Should CEOs have to return enormous salaries if the company does poorly?

[Eddy Current]

So the only (somewhat) valid argument I've seen for CEOs making millions per year is that leading a company is difficult and not many people can do it.

So if a CEO successfully leads a company, maybe they deserve huge compensation for it.

But if a CEO makes $10 million in a year where he makes a couple of bad decisions and 1,000 people get laid off, shouldn't he NOT deserve $10 million?

[man down]

WTF no, if the company you work for does poorly do you return your wages?
Thats on the company. They take the risk in hiring the person and make a contract.

[Eddy Current]

WTF no, if the company you work for does poorly do you return your wages?
Thats on the company. They take the risk in hiring the person and make a contract.

Well then if the lowly hourly employees is to be held equally accountable if the company does poorly, shouldn't they be entitled to the same compensation?

[man down]

Well then if the lowly hourly employees is to be held equally accountable if the company does poorly, shouldn't they be entitled to the same compensation?

Its up to the PRIVATE COMPANY.

[Eddy Current]

Its up to the PRIVATE COMPANY.

Yeah, but my point of discussion is not whether or not a company should be allowed to pay their CEO so much, but whether or not it's ethically sound for them to do so.

[Jim Tom]

So the only (somewhat) valid argument I've seen for CEOs making millions per year is that leading a company is difficult and not many people can do it.

So if a CEO successfully leads a company, maybe they deserve huge compensation for it.

But if a CEO makes $10 million in a year where he makes a couple of bad decisions and 1,000 people get laid off, shouldn't he NOT deserve $10 million?

No one can ever guarantee the success of a company because so many things can go wrong beyond anyone's control. It's very difficult to predict the future but the best bet is to see someone's track record and see if what he has done is something you can deal with. CEOs put in a lot of work and should get compensated well. If they make bad decisions they mess up their own name making it harder for them to get paid in the future. Also share based options in remuneration mean they are most likely going to act in the best interests of the company rather than shooting themselves in the foot.

[man down]

Yeah, but my point of discussion is not whether or not a company should be allowed to pay their CEO so much, but whether or not it's ethically sound for them to do so.

This is a pointless discussion. Start a business and let someone else tell you how to run it.

[Jim Tom]

Well then if the lowly hourly employees is to be held equally accountable if the company does poorly, shouldn't they be entitled to the same compensation?

Lol how can a lowly paid guy ever be entitled to the same compensation? Do they add the same value to the company, is their input the same as the guy at the top? Also it's easier to fire the guy at the top than the guy at the bottom. Bottom guys have far more stability.

[DreamerUSA]

Yeah, but my point of discussion is not whether or not a company should be allowed to pay their CEO so much, but whether or not it's ethically sound for them to do so.

Whether something is ethically sound or not is subjective. Hence why contracts are made outlining what someone will get paid and under what circumstances. There is no right or wrong answer to your question.

[Eddy Current]

This is a pointless discussion. Start a business and let someone else tell you how to run it.

You aren't capable of stepping back and looking at things from an outside view. You have trouble seeing past your own nose.

That's a selfish and narrow attitude you have in that post.