Why would it be fixed through shareholder voting? Most employees aren’t represented in those votes. The major shareholders have fundamentally different interests that are opposed to the interests of the employees. If employees were a majority shareholder, then that could work, but that’s almost never the case.
My comment was aimed more towards the excessive CEO pay, not the stagnation in worker’s pay.
Probably not the best source (just one of the first Google results), but as an example, if I read something like this:
How much money did Marissa Mayer make while running Yahoo? During her five years at Yahoo, from 2012 to 2017, Marissa’s total compensation, including salary, stock, and bonuses, was $405 million. Verizon acquired Yahoo for a little over $4 billion in 2016. Marissa earned roughly $120 million from the acquisition through a mix of bonuses, accelerated stock options and salary. For example, she was paid a onetime bonus of $23,011,325 once the Verizon acquisition was finalized.
I am actually still not sure why it isn’t fixed through voting. And I mean shareholder-voting, not public voting.
But after things like Elon Musk’s compensation package getting approved (again) it cleared won’t work through that mechanism either.
Why would it be fixed through shareholder voting? Most employees aren’t represented in those votes. The major shareholders have fundamentally different interests that are opposed to the interests of the employees. If employees were a majority shareholder, then that could work, but that’s almost never the case.
My comment was aimed more towards the excessive CEO pay, not the stagnation in worker’s pay.
Probably not the best source (just one of the first Google results), but as an example, if I read something like this:
Then it seems to me like the shareholders somehow got the short end, despite being the ones with the power to make changes.
Because shareholders can pay some armed thugs to keep them safe from the dirty plebs, which is cheaper than paying said plebs decent wages