It probably will bankrupt him. But only because he built his business on the basis of exploiting employees. He won't make money if he doesn't do that. Which of course means he shouldn't be in business.
Exactly. It's not "his" company, he's just at the peak of the decision-makers, currently. If he remains (short-term) profit-focused, they'll give him a golden parachute of most of the workers' labor to safely land at another company to cut costs and terminate employees and further enrich himself...
"Great job team! We've increased our profits more than ever before! Now we need your help more than ever to increase profits even further. Unfortunately we cannot afford to pay our employees more, because of the great investmemts we need to make to keep increasing our profits!"
The beauty of Hollywood accounting spreading to other industries. Ford Motor Company sells their cars for an on book loss after sales incentives like sub-prime financing through Ford Credit. Ford Credit then makes a profit due to interest payments thus wiping out the loss on the vehicle sale.
Actually, if you can program it to take inputs of anonymized employee satisfaction surveys, and objective employee satisfaction data (attrition, absenteeism, etc), it could work.
Especially if the AI’s target goals are public information. Nobody would work for a company that set the “employee happiness” and “corporate ethics” dials to 0 and the “improve net profit” dial to 100.
Not only that, it has been proven again and again that treating well workers actually yields positive results, considering the IA would have the best for the Company as a goal instead of the pure greed of current CEO/Stakeholders, there are big chances that IA CEO would treat workers way better than current status.
The problem is if the IA goal is not the best for the Company, but the best for the Stakeholders short term, then we would be fucked 😅
If you make $100,000 for 40 years straight that is $4M. This dude made $21M in a single year. Ford’s share buyback program in 2022 totaled $484M. GM’a share buyback program totaled $3.4B in the past twelve months. We live in a fucked up world. Meanwhile, Ford/GM/Stellantis employees cannot afford to even buy the vehicles they make or feed themselves decent food.
Looks like while all of Chris's brothers got in to comedy his cousin Jim decided to become a laughing stock of a person instead. You did it all wrong, Jimbo.
Here's an article about it. Kind of makes you like the movie less because it's glorifying this fucking prick.
Kinda makes you think if Farley had lived, we probably wouldn't like him so much, either. We didn't have time to learn how big of a pile of shit he was thanks to his family.
I don't fucking live vicariously through rich celebrity twats. In my experience, most of them are absolute shitheads, and when they wrote the movie to glorify *checks notes... the guy who is referenced here for being a selfish cunt who doesn't want to pay his employees worth a damn, maybe, just maybe it means they view his assholery as quite OK.
Sorry that I've known enough rich families with asshats like that in them that I know they support those people. Especially if they take the time to write a whole god damned movie loosely based on them. Give me a fucking break, people in this country are way too ready to defend celebrities, and by extension their provably shitty families.
Big Lots, worst pay to effort ratio of anywhere I've ever worked. Working harder than I ever have for less than I ever have until I find something else.
That sucks smelly ass, sorry to hear that, maybe try and organize once you have another job lined up? I'll never forget working the morning shift at hardes, literally the most stressful job I have ever had, for the least pay I have ever made. I got a job at a factory and made twice the salary, but did a quarter of the work, and I had to hear the people I work with denigrate fastfood workers wanting to raise the minimum wage to $10 an hour, cause they thought they worked so much harder and only made $12 an hour. They pit us against eachother while eating caviar from fishes that are going extinct because they are actively poisoning every aspect of our society and our world simultaneously and living in opulence that make the Kings of old look modest. Shits gotta give...
I work in an IT call center and only make 25k. It's a nightmarish routine of answering calls from customers who don't believe in your basic right to be respected, answering to employers who believe the same.
But if you've got a clean criminal record look into city jobs. The pay isn't usually amazing (better than yours though), but the benefits are usually really, really good.
Even in Texas I have never had to pay premiums on medical, dental, and vision for a government job, and my last 2 cities have provided 2:1 matching on my retirement plan at 7% (so I have 21% going towards pension). The guys mowing the parks get the same benefits.
I do not see others laughing. This isn't exactly funny. How is a CEO getting paid much more than the average worker supposed to make me laugh? This more of a news article snippet than a meme
Since when were memes exclusively meant to make you laugh? Memes have always been a means of societal commentary, think Rage Comics and AdviceAnimals plenty of the most famous ones talk about very real issues.
