Thursday, July 30, 2009

All right, managerial compensation and executive compensation in relation to workers...some basic ideas

I've heard the argument that people who work in management or are white collar professionals deserve the money they get because, unlike manual labor workers, they work hours and hours above the forty hour work week. But, you know, the way this is usually phrased is vague, so let's quantize it a little bit: let's say that someone working in a managerial, white collar, or executive position works eighty hours a week, twice what the normal work week without overtime is for most workers. Now, if that's the case, and we're talking about working six days a week with about fourteen hour days, then surely it's not unreasonable to suggest that the people in question should get twice the amount of money than manual laborers? Even allowing for education, and some experience, surely there's no justification for the extreme wealth disparity that exists between, say, a welder and a corporate accountant. The "work" produced is produced as an honest counterpart to the compensation given. Instead, the compensation given to these people stems from their position in the company, from the fact that they're working, in one way another, with the boss and so are compensated according to the boss's standards. I mean, like I said, if it's equal pay for equal work, then we wouldn't have these huge disparities in income. Something else is most definitely going on, and that something is class.


Renegade Eye said...

Management in the advanced capitalist countries, create wealth from wealth, as opposed to social production.

Atleast they used to.

John Madziarczyk said...

Yes, but there's also technocratic management of enterprises. Management and capitalists direct the raw resources of exploitation, providing money up front and profiting from it.