View Single Post
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 03-30-2008, 02:09 PM
C-D-P C-D-P is offline
Analyst
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,704
usa
C-D-P has much to be proud ofC-D-P has much to be proud ofC-D-P has much to be proud ofC-D-P has much to be proud ofC-D-P has much to be proud ofC-D-P has much to be proud ofC-D-P has much to be proud ofC-D-P has much to be proud ofC-D-P has much to be proud of
Credits: 12,684
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcwang View Post
I CAN UDERSTAND THE RATIO 1:100 OR EVEN 1:250. BUT 1: 1000 IS RIDICULOUS.
Not really. Think of it this way (random numbers but it will make sense in the end). A small business that has 500 employees has a CEO that makes a hundred grand a year.

Large business that has twelve thousand employees CEO makes 14 million a year.

The large business CEO is going to make more than the small business CEO because he is responsible for a lot more, and is making much more expensive deals. If they do not make that much money, there there would be no incentive for them to do well and make those big deals. So without the incentive, they don't work as hard, and the lower guy ends up getting his pay cut because the company is not making as much money.

If you do not want to be the little guy, then it is your responsibility to get out there and make more. It is not the responsibility of the CEO to give up his hard earned money to make it so you can work the same for more money.

Cutting his pay would be the same as the Company saying to the worker, Well, we are making boat loads of money, and you guys are doing a great job, but we are going to cut your wages anyway. Just does not make sense.

Lastly, why are you yelling?
__________________
Someone hijacked my sig again.

Last edited by C-D-P; 03-30-2008 at 02:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Red Cross - Donate Today    Save the Rainforest