Even something as simple as the "This is fine" meme could be considered "not funny" in the same way this meme is "not funny" depending on how it's used.
I am laughing. Because what else can you do, seeing the hell we were born into and will probably stay the same for the rest of our lives. Nothing is going to change and if you weren't born on top, you're never going to come out on top. No matter what you tell yourself.
What ever happened to making memes just to make someone smile for a moment and not a means to publicize an agenda? We get it, you're a liberal who hates capitalism. Enough already...
Its called juxtaposition my guy, Ford also spent almost half billion on stock buybacks last year which could have been used to give every Ford Employee a $2500 bonus to share their profits, but instead they used it to buy back stocks...
And buying back the stock has the effect of making the stock price go up. And guess who gets the most stock? The CEO and C suite. They give themselves huge raises by doing this and it's perfectly legal :(
Well see that's a good example. Ford is a profitable business, and should be paying their employees. All I'm pointing out is that the CEO's salary - in the specific example of this business - does not represent a significant proportion of what is being taken from the average employee. That's most likely going to the shareholders.
The CEO's are partially to blame, but more blame lies with the shareholders, and also the legal system that mandates the CEO's act in the interest of the hypothetical worst, most profit-hungry shareholder.
I mean I personally think income should be tax free up to a relatively high amount. Like 6 figures, minimum. You're giving up your time, in service of a business which itself is in service of society, you shouldn't have to subtract from your reward for that to give more. The business' taxes should be covering that.
We should be heavily taxing investments, the times when people don't actually do anything themselves but pay for things to be done, with the plan of getting money back and giving as little to those that actually did the work as possible. The business owner gives the minimum to their employees and takes all the excess for themselves.
What's needed is a sliding tax scale where employers benefit from giving out higher mean salaries, not median, such that employees and employers both together benefit from the success of the business. If you pay your employees better, up to or maybe a little above the average income, your business gets taxed less. That's the sort of government incentive we should be having.
Sure, but Ford made a profit of 10 billion last year according to google. That means that they can give every single one of those 186k people a 6000$ raise and still be left with almost 9 billion in profit.
Isn't the CEO one of the main people that decide salaries? When you're ok with you having a multimillion salary and you say that others should be happy with 60k a year... that sounds like a problem to me
The CEO decides salaries, but the CEO is also legally obliged to pursue profits for shareholders first and foremost. The issue isn't specifically the CEO, but the infrastructure that ensures the CEO behaves maliciously towards employees and customers.
No the post compared his salary to the employees earning $66,000 or above. I'm not sure what the median income is at Ford, but I'd guess it's less than that - so really the post is only in support of less than half of the company's workforce.
Your attempt to spin my comment into a scarecrow you can argue against is the real stretch here.
I'm not saying it isn't ridiculous that giving a raise to employees of a profitable business would bankrupt the company. I'm saying it's a bad example for the meme to bring up the CEO's salary, rather than the profit of the company. The CEO's salary is peanuts divided amongst every employee, meanwhile the company profits and shareholder dividends represent much more of the wealth that the employees have generated without being compensated for.
I'm with y'all on this, but demonizing a CEO misses a lot of context. While I agree that billionaires are selfish narcissistic people that couldn't care less about their employees, this CEO isn't a dictator operating in a socio-political vacuum. He needs to do what he is doing, or he gets replaced by another selfish narcissistic jerk that will abuse the employees.
The real issue is our system that creates and encourages these people to maintain and exacerbate these inequalities. We need more worker solidarity, more unions, and more organization among the lower classes to use our power to demand what we want. Otherwise, they will pull the strings that control the system to get what they want.
Additionally, I think rather than just demonizing the CEO, a person that could be easily replaced, we should praise the workers as well. It's a loving approach that feels better than hate, it's founded in collective principles, and it also celebrates their collective efforts which could encourage other workers to do the same.
One thing to consider is that the CEO and other people in his position are the people who have been working over the last half century or so to create the system that allows him to do this. It's right to blame the system, but it's easy to forget the system is made and run by actual people. To start to dismantle the system it will involve taking away the power of people like this, which could be seen as demonizing them.
