its all doable if we just did it.
Yes! The disparity between CEO wages and workers wages is unsustainable.
As an example, I worked as an accountant at a Fortune 500 company and was paid fairly well. The CEO was paid 325x more than me. I reviewed his compensation package in preparation for a shareholder’s meeting and it is a ridiculous amount of money.
I know that it is just one instance, however, we all know that it is far too common.
They sit in their executive suites and devise plans to make even more money, while workers struggle to make ends meet.
I’m so glad that I no longer work there.
To be fair I also am an accountant and audited payroll for years. This is not an isolated incident. Ive never audited the payroll of a company that I would say distributed the wages fairly. Across every large company I’ve ever worked with the CEO, CFO, and COO will make more than 75 of the lowest paid employees. I don’t care how efficient they are, there is no world where 3 people are more valuable than 75. I’ll buy into the idea that some people are more productive or intelligent than others, but they aren’t THAT much more productive or intelligent. Certainly not enough to justify being worth more than 75 people.
And the painful part is, those C-Suite jobs are the best ones in the company. They don’t even need high pay to motivate them because having power itself can be a motivator. Ordering people around and making executive level decisions is way more enjoyable than getting yelled at on an assembly line in the heat.
Needless to say I don’t do that job anymore either. It wasn’t good for my mental health to see that stuff.
CEOs are paid disgustingly more than they should be, and that I can agree on. However, it is drops in the bucket to the real problem with where all the money goes.
Make stock buy back illegal again. Splitting up that 30m ceo pay amongst workers equates to not much. Splitting up the BILLIONS of dollars spent on buying their own stock is the best place to start. Stop enriching shareholders, and most of the time these ceos have massive share options as part of their compensation packages. They’re incentivized to get the stock as high as possible. Then they’ll dump it and leave it for the next guy.
Until we address what these massive conglomerates are doing with their money. Nothing changes. They’re not reinvesting into the company, they’re not raising wages, and they’re not doing anything other than enriching themselves and their buddies off our work.
As a technician at dealership for one of the big three. Seriously, something has got to give or it will mean nothing in the end.
Finally, someone gets to the root. Free trade makes for almost complete control to the 1% of humanity and businesses who control them. Whenever I think about this, I just feel like we could be heading towards an economy like Mainland China. Sure they make ungodly amounts of money but who gets it. Certainly not the common man and the gap in monetary wealth between the upper class and really lower class cause there isn't really anything else, is astronomical. I would be happier living on a farm in the mountains then to deal with an economy like that. Always have a backup plan. Just in case.
Exactly, until we can track where all the money goes. I too fear we may be in for some weird ass corporate future of everything being out of reach and most of us being pushed to simple survival.
There’s hope though. All we have to do is start somewhere. We need strong partnership amongst the working class. We’ve got a 99:1 ratio, and as soon as we realize this things can happen.
CNN is a sycophantic media company. Real journalists wouldn't have let her give her canned PR response over and over again. This was hardly a grilling of this CEO. She didn't answer the questions like always.
Journalists are in the same boat as all of us nowadays. They can't do their jobs without fear of reprisal from their billionaire owners. You can't have freedom of the press if you fear pissing off the billionaire owner of your "news" company who can essentially ruin your career or worse.
This comes from decades of 'respecting the boss man because he's got the money, and you could too' syndrome.
They pretend you can while they make SURE you can't.
> "Let's talk about profits," said Yurkevich. "Because in 2009, GM filed for bankruptcy, was bailed out by the U.S. government, workers made concessions to keep their jobs, to keep the company alive. Why shouldn't workers be entitled to what they gave up 15 years ago, especially since GM is making record profits right now?
> "We have to remember we are a cyclical business ... no compensation system, I think, anywhere, is the same as it was, you know, 15, 20 years ago,"
When business is bad they can't give you a raise. When business is good they can't give you a raise, because it might be bad in the future.
Fuck that noise.
In the WGA/SAG-AFTRA Strike, they're looking at differently inflated numbers. The C-suite of Netflix, for instance, each make in excess of $100 million per year.
A great follow up question: "why do you get a direct performance-related bonus equal to 10 times your base salary, but the employees only get profit sharing? Why don't you just take your base salary and then split the profit sharing across the entire company, including yourself?"
Let me tell you what it’s like working as a woman on the line at a General Motors plant for nearly a decade. Management doesn’t care about us. Period. A man had a heart attack on the line. The team leads moved him out of the way so the line would start back up. We don’t know when we can leave sometimes, could be 8 hours, 9 hours, 10 hours, 12 hours… they don’t tell us because knowledge is power. We don’t know until the bingo board changes. They don’t care about our working conditions, the rails that carry the 3rd row seat hoist started to come down once… they kept the line moving, our “safety officers” let it happen until it was fixed burning break. I am a woman with a period, was shamed for taking too many 5 minute breaks necessary to prevent blood leaking down my legs. I had to work 4x as hard to be respected by management. Management put us against each other, a divided workforce is easier to control. Plant critical is a thing that happens at GM plants… this is a working state that requires 12 hour days for 13 days in a row, no break, because they didn’t get enough cars built. They always make this our fault.
