• krashmo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    18 days ago

    If a CEO has very little authority as you claim then what the fuck are they getting paid all that money for?

    The way I see it they either run the company, in which case they own the blame for a company’s failures, or they are just a figurehead with no real influence, in which case they don’t need to be paid any more than the actors the marketing team hires to be in their commercials.

    • Carrolade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      It’s actually between those two extremes. It’s in the name, Chief Executive Officer. They’re essentially there to execute the will of the ownership. They manage the company.

      edit: To further expand on that, it’s not too different from the executive of a country. While they make a lot of decisions, one thing they don’t deserve blame for is any laws passed by the legislature. It’s not a perfect analogy, but it captures the basic idea.

      • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 days ago

        You are both right, if @[email protected] is not claiming that a CEO is not responsible for the running of the company - they are the top tier checks of each other, with the board having marginally more power with the ability to oust the CEO.