Anyone curious there's approximately 177k Ford employees, and 21m divides to a little over 117k a person.
The union is asking for a 40% raise over 4-5 years. So 40% total spread across 4-5 years. Average wages are 100k (60k-130k). That's 24k a person. All together is 4.3m rounding up.
He'd go from 21m to 16.5 mill, if his wages are totally stagnant, and he doesn't get any kind of yearly bonus, which I really doubt he isn't, and then also considered most CEOs make the majority of their yearly net gain in stocks alone.
I get people see one-on-one comparison in salary and it can appear stark. But I do workforce management and planning for a career. The last place I worked at spent $2.1B in employee costs annually—around 17.5K active employees which is actually not that big—,while chief officers were on close to $1M. If they were canabalised, people would get a few extra bucks in their paycheck, fuck all.
The CEO got paid that well because they could handle a $2.1B employee cost company, so obviously other companies want them since few people can do that with success, so obviously they were paid their worth.
Edit: Granted, this is in Australia where there's a lot less capitalistic energy.
As an MBA, I will simply state that you all do not understand capitalism. A CEO is kind of like a sports star. They make what they make because they are making all the hard shots and keeping the team afloat. They are like the captain and coach of the team in one. It takes many years to curate the skills required to be a good CEO and there are only so many people good enough in each industry to take on the challenge. 21M is modest compared to Ford’s profits. If they provided less, he would simply move to a competitor in the same way that sports stars shop around. The idea that everyone in the company should have their salaries compared in terms of orders of magnitude of the CEO is insane. It’s like attempting to say that the janitor at a doctor’s office should have to make tens of thousands above the going rate of what a janitor’s output is worth on the open market simply because the star of the business is able to bring in a lot of money. In general, the idea that the CEO doesn’t work as hard as the line workers is incorrect. They CEO meets all day with direct reports and investors and steers the ship.
There should be sanctions on greed. It should be illegal. The amount of death and destruction it causes is insane and yet the greedy just reward themselves for it.
You are absolutely delusional, and frankly, unless you are a million/billionaire, then you have been brainwashed into thinking you are important. (Not that billionaires are important. Just that thry have fooled you into thinking you matter more than anyone else.
You can carry on believing that you dont need every cog in a machine to make it work, but it won't make you right.
What i find so funny is that you dont se to realise that if every ceo got thanos snapped out of existance, most of the machines would continue to run for quite some time and would likely self repair that one tiny ceo shaped hole. Bit if the same happened to the underpaid workforce, the machine grinds to a halt instantly.
Im reminded of a joke where an FBI agent visits a farm and needs access to a certain field. He goes to the farmers' house, says he needs access, and the farmwr says no. The agent shows his badge and statea he is a federal agent and that this badge means he can go where he wants, when he wants.
The farmer laughs and says ok.
Later, the farmer heres shouting and screaming outside and sees the agent running from an enormous bull in that very field. He hurridly opens the door and shouts QUICK QUICK SHOW HIM YOUR BADGE!!!!
Well i hope your importance is enough to save ypu when the workforce have had enough.
I’m not saying that you need every employee to make a company run. There is a lot of waste. I’m just trying to help you understand how CEO’s work. The don’t necessarily keep their job either. The board can remove then if they aren’t making the company money. Sure, I’d like to get paid more than my quarter million or so. It really isn’t enough, but I’m working my ass off to get to the top of my ladder. It’s not necessarily the CEO at my current company, but it could be close to it somewhere else. You just don’t want to play the game. If you want a good listen, my favorite albums of all times are The Kinks - Preservation: Act 1&2. It’s a great social commentary on workers rights and getting manipulated for profit. The answer is somewhere in the middle where commerce is regulated appropriately, but not by throwing the baby out with the bath water and eating the rich. If you go too far social left, you end up in the territory of a restrictive regime. It’s confusing how that works. There are plenty of terrible governments in history that swung the socialist banner.
"Market movers make money" by shipping jobs over seas and busting unions. That's the part of the CEO's job description. They work hard at it alright, but a guillotine works harder.