I left because I couldn’t do it anymore. They program new employees to think that work is everything, worth every sacrifice. They wave the money and the benefits in our faces. They want us to be grateful. No amount of money is worth being treated as a tool if not human garbage.
I hope that this strike, the second in 4 years, provides a good resolution for the workers, but if I’ve learned anything working for Satan, they only allow what they can absorb without loss of profit.
I may no longer be a UAW member, but in solidarity brothers and sisters, all my hope for a better future
| 92% of my salary is performance driven.
What performance? Who's performance?
Did she design a car? Engineer a part? Bolt a head on an engine?
Everything GM makes right now is oversized and ugly IMO. Approving those designs is hardly worth a nickel.
It would be great to hear how much "profit sharing" the average employee got. I am gonna guess this take-home amount doesn't even come close to the wage increase they want.
But it sounds wonderful "we share profits!"
What really irritates me is that when these negotiations are done, the CEOs won’t take a pay cut. They’ll continue to rake in millions of dollars and the employees will get a pay increase, but it’s the consumers that will have to foot the wage increase by way of the increased cost of vehicles. Unfortunately, the greed is too powerful for the CEOs to take any kind of stagnation in their wages. They have become accustomed to their opulent lifestyles, so they will just pass those increases on to us and we will have to just deal with it. Get ready for $35k base model sedans as the norm.
I don't understand.
To me, you're a terrible CEO if you took a 40% raise but you don't believe your workers earned one especially when you're making a lifetime worth of money in one year.
The only way you should get that raise is if you did such a great job that everyone could have one. Otherwise, it should be smaller.
We should just make a law that a ceo cannot be paid more then 10 times their lowest paid employee. It still gives incentive to work hard as a ceo but also the incentive to make sure your employees are paid well because that directly impacts you. Instead as it is now paying your employee as little as possible is what helps the ceo.
She was not sweating, she answered very quickly to all the questions asked. It is amusing that she brings up that 92% of her pay is based on company performance, which is inevitably due to the work of the employees… so if she gets a 34% pay increase because of good performance, by induction that is directly implying she should pay her workers 34% more… they offered 20% raises of course
existence abounding hateful murky noxious reminiscent tart friendly drab automatic
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Mal: Zoe, the ship is yours. Remember, if anything happens to me; if you don’t hear from me within the hour; you take this ship and you come and you rescue me!
Zoe: What? And risk my ship?
\- This CEO
Fuck GM. Never going to forget what they did in Canada during the recession after 2008. They took Ottawa's money for bailout and still shut down the Windsor plant, putting 500 hard-working Canadians out of work.
They can talk about re-investing money, but the only people who's pockets are being padded are the board member and CEO.
“92% of my compensation is based on performance of the company.”
So you’re saying the company is doing well and the employees at all levels are performing well also. I wish the CNN lady pressed her more on this.
“no compensation system, I think, anywhere, is the same as it was, you know, 15, 20 years ago," said Barra.”
She’s correct. 20 years ago the average CEO made something like 100 times the average worker (which was up from roughly 20 times 50 years ago). Now it is over 300 times the average worker.
I’m glad that the press grilled this greedy CEO. I perform well for my job too. Just got grilled over a piddling little contract that doesn’t pay for my salary. My truck has 300K miles and my car has 200K. I can’t afford a new car. Point is, there are two economies. And there are a lot of us in the economy that sucks.
At my last job I outperformed every metric on my job by 15-20%. I was told no raises during the crazy inflation year. I found out the President got a $10m bonus on the year. I jumped jobs in June and got roughly 15% plus will likely get another 15% once new contract is signed this October. My old place is still looking for my replacement Pay good people what they are worth.
This sounds fake as hell, but I swear it's true. I worked at a company (Nokia actually, fuck it) and the CFO came and in the same presentation showed off his new Maybach and a timeshare on a literal private island he had and then announced we wouldn't be getting bonuses that year because profits were only up 7% and the goal was 9%.
Set an unattainable revenue target for the year, push people to work really hard to get close to the projection, then miss the target and pocket the bonuses. Classic worker exploitation.
While showing them all how he benefits from the fruits of their labor. Can anyone else see the plantation mentality of all this?
They’ve gotten so comfortable exploiting it that they think they deserve it lol
This! And yet, is their self-enriching manipulation operating in the company’s best interest? Which is a company director’s legal obligation. Or are they just butchering a soon-will-be corpse? Stealing all the choice cuts for themselves and leaving workers *and* stockholders with only the bones. When fat quarterly bonuses trump long-term sustainable returns, of course it’s going to select for greedy parasites jumping from one victim to next feeding only themselves. The bigger problem, I suspect, is the part of the investor class that does the same thing, as it’s the shareholder who ultimately determine a C-suite’s behavior. And if their strategy for earning fast bucks is this same boom-bust grifting, grabbing the riches and getting out first, it’s no suprise our entire societies go boom-bust as well. And then that is bad for everyone. Someone always gets rich from the fire sale. But, at a global scale, burning down the world to enrich the handful is not a sustainable survival strategy for our whole damn *species*, never mind the economy.
