EAs CEO makes $20MM. They have 13k employees. That’s an $1100 raise, give or take, if you take every penny from the CEO. For the vast majority of their employees, that is less than a 1% raise.
So no, it won’t get you both, in any meaningful sense.
Edit: And yes, if you are not productive, you get paid less. That’s the whole point. If you are not 100x productive, you don’t deserve to get 100x the wages of a regular employee too.
If I follow your search terms, the first Google result is this. If the data were to be trusted, then most of the employees are absolutely paid much less than the “top positions”.
EAs CEO makes $20MM. They have 13k employees. That’s an $1100 raise, give or take, if you take every penny from the CEO. For the vast majority of their employees, that is less than a 1% raise.
So no, it won’t get you both, in any meaningful sense.
I am pretty sure we don’t need to raise every employee’s wages. Some of the upper management who sit in their offices biting nails, for example.
The point is to reduce the wage inequality inside a company.
So you want to raise the wages of the people making $140k per year but not $170k?
Why?
Where did you pull those numbers from, then?
Edit: And yes, if you are not productive, you get paid less. That’s the whole point. If you are not 100x productive, you don’t deserve to get 100x the wages of a regular employee too.
I googled median EA wages (gave me median, top 75%, etc), EA CEO pay and number of employees at EA and then did division
If I follow your search terms, the first Google result is this. If the data were to be trusted, then most of the employees are absolutely paid much less than the “top positions”.
People do not get paid based on production but based on value.