A Master of Business Administration (MBA; also Master in Business Administration) is a postgraduate degree focused on business administration. The core courses in an MBA program cover various areas of business administration such as accounting, applied statistics, human resources, business communication, business ethics, business law, strategic management, business strategy, finance, managerial economics, management, entrepreneurship, marketing, supply-chain management, and operations management in a manner most relevant to management analysis and strategy. It originated in the United States in the early 20th century when the country industrialized and companies sought scientific management.
You seek to write-off in one stroke what has been built-upon over many centuries and siphoned into scientific disciplines. You suffer from Dunning-Kruger.
Salaries should by law be capped at max 10 times the lowest
Careful, you might be starting to make too much sense!
Doesn't Japan have a system like that? The difference in the lowest and highest paid employee can only be so many thousands different?
Yep, my friend works in a Japanese company and his CEO only makes 3x his salary.
It’s unfortunate that it also requires you to live within shooting range of North Korea and China. Because Japan is a nice vacation spot.
Don't forget appallingly long working hours.
Oh, and don't be not Japanese
That also, I’ve never received so many stares. Like I was a vampire from Twilight, sparkling in the sun, or had a huge booger in my nose.
I'm 6'-4, imagine the stares.
The rest of us live in shooting range of Russia or the US. It's not a question of if we will die, it's a question of when.
Is it law though?
Or is it something else?
Then they'd just get two jobs at the same company, and get two salaries or some other loophole the lawmakers planned for the whole time.
Preferable to 319 jobs I'd say.
You people see the fuckery, shrug your shoulders and say "eh - just let them get away with it".
Fuck that, and fuck them - don't be conned into emptying your pockets to spare them the trouble of robbing you.
I'm not saying we let them get away with it. I'm saying we bleed them in town square as an example of where greed gets them.
Then you close that loophole too as soon as you find it
It probably will bankrupt him. But only because he built his business on the basis of exploiting employees. He won't make money if he doesn't do that. Which of course means he shouldn't be in business.
He is only CEO. Ford going to zero will only sting, it cannot bankrupt him.
Your point remains.
Exactly. It's not "his" company, he's just at the peak of the decision-makers, currently. If he remains (short-term) profit-focused, they'll give him a golden parachute of most of the workers' labor to safely land at another company to cut costs and terminate employees and further enrich himself...
It's always one of the two with this companies, it's either "we're making millions" or "we're going under" there's no inbetween.
Often both at the same time!
"Great job team! We've increased our profits more than ever before! Now we need your help more than ever to increase profits even further. Unfortunately we cannot afford to pay our employees more, because of the great investmemts we need to make to keep increasing our profits!"
The beauty of Hollywood accounting spreading to other industries. Ford Motor Company sells their cars for an on book loss after sales incentives like sub-prime financing through Ford Credit. Ford Credit then makes a profit due to interest payments thus wiping out the loss on the vehicle sale.
Looks like we found one job that should be automated by AI to save Ford 21 million dollars a year.
lol careful. you thought a CEO was heartless, just wait until we put an AI in charge with the ‘goal’ set as profit.
Actually, if you can program it to take inputs of anonymized employee satisfaction surveys, and objective employee satisfaction data (attrition, absenteeism, etc), it could work.
Especially if the AI’s target goals are public information. Nobody would work for a company that set the “employee happiness” and “corporate ethics” dials to 0 and the “improve net profit” dial to 100.
Not only that, it has been proven again and again that treating well workers actually yields positive results, considering the IA would have the best for the Company as a goal instead of the pure greed of current CEO/Stakeholders, there are big chances that IA CEO would treat workers way better than current status.
The problem is if the IA goal is not the best for the Company, but the best for the Stakeholders short term, then we would be fucked 😅
Yeah, it might actually promote unionising since it calculated out the sustainability of its corporate existence
If you make $100,000 for 40 years straight that is $4M. This dude made $21M in a single year. Ford’s share buyback program in 2022 totaled $484M. GM’a share buyback program totaled $3.4B in the past twelve months. We live in a fucked up world. Meanwhile, Ford/GM/Stellantis employees cannot afford to even buy the vehicles they make or feed themselves decent food.
Capitalism lol
CEOs need to take pay cuts. They earn too much and don't provide enough value for their pay.