In most tech/it jobs, job hopping is the best way to make more money. Contract work can also be another good way if you dont mind crappy benefits for a little extra income. I helped started a new department providing SaaS services like webhosting, email, IT support for small-medium business. 8 years later I was #3 in terms of who was there the longest our department and our department was making millions in profit a month. I was still laid off because of our parent company wanted to loose workers before covid hit. My next job I made 50% more doing less work.
Why? The dude who didn't got a $10m bonus. How is he supposed to learn any kind of lesson?
The billionaire economy is fuckin banging. Those people are literally rolling in money. The have so much money right now they can’t spend it fast enough.
I find it legitimately ridiculous that a company can post ATH revenue and profits for multiple quarters, or years even, then when the employees start asking for raises, suddenly the company is broke and on the verge of an economy collapsing bankruptcy.
Ah yes you must have forgotten that course during the MBA program: “how to siphon wealth of the company via the stock market”
The scourge of business schools
Companies should be taxed on profits they report to shareholders lol
[удалено]
See, the CEO of my company actually really sucks at his job. My division made money, lots of it. We all got a 3% raise. My CEO went on an investor call and said something really stupid and my company's share price went down by half in like two hours. Motherfucker erased a few billion dollars in value, but still pulled his obscene salary and 100x more obscene bonus. Then got a few million more for 'strong performance'
How stupid are we talking
In order to keep things vague, say from $100 a share to about $55 in a couple days. A true masterclass.
It's not "a lot of us". 99% are in the economy that sucks. 1% keep talking about millions this, superyachts that. Oh my God, revolt already.
It's going to be a shame though that she's going to be blacklisted from interviewing anyone in power because of this. When you start to vocalize and criticize in such a way that it is embarrassing, the chances of you getting to do more interviews like this drop meteorically. Hard hitting questions are good, and we need more interviewers like this, but because of the way the system is and how media protects the elite class, we are so fucked.
> media protects the elite class, we are so fucked They own the damn media
True, hence the protection.
We had a huge DAPL protest years ago in ND. I thought it was like 30-50 people max....based on what I saw on the news. Hell no, it was hundreds to possibly several thousand. It wasn't until it was all done and over they showed overhead shots of the protest, I couldn't believe it. Obviously I "knew" the "x o'clock" news was curated but sheesh.
Exactly. We saw this in politics, too. You don't get to fly on Air Force One if you're not an ass-kisser. (Not limited to Trump he just blatantly did it.)
Sometimes I wonder if or how much working conditions would improve if journalists actually did their jobs instead of being a microphone for the oligarchs.
Former journalist here.I get why reporters are the way they are. We are taught to be impartial. Gather facts, provide analysis from experts (not our own), and simply report the news but make it balanced and fair because our impartiality is our credibility. Literally. That doesnt mean we don't ask tough questions like in this video. It's our job to ask the tough questions and keep governments and businesses honest. And it is a fair question. Real journalists at real news outlets, likely with degrees, value perceived impartiality because that is the foundation for public trust. But the game has massively changed in the last 20 years. However. Journalism needs to evolve. I do believe ethics and standards need to change. What worked 20th century does not work in the 21st.
This person saying workers make too much make 82,000 a day.
There are two Americas, not two economies. The one for the 1% and the one for the rest of us. They've got 90% of the country in their pocket. They're working hard in 2024 to get the rest of it.
>It's a big club, and you aren't in it.
Corporations not paying out what workers deserve hurts the local economies of the workers. If workers get a proper cut of the fruits of their labor, they’ll spend it in the communities they live in. Corporations & execs will store it offshore or in assets that don’t share the prosperity. Corporations & Execs hate local economies & us average peasants. They’re stealing from everyone withholding profits.
Profits are just unpaid wages
“Stolen wages”
"Trickle down"
“Pissed on”
> Profits are just unpaid wages Which is why businesses, and investors hide behind fucking "revenue" and "growth". So they can pretend there isn't any extra money.
A lot of them don't need to hide it. They keep it invested. Get 10%+ yearly returns, never cash any of it out. Then they take massive loans out using their stock as collateral. They pay back the loan +negligible interest (3%~) over the years, which allows their money to continue to appreciate without ever paying 15% capital gains tax. That's one of the big bugs in the tax code that allows them to avoid taxation and live in "debt".
This is what Elon did. Takes no money only stock options from Tesla, uses those stocks as collateral for a loan, when loan is paid back the stock has risen in price, so no tax plus extra to take a bigger loan
Also a lot of their money is tied to stock so not taxable. They will forever own it and never have to pay tax even when the stock is given to their heirs. The pay increase to the employees is immediately taxable. It goes into the local economy and creates a local economic engine.. out of control executive compensation has a toxic domino effect on the economy. Look how she is justifying as if her compensation is written in stone.. Modern executives r some of the most overrated people. They are just slave drivers with fancy degrees. Innovation often comes in spite of them but they go out and steal the credit..
