Maximum Wage Law - Corbyn

[CityStu]

Okay let's say you work for Tesco and are on that 16k and the CEO of Tesco gets a whopping 50% raise, what law are you bringing in?

Let's say for arguments sake that the law was changed prior to this that the highest paid in a company could not be paid more than 50 times the wage of the lowest paid worker. Suppose the CEO was already maxing this out at £800k and you're saying he wants a 50% increase to £1.2m. Then, according to the law, he can only do that if his lowest paid is on at least £24k, so pay for the lowest earners will have to be increased accordingly. In reality it would probably work out as everyone receiving a much smaller bump.

The debatable things about the law would be the multiplier (50 above) and the ratio used (here min to max).

 

[hilts]

Let's say for arguments sake that the law was changed prior to this that the highest paid in a company could not be paid more than 50 times the wage of the lowest paid worker. Suppose the CEO was already maxing this out at £800k and you're saying he wants a 50% increase to £1.2m. Then, according to the law, he can only do that if his lowest paid is on at least £24k, so pay for the lowest earners will have to be increased accordingly. In reality it would probably work out as everyone receiving a much smaller bump.

The debatable things about the law would be the multiplier (50 above) and the ratio used (here min to max).

Why would they get less? It's the law you would have to pay them 24k or not give the pay rise, which is likely in that scenario?

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

Let's say for arguments sake that the law was changed prior to this that the highest paid in a company could not be paid more than 50 times the wage of the lowest paid worker. Suppose the CEO was already maxing this out at £800k and you're saying he wants a 50% increase to £1.2m. Then, according to the law, he can only do that if his lowest paid is on at least £24k, so pay for the lowest earners will have to be increased accordingly. In reality it would probably work out as everyone receiving a much smaller bump.

The debatable things about the law would be the multiplier (50 above) and the ratio used (here min to max).

What nonsense. What about performance, just because someone gets a pay rise everyone else should not get the same one, even if they are shite. Everyone performs differently to different levels. Pay should refelect individual performance not because of how someone else has performed.

What you and Jezza are missing is that the extra 400k the company pays to the CEO means an extra 200k in the pot for schools hospitals, benefits etc. You are too busy focusing on envy and not practicality and the wider benefits.

 

[Chippy_boy]

What nonsense. What about performance, just because someone gets a pay rise everyone else should not get the same one, even if they are shite. Everyone performs differently to different levels. Pay should refelect individual performance not because of how someone else has performed.

What you and Jezza are missing is that the extra 400k the company pays to the CEO means an extra 200k in the pot for schools hospitals, benefits etc. You are too busy focusing on envy and not practicality and the wider benefits.

Not to mention the fact that the CEO, faced with no pay rise after delivering stellar performance, is really pissed off and decides to leave. So the company has to hire an inferior CEO, and the next year the sales slump and half the workforce are laid off.

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

Not to mention the fact that the CEO, faced with no pay rise after delivering stellar performance, is really pissed off and decides to leave. So the company has to hire an inferior CEO, and the next year the sales slump and half the workforce are laid off.

Correct but the jezzas don't care about that mate just that some rich bloke has been shafted . Fuck the rights and reasons it just makes them feel better. Kick the twat as well for doing well in his life and working hard.

It must have been really tough for Jezza growing up on his million quid farm in Shropshire. He understands working people's pain.

 

[smudgedj]

And he sucks back...Well that idea lasted a few hours. Well done to Jeremy.

 

[kevin horlocks wand]

And he sucks back...Well that idea lasted a few hours. Well done to Jeremy.

People say that trump used to just say the first thing that came into his head....

Jezza takes it to another level. Total and utter prick.

 

[hilts]

Not to mention the fact that the CEO, faced with no pay rise after delivering stellar performance, is really pissed off and decides to leave. So the company has to hire an inferior CEO, and the next year the sales slump and half the workforce are laid off.

Aye and now because of this law the taxpayer is worse off through loss of tax and vat, the worker is worse off and anyone who has shares in Tesco as part of their pension scheme including the poor on the government scheme is worse off. But we can rejoice that a rich CEO hasn't got a pay rise except he has just with a different company in a different country. The only person smelling of roses is the one guy that they didn't want to.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Correct but the jezzas don't care about that mate just that some rich bloke has been shafted . Fuck the rights and reasons it just makes them feel better. Kick the twat as well for doing well in his life and working hard.

It must have been really tough for Jezza growing up on his million quid farm in Shropshire. He understands working people's pain.

It's a very British thing to be so resentful of other peoples' success and it's one of our most undesirable attributes. In other countries, people are often much more willing to be happy for someone who's done well for themselves, whereas here they are more likely to run a key down the side of your jag.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I'm not sure of the relevance of that post to a) my post or b) the thread topic.

Thanks for letting me know, but I suspected as much.