The rise in CEO wages is actually unbelievably ridiculous:
From 1978 to 2018, CEO compensation grew by 1,007.5% (940.3% under the options-realized measure), far outstripping S&P stock market growth (706.7%) and the wage growth of very high earners (339.2%). In contrast, wages for the typical worker grew by just 11.9%.
For context, this research paper was also pre-pandemic.
On average, CEO salaries jumped about 30% since this research was released. Here is an updated article by the EPI EPI Research
Also for context - on 1965, average CEO-to-worker salary ratio was 20:1, and in 1985 it was 59:1.
Not it's almost 400:1.
Thanks for the updated numbers!
I thought he looked a lot like Chris Farley!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Farley_(businessman)#:~:text=He%20graduated%20from%20Georgetown%20University,and%20AHL%20player%20Tripp%20Tracy.
https://www.zenger.news/2023/01/09/god-we-were-lucky-ford-ceo-shares-family-tidbit-about-chris-farley-and-tommy-boy/
Tommy Boy is literally based on this loser fucking prick.
Source: Jim Farley
Here's a little FYI for ya. Tropic Thunder is based on my experiences in Vietnam.
Looks like while all of Chris's brothers got in to comedy his cousin Jim decided to become a laughing stock of a person instead. You did it all wrong, Jimbo.
Maybe he never watched Tommy Boy.
Mfs nickname is from the movie...
MFs life is literally the plot of the movie Tommy Boy. In the movie, Tommy's father is an industrialist who owns Callahan Auto.
https://www.zenger.news/2023/01/09/god-we-were-lucky-ford-ceo-shares-family-tidbit-about-chris-farley-and-tommy-boy/
Here's an article about it. Kind of makes you like the movie less because it's glorifying this fucking prick.
Kinda makes you think if Farley had lived, we probably wouldn't like him so much, either. We didn't have time to learn how big of a pile of shit he was thanks to his family.
Helluva presumption to just pull out of your ass about someone whose only relation to this matter is family name.
I don't fucking live vicariously through rich celebrity twats. In my experience, most of them are absolute shitheads, and when they wrote the movie to glorify *checks notes... the guy who is referenced here for being a selfish cunt who doesn't want to pay his employees worth a damn, maybe, just maybe it means they view his assholery as quite OK.
Sorry that I've known enough rich families with asshats like that in them that I know they support those people. Especially if they take the time to write a whole god damned movie loosely based on them. Give me a fucking break, people in this country are way too ready to defend celebrities, and by extension their provably shitty families.
Maybe he’s like those guys who listen to fortunate son and think it’s glorifying war?
Just broke my brain a little bit, that crazy!
Holy shit, they're cousins!?
He should live in a van down by the river.
Read "Bullshit Jobs" by David Graeber guys. It's really worth it!
Well yeah? If his workers make 66k how is he going to make 23 mil this year?
Is this Guy related to Chris Farley? I definitely see some resemblance.
Yeah they're cousins.
Holy schnikies!
Total revolution needed. Workers that do the real thing barely can feed their mouth, while those useless management ceo got huge cut
No one should earn that kind of money period.
Laughs in 20k a year.
Hope the cost of living helps offset that.. what company has been stealing your labor from you?
Big Lots, worst pay to effort ratio of anywhere I've ever worked. Working harder than I ever have for less than I ever have until I find something else.
That sucks smelly ass, sorry to hear that, maybe try and organize once you have another job lined up? I'll never forget working the morning shift at hardes, literally the most stressful job I have ever had, for the least pay I have ever made. I got a job at a factory and made twice the salary, but did a quarter of the work, and I had to hear the people I work with denigrate fastfood workers wanting to raise the minimum wage to $10 an hour, cause they thought they worked so much harder and only made $12 an hour. They pit us against eachother while eating caviar from fishes that are going extinct because they are actively poisoning every aspect of our society and our world simultaneously and living in opulence that make the Kings of old look modest. Shits gotta give...
I work in an IT call center and only make 25k. It's a nightmarish routine of answering calls from customers who don't believe in your basic right to be respected, answering to employers who believe the same.
What part of the country are you in?
Indiana.