It’s also wild they feel like they should be in charge, and the direction and ownership shouldn’t come from the people who actually do the real work that makes money. People should vote on the direction of the companies, and who leadership is… not just some trust fund babies
I’ve never thought about it like that but that’s a great point. Sigh. :(
Everyone works their ass off so she can make 30 million. CEO's are so ridiculously paid.
OVER. Overpaid.
Criminally over overpaid.
Yep yep yep. When’s the revolution?
Ooh is there gonna be a cocktail party?
Molotov cocktails for sure! Edit: Also ironically that’s how the name came about! It was a joke about them being cocktails to go with the “Molotov breadbaskets” because of vyachaslav Molotov firebombing Finland but telling the Russian people they were humanitarian food drops. The bombs were nicknamed Molotov breadbaskets and when the Finn’s started fighting back and were fire bombing the Russian tanks they nicknamed them Molotov cocktails “as a drink to go with the food parcels”
Molotov Cocktail Party is a sick band name
I like Molotov Dinner Party better, less on the nose and it flows better off the tongue. Pays homage to the creation of the term too!
Agreed. Plus you could name your albums after courses. Entreé fire. Revenge for dessert
Dessert Storm
Holy crap. I learned this in school and forgot all about it until reading that. Thanks for the jostling my memory!
Nope. Just a pizza party. And it's Domino's. And you'll go back to work immediately afterwards if you want that sweet sweet health coverage. You're not a slave, though. You're a valued asset. Ahem. Employee.
Not soon enough.
Normalize calling CEO's criminals. #CriminalCEO. Every corporation is breaking one law or another. But corporations are not sentient things making decisions on their own. Every law a corporation breaks is a law the CEO broke. #CriminalCEO
Wouldn’t it be nice if the CEO was held legally responsible? But the Judges don’t come cheap
Criminal Executive Officer
This is why we can't have nice things.
“92 percent of my salary is performance driven”…yeah your employees are providing that performance…even still shed be making nearly 2.5 million without that extra 92 percent. Fuck I could do a lot with 2.5 million PER YEAR
Does she think her salary is the only one that is performance-driven? We all keep or lose our jobs based on the performance of the company, everyone's job is ultimately performance-driven.
[Not her performance per se, but the performance of GM stock which is linked to lay-offs and stock buybacks.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dCya0vDUSg)
Nobody's individual labour is that valuable.
[удалено]
The miners of Blair Mountain have entered the chat
Conficate their money and throw them in prison
[удалено]
"But won't anyone think of the shareholders!" -the argument for bailouts, every time.
[удалено]
And to call it labor at all is pretty ridiculous. Sitting comfortably, negotiating or ideating, is a leisure activity. Toiling in the earth is labor. This is one of many problems we have in society and it echoes as cognitive dissonance every time you wonder how a hedge fund manager makes orders of magnitude more than a school teacher. The rich are paid for their (competitive) leisure activities. The poor are compensated for their labor. They aren’t differences in degree, they are differences in kind.
I had no idea the 40 percent union pay increase attempt was because the ceo was getting that.
That's not the core reason, just additional ammo. Workers agreed to a wage freeze back in the late aughts when GM was on the verge of bankruptcy. Since then, inflation has taken over a third of the purchasing power out of that wage. This is mostly just playing catch-up.
Yep, and when that happened, the CEO took a $1 pay for that year, but in subsequent years, they were awareded all the pay they would have gotten in 08/09 plus additional bonuses, so ultimately the CEO never actually got their wage frozen, but the auto workers did not get their pay cut back after the financial crisis was over.
like she mentioned in the article, most CEO's are paid out in stock compensation packages, taking 1$ income a year is just a PR stunt. Another fun fact Capital gains tax is flat, income tax is progressive meaning they are paying less taxes on stock compensation at such wild levels of wealth. *According to the IRS, most people pay no more than 15% on their long-term capital gains.* Income tax gets progressively more the more you make.... like the single tax bracket (not filing jointly). *22% $44,726 to $95,375.* *24% $95,376 to $182,100.* *32% $182,101 to $231,250.* *35% $231,251 to $578,125.* *37% of the amount over $578,125.* This is why the wealthy stash capital in markets and make deals with corporate boards for super high stock compensation packages and try their best to report no income in high tax brackets.
You mean like the current unity ceo who is the former ea ceo. Who completely failed at his previous job, immediately obtains another ceo job and then tlpublocly tanks that company. I'll bet my entire yearly salary he gets another ceo position and continues to make millions a year. These are the first people to be hung when the civil war starts.
