Cost of living crisis.

[Izzy]

1 hour ago, ozleicester said:

Completely disagree, there is no similarity to football. Failing upward is the standard, there are literally tens of thousands of people capable to run corporations but the con continues. 

That's bollux and you know it.

 

Most people would shit themselves having that much responsibility.

 

Easier for people to bitch and moan about those who have the balls to take senior positions than actually strive to do it themselves.

 

[Izzy]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

Well it has too, we can’t continue in a world whereby the workers pay goes down but the fat cats wage keeps rising. It’s unsustainable and it’s very close to breaking point in many industries.

Totally agree. I'm not saying it's right!

[Foxdiamond]

Just now, Izzy said:

That's bollux and you know it.

 

Most people would shit themselves having that much responsibility.

 

Easier for people to bitch and moan about those who have the balls to take senior positions than actually strive to do it themselves.

 

What is galling is that when they cock it up they walk away with huge sums or golden handshakes. Pressure is trying to keep a family together on peanuts in often lousy housing. Personally I count my blessings as I've never lived in poverty though never had much disposal income. 

[ozleicester]

6 minutes ago, Izzy said:

That's bollux and you know it.  Nope.

 

Most people would shit themselves having that much responsibility. Many people would... however...many many people would love it and do it equally well for MUCH less

 

Easier for people to bitch and moan about those who have the balls to take senior positions than actually strive to do it themselves. Look around at current leaders, most are nothing special, failed upwards at the right place, had the right friends, went to the right school.

 

 

 

[HighPeakFox]

14 minutes ago, Izzy said:

That's bollux and you know it.

1) Love you dearly, but..

 

2) You don't get to tell someone else what they know and don't know. And you know it... 

[LiberalFox]

14 minutes ago, Izzy said:

That's bollux and you know it.

 

Most people would shit themselves having that much responsibility.

 

Easier for people to bitch and moan about those who have the balls to take senior positions than actually strive to do it themselves.

 

I don't really agree with either of your positions. In my experience there is no shortage of people willing to take on responsibility above their level of competence and that's without incentivising with a huge salary. 

[Izzy]

1 hour ago, Foxdiamond said:

I understand that the average CEO is paid well over 200 times more than their rank and file worker. The ratio was about 20 times in the 1950s and 120 times in 2000. I don't see government particularly the Tories breaking a sweat to change this runaway gap. Yet as soon as a group of workers protest or go on strike they are vilified 

In the top 300 US companies it's over 350 times.

 

I agree there are some companies in the U.K. where CEO's are overpaid - but the CEO's don't set their own salary. If the remuneration committee/non execs and shareholders agree to pay them stupid numbers then that's not the CEO's fault. 

 

I favor a model of lower CEO salary with a Long Term Incentive Plan (LTIP) instead. 

 

And I'm certainly not vilifying workers going on strike (but that's the public sector and I'm mainly talking private sector) 

 

1 hour ago, Foxdiamond said:

What is galling is that when they cock it up they walk away with huge sums or golden handshakes. Pressure is trying to keep a family together on peanuts in often lousy housing. Personally I count my blessings as I've never lived in poverty though never had much disposal income. 

Yep, but I don't see how that's the governments fault if private sector companies decide to do that.

 

1 hour ago, LiberalFox said:

I don't really agree with either of your positions. In my experience there is no shortage of people willing to take on responsibility above their level of competence and that's without incentivising with a huge salary. 

I agree up to middle management but I think it's a different ball game when you get to C-suite level.

[Izzy]

1 hour ago, ozleicester said:

That's bollux and you know it.  Nope.

 

Most people would shit themselves having that much responsibility. Many people would... however...many many people would love it and do it equally well for MUCH less

 

Easier for people to bitch and moan about those who have the balls to take senior positions than actually strive to do it themselves. Look around at current leaders, most are nothing special, failed upwards at the right place, had the right friends, went to the right school.

I don't agree that people would do if for much less - I think that's a nice dream to believe.

 

In the real world, If people are offered big money to do big jobs they usually take it. 

 

Bashing people for having the right friends or having a good education just smacks of bitterness to me - sorry.

 

And I also find it a bit hypocritical when people have a pop at CEO's salaries but then quite happily enjoy the goods and services that their companies provide.