Darn. I don't have any contacts there.
But if you've got a clean criminal record look into city jobs. The pay isn't usually amazing (better than yours though), but the benefits are usually really, really good.
Even in Texas I have never had to pay premiums on medical, dental, and vision for a government job, and my last 2 cities have provided 2:1 matching on my retirement plan at 7% (so I have 21% going towards pension). The guys mowing the parks get the same benefits.
Why are these posts specifically aimed at car company CEOs?
Are they begging for money in Congress again ?
Is this an anticar thing ?
Are they in union négociations ?
The American autoworkers union is currently striking due to stalled contract negotiations.
It seems obvious the government is siding with the owners.
Because this is the trending politics community. I meant it says so right th...oh ... "memes"? That's the same thing, right?
Memes are memes
I do not see others laughing. This isn't exactly funny. How is a CEO getting paid much more than the average worker supposed to make me laugh? This more of a news article snippet than a meme
Since when were memes exclusively meant to make you laugh? Memes have always been a means of societal commentary, think Rage Comics and AdviceAnimals plenty of the most famous ones talk about very real issues.
Even something as simple as the "This is fine" meme could be considered "not funny" in the same way this meme is "not funny" depending on how it's used.
(You might've mistaken me for the other guy. I'm agreeing with you.)
The "meme" is not exclusive to me. What made you have that idea?
I am laughing. Because what else can you do, seeing the hell we were born into and will probably stay the same for the rest of our lives. Nothing is going to change and if you weren't born on top, you're never going to come out on top. No matter what you tell yourself.
What ever happened to making memes just to make someone smile for a moment and not a means to publicize an agenda? We get it, you're a liberal who hates capitalism. Enough already...
Pointing out a blatant flaw does not inherently mean you hate capitalism. But that being your immediate reaction sure is telling.
Fair point. You can't also deny that places like this 1) aren't overly political and 2) are so far left you never hear from the other side.
When a person that named themselves "antitrust" is upset about spotlighting union grievances...
When someone doesn't know what a burner with a randomly generated name is and completely disregards my comment all together 😆
Man you must really hate jokes.
No, I just enjoy seeing something other than the same stupid, 1-sided shit day in and day out.
Glad I'm not the only one....
How could you be so heartless? How is he supposed to afford his second super yacht?
Ford has 186,000 employees. His entire salary, divided amongst every employee, would be $112.90.
He's certainly overpaid - like pretty much all CEOs - but this is a bad example.
Its called juxtaposition my guy, Ford also spent almost half billion on stock buybacks last year which could have been used to give every Ford Employee a $2500 bonus to share their profits, but instead they used it to buy back stocks...
And buying back the stock has the effect of making the stock price go up. And guess who gets the most stock? The CEO and C suite. They give themselves huge raises by doing this and it's perfectly legal :(
Well see that's a good example. Ford is a profitable business, and should be paying their employees. All I'm pointing out is that the CEO's salary - in the specific example of this business - does not represent a significant proportion of what is being taken from the average employee. That's most likely going to the shareholders.
The CEO's are partially to blame, but more blame lies with the shareholders, and also the legal system that mandates the CEO's act in the interest of the hypothetical worst, most profit-hungry shareholder.
Fucking absolutely. But that's a drop in the bucket of financial fuckery that goes on, which is a very big elephant in the room.
I mean I personally think income should be tax free up to a relatively high amount. Like 6 figures, minimum. You're giving up your time, in service of a business which itself is in service of society, you shouldn't have to subtract from your reward for that to give more. The business' taxes should be covering that.
We should be heavily taxing investments, the times when people don't actually do anything themselves but pay for things to be done, with the plan of getting money back and giving as little to those that actually did the work as possible. The business owner gives the minimum to their employees and takes all the excess for themselves.
What's needed is a sliding tax scale where employers benefit from giving out higher mean salaries, not median, such that employees and employers both together benefit from the success of the business. If you pay your employees better, up to or maybe a little above the average income, your business gets taxed less. That's the sort of government incentive we should be having.
This…is not a bad take. 🍻
A 15 cent quarterly dividend on a $15 stock is 1%, not 10%. Ford's annual dividend is about 4% per year.
