Capping high wages 'could' work?

Joined
16 Sep 2006
Messages
4,264
Reaction score
804
Location
Fife
Country
United Kingdom
This makes sense in my head so hopefully it'll make sense in type!

When it comes to people that earn extremely high wage packages e.g. CEOs of large companies, top tier sportspeople and so on, we often hear along the following lines in justification of:

'It's what the market dictates and commands. If we don't pay those wages, we won't attract the talent into the business.'

So let's take a couple of examples.

FTSE 100 chief executives were paid £2.7m on average in 2020 (the latest full-year figures available), which works out at 86 times the £31,285 average salary for full-time UK workers, according to Office for National Statistics figures.

Cristiano Ronaldo is said to be the highest paid current EPL star with an annual salary of £26.4m, while Manchester City playmaker Kevin De Bruyne is second on £20.4m.

Here's my thought process. Let's say there was agreement between all FTSE 100 companies (an agreement that was stringently adhered to) to cap chief exec wages at £1.5 million pa. Let's also say there was a similar agreement between all tier 1 football leagues across the world to cap player wages at £7.8 million pa, £150k per week.

The people that are driven to be CEOs and top footballers would still strive to reach the top of their respective industries, no? If you're business obsessed you're business obsessed. Same with wanting to play football. Using my financial examples, it's not as if a young Ronaldo in the making is going to think 'The most I can ever earn is £150k each week? Forget it, I'm going to law school!' Similarly a young Pascal Soriot in the making (chief executive of AstraZeneca) isn't going to think 'The most I can earn if I climb the corporate ladder is £1.5 million each year? Forget it, I'm going to work in the local supermarket!'

Whatever the sector, if you're driven to achieve you're driven to achieve. So if, around the world, each sector had a strictly adhered to cap, those wanting to reach the top would still strive to do so.

Or am I wrong? If I am wrong, why? And remember, in my hypothetical world, the cap agreements are being adhered to, there's no under the table envelopes being exchanged ;)
 
Sponsored Links
Guys, you've not read my post fully. Yes it's hypothetical, however if adhered to, they wouldn't have anywhere else to go. And it's not necessarily linked to tax in any way, although I see the correlation.
 
Sponsored Links
For sports it is done, look at the salary caps for American Football. For real workers it's more complex and there are ways to game the system.

in principle I'm fine with capping salaries at say 30x the median employee. It can be gamed or worked around but if it's a social expectation then shareholders can start to drive behaviour to fall in line.
 
You mean like when footballers wages were capped at £20 a week which was got around with back handed payments
 
Brain drain, work abroad where no upper earnings cap would be in place. Look at Rugby Union for examples of players moving to France for their pension pot top up
 
It's never going to work, never.

I don't have a problem with those earning millions and I hope that one of my family or more of them start earning something like that ASAP

IMO it is an incentive to many and nothing wrong with that.

Those on low wages, there will always be peeps on low wages compared to others on higher wages.

It's how you manage your money and how you spend/invest it.

I am against all caps every caps.

Even business price caps are not for me but monopolies are a problem and those need to be addressed.

I'm also against my money being used to pay for public transport and clean up after those that leave their dog mess on the street.

If price caps were to come in, what next rent caps, food price caps etc, it will never work thankfully.

Thanks
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top