 

P.S. I don't see many on here having a go at Susan Whelan for the salary she receives.

[Foxdiamond]

4 minutes ago, Izzy said:

In the top 300 US companies it's over 350 times.

 

I agree there are some companies in the U.K. where CEO's are overpaid - but the CEO's don't set their own salary. If the remuneration committee/non execs and shareholders agree to pay them stupid numbers then that's not the CEO's fault. 

 

I favor a model of lower CEO salary with a Long Term Incentive Plan (LTIP) instead. 

 

And I'm certainly not vilifying workers going on strike (but that's the public sector and I'm mainly talking private sector) 

 

Yep, but I don't see how that's the governments fault if private sector companies decide to do that.

 

I agree up to middle management but I think it's a different ball game when you get to C-suite level.

How about the government giving a moral lead at the least regarding CEO pay. Or it maybe the people involved are their own kind and in the same cosy club. Lack of political will lies at the root of a lot of our ills. How many MPs sit or boards or are company directors.

[Foxdiamond]

2 minutes ago, Izzy said:

I don't agree that people would do if for much less - I think that's a nice dream to believe.

 

In the real world, If people are offered big money to do big jobs they usually take it. 

 

Bashing people for having the right friends or having a good education just smacks of bitterness to me - sorry.

 

And I also find it a bit hypocritical when people have a pop at CEO's salaries but then quite happily enjoy the goods and services that their companies provide.

 

P.S. I don't see many on here having a go at Susan Whelan for the salary she receives.

So we are faced with the situation getting worse. I'm all for top people getting  a big salary but not to the levels so far ahead of their workers. If it continues they will be in their gated mansions with people baying at the gates. 

[Izzy]

7 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

How about the government giving a moral lead at the least regarding CEO pay. Or it maybe the people involved are their own kind and in the same cosy club. Lack of political will lies at the root of a lot of our ills. How many MPs sit or boards or are company directors.

The only thing people can do is vote in a Labour government in the hope things change, I guess.

[Izzy]

2 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

So we are faced with the situation getting worse. I'm all for top people getting  a big salary but not to the levels so far ahead of their workers. If it continues they will be in their gated mansions with people baying at the gates. 

I think this is the crux of the argument really.

 

But as stated before, the top people don't set their own salary. If the shareholders/remuneration committee/non execs agree to pay them stupid money, they're fully aware of the potential PR backlash the company might face. To Oz's point, they could obviously decline such high salaries - but would you?

 

And not all companies have such a disparity between CEO and workers salary, so I think we need to be careful not to generalize.

 

It's a moral argument I suppose and I don't know what the answer is.

 

[fuchsntf]

1 hour ago, LiberalFox said:

I don't really agree with either of your positions. In my experience there is no shortage of people willing to take on responsibility above their level of competence and that's without incentivising with a huge salary. 

Agree..just look ...und Think about what These People do....Part jobs, Part vocation 

Deputy Doctors

The whole nursing/medical / Care staff...Vocatiob

Gastronomie-career staff( hotels/pubs/restaurants who Love their job...Job & Vocation.

Farm/Agricultral staff...Job & vocation....

Small holding...Engineers/Electrictians/Plumbers/ profi-technical-consultants/montiere...etc

 

 

In fact many jobs, where People Take in social,technical, job-management responsibilities in their normal & daily-routine without batting an eyelid..

 

Cynical Cowboys,del-boy-management/ adminastration ruins...the actual Allround competence & reputation of the honest workers & managers...

 

[grobyfox1990]

22 minutes ago, Izzy said:

I think this is the crux of the argument really.

 

But as stated before, the top people don't set their own salary. If the shareholders/remuneration committee/non execs agree to pay them stupid money, they're fully aware of the potential PR backlash the company might face. To Oz's point, they could obviously decline such high salaries - but would you?

 

And not all companies have such a disparity between CEO and workers salary, so I think we need to be careful not to generalize.

 

It's a moral argument I suppose and I don't know what the answer is.

 

In reality how often does RemCo make a serious dent in proposed ceo pay. That’s when RemCo and the board isn’t full of the ceos allies anyway. Likewise shareholder action is a pipe dream, the index funds largely own companies now so how do individuals conceivably vote down pay? 
 