Sure, but Ford made a profit of 10 billion last year according to google. That means that they can give every single one of those 186k people a 6000$ raise and still be left with almost 9 billion in profit.
Yes, that's a good example. All I'm saying is the CEO's salary is not the root problem here. It's more of a symptom.
Isn't the CEO one of the main people that decide salaries? When you're ok with you having a multimillion salary and you say that others should be happy with 60k a year... that sounds like a problem to me
The CEO decides salaries, but the CEO is also legally obliged to pursue profits for shareholders first and foremost. The issue isn't specifically the CEO, but the infrastructure that ensures the CEO behaves maliciously towards employees and customers.
Did the post day to divide his salary to everyone or did it laugh at the thought of a living wage bankrupting his company?
No the post compared his salary to the employees earning $66,000 or above. I'm not sure what the median income is at Ford, but I'd guess it's less than that - so really the post is only in support of less than half of the company's workforce.
Yes, the post did just that...
...while laughing at the thought that raising the lower paid people's salary will bankrupt his company.
Your attempt to spin the memes meaning around is an amount of reaching that I'd recommend stretching for next time
Your attempt to spin my comment into a scarecrow you can argue against is the real stretch here.
I'm not saying it isn't ridiculous that giving a raise to employees of a profitable business would bankrupt the company. I'm saying it's a bad example for the meme to bring up the CEO's salary, rather than the profit of the company. The CEO's salary is peanuts divided amongst every employee, meanwhile the company profits and shareholder dividends represent much more of the wealth that the employees have generated without being compensated for.
I'm with y'all on this, but demonizing a CEO misses a lot of context. While I agree that billionaires are selfish narcissistic people that couldn't care less about their employees, this CEO isn't a dictator operating in a socio-political vacuum. He needs to do what he is doing, or he gets replaced by another selfish narcissistic jerk that will abuse the employees.
The real issue is our system that creates and encourages these people to maintain and exacerbate these inequalities. We need more worker solidarity, more unions, and more organization among the lower classes to use our power to demand what we want. Otherwise, they will pull the strings that control the system to get what they want.
Additionally, I think rather than just demonizing the CEO, a person that could be easily replaced, we should praise the workers as well. It's a loving approach that feels better than hate, it's founded in collective principles, and it also celebrates their collective efforts which could encourage other workers to do the same.
One thing to consider is that the CEO and other people in his position are the people who have been working over the last half century or so to create the system that allows him to do this. It's right to blame the system, but it's easy to forget the system is made and run by actual people. To start to dismantle the system it will involve taking away the power of people like this, which could be seen as demonizing them.
Companies should just do a rotational CEO from their pool of workers and give the position a nice 20% salary bump for the term of the position.
Yeah that would work great!
Does a bit of constant chaos seems worse than the existential failure of the system every 13 years like we enjoy today?
Anyone curious there's approximately 177k Ford employees, and 21m divides to a little over 117k a person.
The union is asking for a 40% raise over 4-5 years. So 40% total spread across 4-5 years. Average wages are 100k (60k-130k). That's 24k a person. All together is 4.3m rounding up.
He'd go from 21m to 16.5 mill, if his wages are totally stagnant, and he doesn't get any kind of yearly bonus, which I really doubt he isn't, and then also considered most CEOs make the majority of their yearly net gain in stocks alone.
What’s a perfect day for you? Waiting in line for your government cheese?
I get people see one-on-one comparison in salary and it can appear stark. But I do workforce management and planning for a career. The last place I worked at spent $2.1B in employee costs annually—around 17.5K active employees which is actually not that big—,while chief officers were on close to $1M. If they were canabalised, people would get a few extra bucks in their paycheck, fuck all.
The CEO got paid that well because they could handle a $2.1B employee cost company, so obviously other companies want them since few people can do that with success, so obviously they were paid their worth.
Edit: Granted, this is in Australia where there's a lot less capitalistic energy.
Though he does get paid a lot more than his foreign counterparts of roughly same size.
