Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is a "sounds good but is actually terrible" idea.

Outsourcing would skyrocket and millions of low paying jobs would be lost and sent abroad and to sub-contractors because you've just created a strong incentive for the CEO to fire the lowest-paid workers in their company.



all jobs including outsourced ones should be pegged. It should be something like you're allowed to earn 200x the average worker including bonuses, including outsourced employees, contractors, freelancers both foreign and domestic.

Maybe also have a bonus structure that's add/subtract 10% to that # for jobs created/lost, so if you added 1% (USA based) increase in jobs you can get a 10% bonus, so if you earned 10 million, you can get 11 million. If your company had to lay off 1% (USA based) of workforce, then you have to take 10% less as a penalty. The idea is to encourage a healthy economy locally in America, while keeping wages up across the board.

Then there are only 2 ways for the CEO to rise above current pay: 1. raise wages. 2. hire more people. Both of which stimulate the economy.


How about pay of your suppliers?

You assemble cars. The radios are made by a company making radios in China for $1 a day.

Okay so you include those. Now miners. The metal that goes in the radio is mined by a guy for $2 a day.

This link CEO pay to worker pay thing sounds really good on paper, but I don't think you could actually do it in a way that would not encourage very bad events (like lay off half your staff)


those are totally separate companies w/ their own ceo and own pay structure to worry about and outside of scope/beyond control.

I also tied it to % increase/decrease of employees. So if you increase by 1% your employees, you would be allowed a 10% increase bonus, so if you earn 10 mill, you now earned 11 mill if you hire 1% more staff this year over last year. However if you lay off 1% you lose 1 million because it's also a penalty. So laying off half your staff obviously does NOT help in this situation.


Suppliers would be subject to the same rules. They'd have to raise their prices to compensate or take a hit on their own personal income from the top -- just as this first corporation will have to do.


tie those too




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: