I would like a law

[lynxreign]

It is a simple law.

No employee of any company at any level can make more than 100 times the lowest paid employee of that company.

You're paying someone $20,000 a year, then you can make 2 million a year. Want a raise? You have to raise the salaries of the lowest paid employees.

Now, tell me why you don't like my law.

Comments

[jestermotley.livejournal.com]

Simple legal loophole -

You run a company that RUNS the other companies.

So the CEOs of the top company can make millions and billions because their company only has 10 people, the lowest of which is paid 100k.

And there you have it.

Or not even that complex. The most mundane of tasks would get outsourced to consultants. Very little would be done "in house"

[lynxreign.livejournal.com]

Simply extend the definition of "company" to the entire structure of a corporate hierarchy. This will also benefit transparancy and tax purposes.

If you outsource to consultants, their pay falls under your corporate structure for as long as they're working for you.

[jestermotley.livejournal.com]

Its a nice idea but then the problem THERE becomes people shuffling to do things like.

You're just paying a SERVICES company. Who then decides what to pay people they send in. Its out of your hands.

This wouldn't benefit transparency at all, as you'd have people chomping the bit, who are far more devious and learned than I, to take advantage of the system.

[lynxreign.livejournal.com]

No, you'd be paying the employee. I'm a contractor. My salary is set through my agency with the company I'm working for. If I go work for another company, the rate could be different even though I use the same agency. A similar would prevent abuse.