Bruh
As an MBA, I will simply state that you all do not understand capitalism. A CEO is kind of like a sports star. They make what they make because they are making all the hard shots and keeping the team afloat. They are like the captain and coach of the team in one. It takes many years to curate the skills required to be a good CEO and there are only so many people good enough in each industry to take on the challenge. 21M is modest compared to Ford’s profits. If they provided less, he would simply move to a competitor in the same way that sports stars shop around. The idea that everyone in the company should have their salaries compared in terms of orders of magnitude of the CEO is insane. It’s like attempting to say that the janitor at a doctor’s office should have to make tens of thousands above the going rate of what a janitor’s output is worth on the open market simply because the star of the business is able to bring in a lot of money. In general, the idea that the CEO doesn’t work as hard as the line workers is incorrect. They CEO meets all day with direct reports and investors and steers the ship.
If this isn't sarcasm, have fun steering a ship with no crew.
The market will dictate your worth. Have fun asking for too much money and not getting it.
Nothing lasts forever.
Not even capitalism.
You say the market will decide my worth. The people will decide yours
I feel like it would be more fun to respond to you with songs from my favorite albums. It doesn’t really answer a question since you didn’t have one.
Speak for yourself. I'm priceless.
Is this sarcasm?
No. You live in a capitalist economy. This is how that system works. Market movers make money. CEO’s are the company’s superstars.
There should be sanctions on greed. It should be illegal. The amount of death and destruction it causes is insane and yet the greedy just reward themselves for it.
You are absolutely delusional, and frankly, unless you are a million/billionaire, then you have been brainwashed into thinking you are important. (Not that billionaires are important. Just that thry have fooled you into thinking you matter more than anyone else.
You can carry on believing that you dont need every cog in a machine to make it work, but it won't make you right.
What i find so funny is that you dont se to realise that if every ceo got thanos snapped out of existance, most of the machines would continue to run for quite some time and would likely self repair that one tiny ceo shaped hole. Bit if the same happened to the underpaid workforce, the machine grinds to a halt instantly.
Im reminded of a joke where an FBI agent visits a farm and needs access to a certain field. He goes to the farmers' house, says he needs access, and the farmwr says no. The agent shows his badge and statea he is a federal agent and that this badge means he can go where he wants, when he wants.
The farmer laughs and says ok.
Later, the farmer heres shouting and screaming outside and sees the agent running from an enormous bull in that very field. He hurridly opens the door and shouts QUICK QUICK SHOW HIM YOUR BADGE!!!!
Well i hope your importance is enough to save ypu when the workforce have had enough.
I’m not saying that you need every employee to make a company run. There is a lot of waste. I’m just trying to help you understand how CEO’s work. The don’t necessarily keep their job either. The board can remove then if they aren’t making the company money. Sure, I’d like to get paid more than my quarter million or so. It really isn’t enough, but I’m working my ass off to get to the top of my ladder. It’s not necessarily the CEO at my current company, but it could be close to it somewhere else. You just don’t want to play the game. If you want a good listen, my favorite albums of all times are The Kinks - Preservation: Act 1&2. It’s a great social commentary on workers rights and getting manipulated for profit. The answer is somewhere in the middle where commerce is regulated appropriately, but not by throwing the baby out with the bath water and eating the rich. If you go too far social left, you end up in the territory of a restrictive regime. It’s confusing how that works. There are plenty of terrible governments in history that swung the socialist banner.
"Market movers make money" by shipping jobs over seas and busting unions. That's the part of the CEO's job description. They work hard at it alright, but a guillotine works harder.
So the government should incentivize keeping jobs local. If you aren’t exploiting all available options, then your competitors are.
Why do you think having a MBA matters? It's a weird circlejerk for losers.
A Master of Business Administration (MBA; also Master in Business Administration) is a postgraduate degree focused on business administration. The core courses in an MBA program cover various areas of business administration such as accounting, applied statistics, human resources, business communication, business ethics, business law, strategic management, business strategy, finance, managerial economics, management, entrepreneurship, marketing, supply-chain management, and operations management in a manner most relevant to management analysis and strategy. It originated in the United States in the early 20th century when the country industrialized and companies sought scientific management.
You seek to write-off in one stroke what has been built-upon over many centuries and siphoned into scientific disciplines. You suffer from Dunning-Kruger.
If this is the takeaway from your MBA, you fell for the propaganda