Conversation

Notices

Embed this notice
Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 17-Nov-2023 06:44:46 JST Paul Cantrell
- int%rmitt]nt sig^al. ...~!...)
This little remark from @nrmacdonald is a really, really, really good point. Take half a moment to get the context and mull it over.
https://mastodon.social/@nrmacdonald/111422360795544722
In conversation about a year ago from hachyderm.io permalink
Attachments
1. No result found on File_thumbnail lookup.
  
  int%rmitt]nt sig^al. ...~!...) (@nrmacdonald@mastodon.social)
  
  from int%rmitt]nt sig^al. ...~!...)
  
  @ned@mstdn.ca You forgot CEO productivity growth: -92%
- Embed this notice
  Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 17-Nov-2023 06:48:30 JST Paul Cantrell
  in reply to
  - Noah Gibbs
  @codefolio
  I assume it’s taking the numbers from the screenshot at face value — although when I do the math myself, I get -89% CEO productivity growth, so…??
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Noah Gibbs (codefolio@ruby.social)'s status on Friday, 17-Nov-2023 06:48:31 JST Noah Gibbs
  in reply to
  - int%rmitt]nt sig^al. ...~!...)
  @inthehands @nrmacdonald
  It's a great conceptual point, though I have very little understanding of how you'd usefully measure it.
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 17-Nov-2023 06:50:16 JST Paul Cantrell
  in reply to
  - int%rmitt]nt sig^al. ...~!...)
  - Noah Gibbs
  @codefolio
  ceo_pay = (1,460 + 100) / 100 = 15.6 pay growth factor vs baseline
  productivity = 1.646 pay growth factor vs baseline
  (1 − productivity / ceo_pay) × 100 = 89.45, i.e. -89% growth
  @nrmacdonald, am I missing something?
  
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 17-Nov-2023 06:53:55 JST Paul Cantrell
  in reply to
  
  Properly quantifying this is of course murky far beyond my skills (and I’m not quite sure the math is correct: https://hachyderm.io/@inthehands/111422433783809200), but…
  All that is missing the basic point: if we pay CEOs because they help companies succeed, then shouldn’t we expect a closer relationship between CEO pay growth and worker productivity growth? The way those two numbers diverge suggests instead this is a case of “those who control the money make off with the money.”
  In conversation about a year ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. No result found on File_thumbnail lookup.
    
    Paul Cantrell (@inthehands@hachyderm.io)
    
    from Paul Cantrell
    
    @codefolio@ruby.social ceo_pay = (1,460 + 100) / 100 = 15.6 pay growth factor vs baseline productivity = 1.646 pay growth factor vs baseline productivity / ceo_pay = 0.1055 pay-per-productivity factor vs baseline (1 − productivity / ceo_pay) × 100 = 89.45, i.e. -89% growth @nrmacdonald@mastodon.social, am I missing something?

Public

Conversation

Notices

Feeds