Exec essentially do pay themselves, as well as putting in astronomical LTIP conditions and payouts connected to issues which have largely got nothing to do with their performance (share price) - there is lots of research showing this. 

[Izzy]

40 minutes ago, grobyfox1990 said:

In reality how often does RemCo make a serious dent in proposed ceo pay. That’s when RemCo and the board isn’t full of the ceos allies anyway. Likewise shareholder action is a pipe dream, the index funds largely own companies now so how do individuals conceivably vote down pay? 
 

Exec essentially do pay themselves, as well as putting in astronomical LTIP conditions and payouts connected to issues which have largely got nothing to do with their performance (share price) - there is lots of research showing this. 

That maybe so, but there's no law against any of it, is there?

 

What would you suggest as an alternative?

[Daggers]

3 hours ago, Izzy said:

That's bollux and you know it.

 

Most people would shit themselves having that much responsibility.

 

Easier for people to bitch and moan about those who have the balls to take senior positions than actually strive to do it themselves.

 

Presupposes we live in a meritocracy, which we don’t. Hence why large CEO pay packets aren’t reflective of the remuneration required to attract the finest candidates, it’s just indicative of an unregulated communal trough feeding frenzy for mates with the right coloured tie.

[Milo]

I think we live in an absolutely storming country. 

 

High quality, free education for all. 

 

If you want to go on to further education and/or some of the best Universities on the planet then you can. 

 

If you want to work for a blue chip company there are loads of them based here. If you have an idea and want to start your own business then that's pretty easy to do, too. If you want to work for dynamic, high pressure businesses you have an abundance to choose from. 

 

Similarly, if you want to sit on your backside all day and not work, well, there are provisions for you as well. 

 

Plus the plethora of options in between. Private sector with all of the pros and cons that come with that/Public sector with all of the pros and cons there.  

 

My first job was working in one of the many hosiery factories in Hinckley when I left school - there were a couple of old blokes there who just bitched and moaned and blamed.

 

Every day - bitch, moan, blame, repeat. Blame Management for this, blame Government for that. They were an absolute godsend to me. I really didn't want to get to the end of my working life as embittered as them.

 

When I started my working life proper, I wanted to work for a successful company - why the fvck should I care what the big boss earns? If you're unhappy and think you can get better pay and conditions elsewhere then go for it.  

 

I didn't get it then, and I don't get it now.   

 

 

 

 

  

[Izzy]

1 minute ago, Daggers said:

Presupposes we live in a meritocracy, which we don’t. Hence why large CEO pay packets aren’t reflective of the remuneration required to attract the finest candidates, it’s just indicative of an unregulated communal trough feeding frenzy for mates with the right coloured tie.

I bet deep down, you wish you wore the right coloured tie and had those type of mates 

[Izzy]

4 minutes ago, Milo said:

I think we live in an absolutely storming country. 

 

High quality, free education for all. 

 

If you want to go on to further education and/or some of the best Universities on the planet then you can. 

 

If you want to work for a blue chip company there are loads of them based here. If you have an idea and want to start your own business then that's pretty easy to do, too. If you want to work for dynamic, high pressure businesses you have an abundance to choose from. 

 

Similarly, if you want to sit on your backside all day and not work, well, there are provisions for you as well. 

 

Plus the plethora of options in between. Private sector with all of the pros and cons that come with that/Public sector with all of the pros and cons there.  

 

My first job was working in one of the many hosiery factories in Hinckley when I left school - there were a couple of old blokes there who just bitched and moaned and blamed.

 

Every day - bitch, moan, blame, repeat. Blame Management for this, blame Government for that. They were an absolute godsend to me. I really didn't want to get to the end of my working life as embittered as them.

 

When I started my working life proper, I wanted to work for a successful company - why the fvck should I care what the big boss earns? If you're unhappy and think you can get better pay and conditions elsewhere then go for it.  

 

I didn't get it then, and I don't get it now.   

 

Hallelujah, a kindred spirit 

 

I too think we live in a storming country which is only let down by those who go through life with a victim mentality.

 

Glass always half empty, pessimistic, mood hoovers. 