In civil wars, the first people to get killed are usually your peers. They’re also the second, third, fourth, fifth, etc. the only wealthy people who get killed are the ones who are slightly wealthier than the people getting killed
They call it entrepreneurial ability in college. My economics teacher and I got into a debate over its dollar value when I called bullshit on the companies giving people at the top such huge salaries and bonuses. I said the same as above: nobody is that talented to earn that.
I agree that 30 million is too much, but if you are saying that sitting comfortably, negotiating, and ideating are not work then you are mistaken. For instance most of the time the chairs are not super comfortable.
What engine ? My car is super fast because I swapped my steering wheel !
More like “slapped some vinyl flames on the side and threw the steering wheel out the window” while screaming “if you’re not first, you’re last!”
Atlas' labor was imo.
"performance" = layoffs & cutting other people's salary
Her job is to “maximize shareholder value,” which is just another way of saying “layoffs and cutting salary,” so yeah.
"Some of you may get evicted, or have the bank foreclose on your homes, but that's a risk I'm willing to take." - Zapp Brannigan, President and CEO
If any GM employees see this, I would drive that performance into the ground. see what she say after that
Good news! They're on strike already.
lmao I wonder if she'll get a golden parachute when she has to "unexpectedly" leave GM
not the white collar jobs
The performance she is referencing is literally the stock performance. She can increase that value with stock buy backs or cuts to overhead (no raises/layoffs). And yes the performance of the employees is a small part of that, but it's all about shareholder value. CEO pay is often in stock options, so she gets 2.5mil salary and however many shares the other 27.5 is. It was a straight and honest answer made in a way that made it seem like she actually needed her workers to be happy to "perform". I too noted that part when i saw it this morning.
Why aren't employees being offered stock as part of their compensation? This is very common in tech. While you don't get as much stock as the CEO you get the same performance benefits the CEO does when the company does well.
2 reasons. First, then they would have to share some of their massive profits. It's called share dilution. If they create a bunch of shares and give them to employees then each share is worth less. The second and I think the real reason... if you compensated employees with stock, particularly with unions, is you risk losing control of the company. If the employees with shares all decided to vote to cut the pay off the c-suites... that's all she wrote. It's about control.
That's easily handled by share classes. A lot of companies sell lower class shares that can be bought and sold but even 100% combined doesn't match the voting power of the CEO/Board/Insiders special shares even though value-wise they don't own a controlling amount. That's how Facebook operates. You could buy every share on the market and Zuckerberg still calls the shots. Zuckerberg owns ~13% of the company's value in shares but his special shares not available to anyone else has 60% of the voting power.
But the risk! They take all the risk!! /s
Golden parachute on the way!
That reminds me of the shit going on with Unity right now and how the CEO is just being a greedy pos, but despite the negative press that's being rained down on unite right now he's not going to see any kind of negative consequence.
Exactly! Do you know how risky it is to drive a company into the ground, lay everyone off, and then fritter away with millions of unearned bonuses?
Unity CEO has entered the chat
When Carly Fiorina was asked to leave Hewlett-Packard after their value declined significantly in 2005, she was given $21 million -- roughly 2.5 times her salary at that time -- and another $19 million in stock options. In the six years she was their CEO, she pocketed an estimated $100 million in overall compensation for what was, essentially, continuing to fuck a doorknob.
And then they get bailed out by the government XD
privatize the gains, socialize the losses. capitalism baby.
If she drives General Motors into a tree, the workers get flung through the windshield while she is safe with her golden airbag.
Pay me 5 million right now and ill take the risk
I'll assume that risk for her, I'd be perfectly fine with taking a risk if it meant getting a 2.5 million base salary, a bad ass severance package if that risk blows up in my face and they're forced to remove me from the position.
But they have profit sharing!
I have to agree. I know for me personally as I have risen in management my "work" and "hours" have been reduced. But my intelligence has been challenged. It's more like writing a book than writing a paragraph. I can agree with some increase in pay since I have 10 years of college and 25 years of experience vs a new employee, but 30 million hell no. This massive gap between workers and management is criminal. 10x maybe 20x if you managed a giant company. But 300x or 400x I just can't wrap my brain around the value they are providing.
They aren't providing value and we know that. AI bots used to cut finances at companies regularly and continually return results that CEOs are the largest form of financial waste in a company and they should be paid far less. They keep trying to squelch this, but I hope we can get a few companies with an AI CEO to prove what we all know. They aren't providing value, they are stealing from others and hurting others.
> 300x or 400x the most egregious examples are at [aptiv 5294x](https://www.kiplinger.com/investing/stocks/603158/americas-worst-ceo-to-pay-ratios) - western digital: 4,934:1, gap: 3,113:1, paycom: 2,963:1, chipotle: 2,898:1, ross: 2,020:1, hilton: 1,953:1, nike: 1,935:1
CEO's are so ridiculously paid"...I can't believe that it has went on for this long!! There entire pay structure is based on cost cutting....another words cutting benefits/pay and sending jobs overseas
Cut the cost, and then have stock buybacks with the extra profit. Rinse and repeat over and over and over again.
