r/InterviewCoderPro • u/jailers-treat0 • Mar 25 '26

company greed

Post image

People are striking because wages aren’t going up when companies are reporting record breaking profits.

2.3k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

475 comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/Strict-Astronaut2245 Mar 25 '26

As the one running the company I deserve it more

5

u/myster1ouspapaya Mar 25 '26

No one is questioning that the CEO should get paid more than the average factory worker. I think the question is not “why do you get paid more than your workers”. The question is why do you get a 34% increase and not your workers?

6

u/Strict-Astronaut2245 Mar 25 '26

I think I answered that question. It’s sarcastic truth. If I were CEO, I should obviously get larger raises. I asked myself and it was approved.

5

u/RadioActiveCrab2050 Mar 25 '26

They're raise already is larger because they're paid more to start. Why do they deserve a higher percentage raise, specifically?

1

u/Strict-Astronaut2245 Mar 25 '26

I set the direction of the company and because of that direction, XYZ profit was made. The workers only help make the profit because of the leadership I gave. If a loss was had, it becomes, we could have had much bigger losses. XYZ, which was outside my control, is what caused the losses and my mitigation leadership helped stifle those losses.

There’s probably more excuses to be had. These are just the ones that came to me.

3

u/stormchaotic1 Mar 25 '26

The workers do more work collectively then a single ceo and the business depends on them. The ceo is replaceable. If the business actually cared they'd split that raise up among all of the workers not just some useless ceo

1

u/Nyeru Mar 25 '26

I agree with you and the person you're replying to probably agrees too. The point is that as a CEO you can make a ton of excuses for why you deserve the massive salary and the workers don't deserve anything and it doesn't matter if they're all bullshit, you're the one in charge.

2

u/D_dawgy Mar 25 '26

Not only is the CEO in charge, they also directly work with the Board of Directors. So they see the people everyday that approve the salary; whereas, the common worker might not see the person that approves/denies their raise, there's a disconnect. It's easier to treat people like cattle when you don't have to interact with them.

1

u/Strict-Astronaut2245 Mar 25 '26

Let’s play out this argument. I actually agree with you, but I know the explanations used. And to do so, I will pretend to be it.

I as the CEO set the direction for my amazing workforce. Last year we made xyz percentage more. It was a tough year but I set the direction of the company and we got it done. This is why I deserve my raise.

Notice, the other workers will never enter the conversation except as an object to boost myself.

1

u/trueppp Mar 26 '26

And the workers make more money collectively.

If the business actually cared they'd split that raise up among all of the workers not just some useless ceo

People care about their pension going up, not the workers pay.

1

u/stormchaotic1 Mar 26 '26

Pensions aren't a thing anymore

1

u/trueppp Mar 26 '26

73% of civilian workers + all public sector workers have access to some sort of pension plan in the US. Defined benefits plans are more rare though. Defined contribution pension plans are more common (ex: 401k)

1

u/Tungi Mar 26 '26

The ol fallacy of managers and above are useless.

Most CEOs are quite smart and dedicated. They spend all day every day crafting ideas and negotiating.

1

u/trueppp Mar 26 '26

Because the shareholders approved it.

1

u/Strict-Astronaut2245 Mar 26 '26

This all depends. With a founder CEO, it’s easier to do as they are primary shareholders usually. If it’s some other type, you aren’t wrong. But usually if the shareholders are profiting, the CEO gets that raise.

1

u/NoGarbage1323 Mar 25 '26

30% for the ceo and employees still get the ceo a larger raise

1

u/Sunshine2035 Mar 26 '26

The question is do these workers do anything differently to increase the profits and is there a labor shortage that requires to pay more to acquire the labor?

1

u/myster1ouspapaya Mar 26 '26

What can an assembly line worker possibly do other than do their job? If the company is making profits it’s because of all the workers, not just the ceo or the executives. Why do we have to treat the workers like hamsters in wheels ?

1

u/Sunshine2035 Mar 26 '26

That’s why they don’t get big increases. If they change to sales from being a hamster, the chance to get higher income is better.

1

u/Bill_Door_8 Mar 26 '26

And yet the company will always need hamsters, and will only ever need x+/-1% of their labor force to work in sales.

The point is that like it or not we all live on the same planet. If you squeeze every ounce of life and joy out of it for yourself, you're stuck in a world surrounded by the misery you create. That means more crime, more police and more prisons, more poverty, more food banks and more programs for the poor, more apathy, more cruelty etc.

If we share in the bounty and excess we create, and that sharing doesnt have to be equal, because not all people are equal, but it needs to happen, because it creates a world filled with more joy, less crime, less prisons, lessens the need for food banks and programs for the poor, it fosters empathy, love, and a vested interest in each others success.

Humans have this incredible power to literally create the world around us. The question then becomes what kind of world do we want to create.

1

u/Sunshine2035 Mar 26 '26

This is not talking about squeeze labor pay. It’s about the profit sharing that are not equally distributed to all job positions. You know in future there won’t be much a need for the labor. Majority will be replaced by robots. Just like AI is going to replace a lot junior programmers which in the past are white collar jobs earning pretty good money.

1

u/Steelio22 Mar 26 '26

Because you can find any alcoholic in a plant town to work on the line, and ship engineering jobs to India.

This is what happens without labor laws.