 

Why would you want to live your life always blaming things that are out of your control? What a sad existence.

 

I too don't get it. 

[grobyfox1990]

50 minutes ago, Izzy said:

That maybe so, but there's no law against any of it, is there?

 

What would you suggest as an alternative?

 

52 minutes ago, Izzy said:

That maybe so, but there's no law against any of it, is there?

 

What would you suggest as an alternative?

Following the law is no longer a get out clause now. The business of business isn’t just to do business these days and business should be seen as a leader to create a fair and just world. Not a box ticker. Standards like the FRC ethics code and corporate governance code exist for this purpose 

 

on ceo pay - less emphasis on short term performance. If you want to get paid based on share price rises, commensurate pay cut based on share price drops. Clawbacks based on scandals under your watch uncovered for an unlimited period. Jail sentences. LTIPs paid out under a longer vesting period. Independently verified and appointed RemCo. Pay increases only awarded if you’ve shown due and proper approval from all shareholders, independently verified. I could go on and on and on. Ceo pay is out of control and it’s not that hard to fix it, look at the SMCR as an example 

[grobyfox1990]

41 minutes ago, Milo said:

I think we live in an absolutely storming country. 

 

High quality, free education for all. 

 

If you want to go on to further education and/or some of the best Universities on the planet then you can. 

 

If you want to work for a blue chip company there are loads of them based here. If you have an idea and want to start your own business then that's pretty easy to do, too. If you want to work for dynamic, high pressure businesses you have an abundance to choose from. 

 

Similarly, if you want to sit on your backside all day and not work, well, there are provisions for you as well. 

 

Plus the plethora of options in between. Private sector with all of the pros and cons that come with that/Public sector with all of the pros and cons there.  

 

My first job was working in one of the many hosiery factories in Hinckley when I left school - there were a couple of old blokes there who just bitched and moaned and blamed.

 

Every day - bitch, moan, blame, repeat. Blame Management for this, blame Government for that. They were an absolute godsend to me. I really didn't want to get to the end of my working life as embittered as them.

 

When I started my working life proper, I wanted to work for a successful company - why the fvck should I care what the big boss earns? If you're unhappy and think you can get better pay and conditions elsewhere then go for it.  

 

I didn't get it then, and I don't get it now.   

 

 

 

 

  

It’s nothing to do with moaning. We live in a storming country. Yes. Is ceo pay out of control and should something be done about it. Yes

 

the country you describe above wasn’t built through people sitting around on their arses going ‘you know what Danny overall we’ve got it wicked here mate so we shouldn’t complain mate and just accept everything that is bad’ it was built through people constantly pushing the standards and forcing improvements 

[Milo]

2 minutes ago, grobyfox1990 said:

It’s nothing to do with moaning. We live in a storming country. Yes. Is ceo pay out of control and should something be done about it. Yes

 

the country you describe above wasn’t built through people sitting around on their arses going ‘you know what Danny overall we’ve got it wicked here mate so we shouldn’t complain mate and just accept everything that is bad’ it was built through people constantly pushing the standards and forcing improvements 

Honestly pretty low down on my list of priorities at the moment. And maybe deserves its own thread (?)

 

 

 

FWIW I was prevented from earning money this week by the train strike. That's probably more appropriate for this thread.  

[Daggers]

58 minutes ago, Izzy said:

I bet deep down, you wish you wore the right coloured tie and had those type of mates 

I do have the right coloured tie and know those people from school. Attempting the ‘politics of envy’ argument will prove a fruitless cul-de-sac for you, I’m afraid.

[Foxdiamond]

35 minutes ago, grobyfox1990 said:

It’s nothing to do with moaning. We live in a storming country. Yes. Is ceo pay out of control and should something be done about it. Yes

 

the country you describe above wasn’t built through people sitting around on their arses going ‘you know what Danny overall we’ve got it wicked here mate so we shouldn’t complain mate and just accept everything that is bad’ it was built through people constantly pushing the standards and forcing improvements 

Yes  perhaps some think that the paid holidays, sick pay and pensions etc were just given and not fought for by previous generations. Some of these have been eroded for some already. 

[HighPeakFox]

Are those that are moaning about those that moan the patriotic equivalent of happy clapper fans?