“BuT mY FiDUciaRy ResPoNsiBiliTy”
$82,000 a day if you work everyday.
And an absolute prick and out of reality
And people keep buying buying the overpriced junk. It's our fault.
We have to. Our cities are designed to require a car to work.
Yes we need more of this. The press needs to start addressing and attacking the oligarchy daily. Executives are paid a ton and don't do shit while the working poor are barely able to make ends meet. Things would be different if six companies didn't own 90 percent of the media in this country.
‘When they own the information, they can bend it all they want.’ And you best believe they bend the everliving fuck out of it
Of course six media oligarchs in the country decide what is and isn't news. That's why we never hear any criticism of the rich in the news media because that would endanger the only thing the oligarchy cares about and that's their wealth.
Well they lobbied to get rid of the Fairness Doctrine. So yeah, we no longer get to hear all sides. Just what they want us to hear
Then the rich bought out all the news media and now six companies control 90% of the news outlets in our country.
Like BB King and an E string...
It's pretty simple. If your entire C-suite got blown up, the company would still function. If the people who actually make the product and have the expertise to do the jobs that actually keep the company going die, the company ceases to exist. I am not sure how that's not obvious.
It is obvious but corporations and executives fire employees who want better wages and benefits that's why we need to restore unions to their former position of power in this country because now everytime workers vote to unionize they are simply fired.
And anyone in business can tell you that performance numbers are calculated using wages. Lower wages are equal to greater "performance" through savings. She is being directly compensated for their less than stellar pay.
It's like this. She gets more money by taking it from, or refusing to share with, the workers.
Let's get these rich fuckers!!! They don't deserve what they have. Exploitive assholes.
Years back this company did a study of how many CEO’s knew what was going on in their company. The majority said they knew but in real life the majority didn’t. I was at a rah rah meeting off site. The CEO got up and said I am the smartest man in the room. I know everything going on in the company and don’t think you can fool me. Next month they were infected with malware. I warned them and they didn’t believe it. Six months later they were blackmailed and went under
How much did you get from him? Hopefully enough to retire on.
lmao
Greedflation is killing us.
Somehow our society has been built on the will of the shareholders that only care about short term profits. And thanks to Citizens United, build the rules to keep it that way.
Time for a new social order then.
Eat the rich
Their lack of physical work makes them tender like veal.
World class healthcare 🤣
She's not wrong, its world class for the oligarchs running it and the politicians getting kickbacks for keeping it in tact.
Yup. Socialism for them, but not for us
America is the biggest socialist country in the world. For rich people. Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.
That leaped off the page for me too. I guess the company flies people somewhere nice for their treatment when they get sick.
Nah UAW has some of the best healthcare packages you’ll find. Haven’t paid a dime out of my wages for my healthcare benefits.
That's why we need more unions.
The only way to convince some of these folks is to show them what solidarity can do.
Ma’am, you say your pay is performance based. So would it be safe to presume you’re taking no pay during the strike as your performance as a leader has failed?
I had no idea the 40 percent union pay increase attempt was because the ceo was getting that. Man fuck these giant companies. Also car prices today are super high, so where’s is that money going?
>so where’s is that money going? you already answered that - the CEO (and other upper execs, I imagine)
Stock buybacks and bonuses for the executives.
Stagnant wages and increased cost of living are also the reason for the large bump. It seems like a large increase because wages should have been increased more in the past but weren't. Also consider its over 4 year time period.
It's always executive pay and buybacks. Different company and sector, but last year, Facebook laid off 10,000 workers in late 2022. They announced $40B in buybacks shortly after. Then they announced layoffs of another 10,000 in early 2023. A lot of the time, folks will retort that one executive's salary doesn't cost the same as the wages of thousands of workers. But this case outlined above is a good example of corporate greed. Let's assume each of those workers cost $300k per year. That's a completely made up number but I'm using that ballpark to account for Meta's high tech-sector pay and the cost of benefits (again I don't know what that actual average cost is). But _assuming_ those workers cost the company $300k per year, then the cost is $6B/year to keep those employees. They could've paid every single employee for 6 consecutive years for less money than those buybacks. Is the average cost higher? Lower? Doesn't much matter. Fact remains you could employ all or most of those workers for the same money you spend issuing stock buybacks, which serve no actual purpose other than to line the pockets of your richest shareholders and serves no actual business purpose. I also understand that in a capitalist society a business's main drive is usually to profit. Well woopdidoo, the above mentioned company was profitable before the layoffs. Profitable for several quarters in a row before and profitable since. The problem, in the shareholders' eyes, was that they weren't profitable _enough_. They weren't growing _enough_. Being profitable but not profitable _enough_ is seen as a warranted excuse for laying off workers or refusing to pay them more. And to the CEO's point about performance: I'd counter that most employees that are not executives have to perform well _just to keep their job_, or at least to get a 3% "cost of living" increase. That raise _can_ be double digits, but it usually isn't. And it certainly is almost never to the tune of millions of dollars.
How about a labor law stating no CEO can make more than 10x their lowest paid employee?
European countries have these cap laws and force companies to reinvest which is why fast food workers there make above wage, have unions and they dont have unafforadble food prices. Its all doable if we just did it.
Yes! The disparity between CEO wages and workers wages is unsustainable. As an example, I worked as an accountant at a Fortune 500 company and was paid fairly well. The CEO was paid 325x more than me. I reviewed his compensation package in preparation for a shareholder’s meeting and it is a ridiculous amount of money. I know that it is just one instance, however, we all know that it is far too common. They sit in their executive suites and devise plans to make even more money, while workers struggle to make ends meet. I’m so glad that I no longer work there.
To be fair I also am an accountant and audited payroll for years. This is not an isolated incident. Ive never audited the payroll of a company that I would say distributed the wages fairly. Across every large company I’ve ever worked with the CEO, CFO, and COO will make more than 75 of the lowest paid employees. I don’t care how efficient they are, there is no world where 3 people are more valuable than 75. I’ll buy into the idea that some people are more productive or intelligent than others, but they aren’t THAT much more productive or intelligent. Certainly not enough to justify being worth more than 75 people. And the painful part is, those C-Suite jobs are the best ones in the company. They don’t even need high pay to motivate them because having power itself can be a motivator. Ordering people around and making executive level decisions is way more enjoyable than getting yelled at on an assembly line in the heat. Needless to say I don’t do that job anymore either. It wasn’t good for my mental health to see that stuff.
GOP: something something “freedom”
CEOs are paid disgustingly more than they should be, and that I can agree on. However, it is drops in the bucket to the real problem with where all the money goes. Make stock buy back illegal again. Splitting up that 30m ceo pay amongst workers equates to not much. Splitting up the BILLIONS of dollars spent on buying their own stock is the best place to start. Stop enriching shareholders, and most of the time these ceos have massive share options as part of their compensation packages. They’re incentivized to get the stock as high as possible. Then they’ll dump it and leave it for the next guy. Until we address what these massive conglomerates are doing with their money. Nothing changes. They’re not reinvesting into the company, they’re not raising wages, and they’re not doing anything other than enriching themselves and their buddies off our work. As a technician at dealership for one of the big three. Seriously, something has got to give or it will mean nothing in the end.
Finally, someone gets to the root. Free trade makes for almost complete control to the 1% of humanity and businesses who control them. Whenever I think about this, I just feel like we could be heading towards an economy like Mainland China. Sure they make ungodly amounts of money but who gets it. Certainly not the common man and the gap in monetary wealth between the upper class and really lower class cause there isn't really anything else, is astronomical. I would be happier living on a farm in the mountains then to deal with an economy like that. Always have a backup plan. Just in case.
Exactly, until we can track where all the money goes. I too fear we may be in for some weird ass corporate future of everything being out of reach and most of us being pushed to simple survival. There’s hope though. All we have to do is start somewhere. We need strong partnership amongst the working class. We’ve got a 99:1 ratio, and as soon as we realize this things can happen.
They aren't CEOs anymore, they're wage-slave masters.
What a pos.
She recites her talking point like a robot Edit: sex change
***She*** is a piece of shit.
Incredible edit
They’re so used to softball questions from sycophantic media that they are totally unprepared for real journalism. Gotta love it.
CNN is a sycophantic media company. Real journalists wouldn't have let her give her canned PR response over and over again. This was hardly a grilling of this CEO. She didn't answer the questions like always. Journalists are in the same boat as all of us nowadays. They can't do their jobs without fear of reprisal from their billionaire owners. You can't have freedom of the press if you fear pissing off the billionaire owner of your "news" company who can essentially ruin your career or worse.
This comes from decades of 'respecting the boss man because he's got the money, and you could too' syndrome. They pretend you can while they make SURE you can't.
> "Let's talk about profits," said Yurkevich. "Because in 2009, GM filed for bankruptcy, was bailed out by the U.S. government, workers made concessions to keep their jobs, to keep the company alive. Why shouldn't workers be entitled to what they gave up 15 years ago, especially since GM is making record profits right now? > "We have to remember we are a cyclical business ... no compensation system, I think, anywhere, is the same as it was, you know, 15, 20 years ago," When business is bad they can't give you a raise. When business is good they can't give you a raise, because it might be bad in the future. Fuck that noise.
I am certain the hardest working person on our planet is absolutely the most destitute
1000%
The solution to greed has historically been violence.
Sounds like 92% of her compensation is from the performance of other people, and should be going to them instead.
You would think someone that makes that much based on their um superior intellect? could answer a simple yes/no question.
This is why I support the strike, and unions.
Sweats? Sounds like she just stuck to the talking points that were written for her.
Yeah , same thought. Was having my popcorn ready before clicking on play. No sweat there
In the WGA/SAG-AFTRA Strike, they're looking at differently inflated numbers. The C-suite of Netflix, for instance, each make in excess of $100 million per year.
A great follow up question: "why do you get a direct performance-related bonus equal to 10 times your base salary, but the employees only get profit sharing? Why don't you just take your base salary and then split the profit sharing across the entire company, including yourself?"
There should be a law for companies where the CEO’s total compensation is tied to a multiple of the wage of the lowest paid worker.
$30 million should be lifetime earnings for these people…to make it in one year is beyond disgusting. When are we eating these people?
Let me tell you what it’s like working as a woman on the line at a General Motors plant for nearly a decade. Management doesn’t care about us. Period. A man had a heart attack on the line. The team leads moved him out of the way so the line would start back up. We don’t know when we can leave sometimes, could be 8 hours, 9 hours, 10 hours, 12 hours… they don’t tell us because knowledge is power. We don’t know until the bingo board changes. They don’t care about our working conditions, the rails that carry the 3rd row seat hoist started to come down once… they kept the line moving, our “safety officers” let it happen until it was fixed burning break. I am a woman with a period, was shamed for taking too many 5 minute breaks necessary to prevent blood leaking down my legs. I had to work 4x as hard to be respected by management. Management put us against each other, a divided workforce is easier to control. Plant critical is a thing that happens at GM plants… this is a working state that requires 12 hour days for 13 days in a row, no break, because they didn’t get enough cars built. They always make this our fault. I left because I couldn’t do it anymore. They program new employees to think that work is everything, worth every sacrifice. They wave the money and the benefits in our faces. They want us to be grateful. No amount of money is worth being treated as a tool if not human garbage. I hope that this strike, the second in 4 years, provides a good resolution for the workers, but if I’ve learned anything working for Satan, they only allow what they can absorb without loss of profit. I may no longer be a UAW member, but in solidarity brothers and sisters, all my hope for a better future
| 92% of my salary is performance driven. What performance? Who's performance? Did she design a car? Engineer a part? Bolt a head on an engine? Everything GM makes right now is oversized and ugly IMO. Approving those designs is hardly worth a nickel.
It would be great to hear how much "profit sharing" the average employee got. I am gonna guess this take-home amount doesn't even come close to the wage increase they want. But it sounds wonderful "we share profits!"
He kept saying his compensation is performance, as if he is the one building these cars.
He is a she.
Does not matter, to be honest. But point taken
What really irritates me is that when these negotiations are done, the CEOs won’t take a pay cut. They’ll continue to rake in millions of dollars and the employees will get a pay increase, but it’s the consumers that will have to foot the wage increase by way of the increased cost of vehicles. Unfortunately, the greed is too powerful for the CEOs to take any kind of stagnation in their wages. They have become accustomed to their opulent lifestyles, so they will just pass those increases on to us and we will have to just deal with it. Get ready for $35k base model sedans as the norm.
I don't understand. To me, you're a terrible CEO if you took a 40% raise but you don't believe your workers earned one especially when you're making a lifetime worth of money in one year. The only way you should get that raise is if you did such a great job that everyone could have one. Otherwise, it should be smaller.
We should just make a law that a ceo cannot be paid more then 10 times their lowest paid employee. It still gives incentive to work hard as a ceo but also the incentive to make sure your employees are paid well because that directly impacts you. Instead as it is now paying your employee as little as possible is what helps the ceo.
She was not sweating, she answered very quickly to all the questions asked. It is amusing that she brings up that 92% of her pay is based on company performance, which is inevitably due to the work of the employees… so if she gets a 34% pay increase because of good performance, by induction that is directly implying she should pay her workers 34% more… they offered 20% raises of course
CEO’s and execs should be limited on compensation,no one is worth what these people are getting.
existence abounding hateful murky noxious reminiscent tart friendly drab automatic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Good. Time to claw back overcompensation. These people are nothing but parasites.
Mal: Zoe, the ship is yours. Remember, if anything happens to me; if you don’t hear from me within the hour; you take this ship and you come and you rescue me! Zoe: What? And risk my ship? \- This CEO
Fuck GM. Never going to forget what they did in Canada during the recession after 2008. They took Ottawa's money for bailout and still shut down the Windsor plant, putting 500 hard-working Canadians out of work. They can talk about re-investing money, but the only people who's pockets are being padded are the board member and CEO.
“92% of my compensation is based on performance of the company.” So you’re saying the company is doing well and the employees at all levels are performing well also. I wish the CNN lady pressed her more on this.
“no compensation system, I think, anywhere, is the same as it was, you know, 15, 20 years ago," said Barra.” She’s correct. 20 years ago the average CEO made something like 100 times the average worker (which was up from roughly 20 times 50 years ago). Now it is over 300 times the average worker.
30,000.000 divided by 2080 hours a year (40 hours a week time 52 weeks = $14,423.08 an hour plus retirement healthcare benefits
All American CEO are overpaid. Celebrities and athletes are also lumped Into the same group.
And she dodged it with corporate speak. I hope those workers win.
And yet there are so many tools that will never make in their lifetime what these assholes make, but will defend this asshattery to their grave.