Microsoft CEO's pay rises 63% to $79m, despite devastating year for layoffs: 2550 jobs lost in 2024
Microsoft CEO's pay rises 63% to $79m, despite devastating year for layoffs: 2550 jobs lost in 2024
Microsoft boss Satya Nadella will earn a wallet-busting $79.1m (£60.9m) this financial year, up 63 percent on his compe…
2024 has seen two mass layoffs at Microsoft, with 1900 staff laid off in January, before a further 650 Xbox employees were shown the door in September.
Regardless, Microsoft's shares are up and the company's market value is now higher than $3tn, as it works to capitalise on the rise of AI.
When I entered the work force in 2005, it was with a company that had never had a layoff in its thirty-year history.
Then, in 2009, they had their first layoff, and I learned later our CEO had taken an 80% pay raise that year.
Taxes aren't theft. Literally firing people and taking their salaries is theft.
Also that CEO has an eminently punchable face.
tautological
Taxes are theft the specific way they are designed in most countries.
Another example of theft is a hired administrator administrating by the criterion of their own pay.
I mean, it is understandable how this works - their pay is a counterweight to the incentive to "mismanage" the company if someone else pays a fitting price. The issue here is that these two incentives do not completely neutralize each other, in some dimension their components add up.
Why I had to say that taxes are still theft - because a CEO is equivalent to a state official in this issue. It's the same problem.
Political ideologies divide these problems, because political ideologies are like hedge funds, they diversify investments, so that every political ideology could be usable in every landscape for every policy. They are the opposite of consistent, by design.
In case you missed it, in our broken model of civilization a CEO's only responsibility is to increase value for shareholders. Not to clients, not to employees, not to the biosphere.
Market cap increased, job's done successfully.
A) 1971, Economist Milton Friedman explicitly told the world the "only social responsibility" for businesses is to increase shareholder value. The Business Roundtable heartily endorsed this view, setting the stage for the next half century of villains to gleefully enrich themselves without compunction.
B) 2019, Business Roundtable reversed their 50 year position to include that businesses should be beholden to all Stakeholders, not just shareholders.
But of course the damage has been done, and continues onward. To compound this, the FED's open-purse monetary policy for 14 YEARS ushered in the worst inflation in 40 years, while wages have stagnated for 4 decades, kicking off around the time Baby Boomers were birthing the first Millennial children.
These are just some of the reasons Millennials lay the bulk of culpability at the feet of Baby Boomers, who of course respond with something like: "Well, I don't remember that."
Because of layoffs, not despite them.
That’s roughly 30k for every employee laid off
Sounds like an easy sell to the board, then. It it's that much of a net positive in economics.
If they were software engineers, they saved $200,000+ per person laid off
That's how he makes dem big bux, by telling other people to fuck off
So the CEO gets less than half their salary for the year?
Sounds like a great deal for the company. Until, you know, the whole thing collapses because they laid off the workers who kept the whole thing running
That's some real bald-headed behavior if you ask me.
I'm bald.
I think the author got confused, it's not despite off it's because of.
He made $12000 off each fired employee.
Per year. And lets not talk about his stock options and other benefits... Fucking disgusting.
Trickle down economics - when the 1% tinkle on the remainder.
Trickle down was a rebrand.
It used to be called "Horse and Sparrow economics."
Idea being: The horses eat buckets of whole grains. And the sparrows pick their meal from the horseshit.
Never heard that. Regardless, i love it.
Headline confused "despite" and "due to"
yeah lol what do they think is happening here
When was the last time you got a 63% raise?
70% workload raise
Well his compensation is tied to the stock price so it’s not exactly a “raise.” My employer’s stock is near an all time high right now so I’m not complaining about how much I made from the shares I sold, but neither do I consider it a “raise” because it’s not guaranteed to be the same next year.
At my last company, they usually gave end-of-the-year bonuses instead of raises. They were pretty generous, usually amounting to about half of our annual salaries, but it of course prevented us from being guaranteed that level of compensation the following year. That's why I always describe bonuses as raises followed by pay cuts.
Typical and most people in the US view CEO's as heroes. US income distribution is on the same level as fucking Russia.
As someone from fucking Russia, people with biggest income in your country are usually first businessmen, second - something else, while in Russia those would be cockroaches from MFA, PA and other thieves, plus a few oligarchs who at some point were among those cockroaches.
So it may not be as bad yet, but frankly yes, you are giving out vibes of going in the same direction.
The board doesn’t care about the number of people employed. They care about the current profitability and future profitability.
Of course that’s their job; to look after shareholder interests. And the money would move to a better investment if they didn’t.
It’s the whole system you need to change, if you seek change, not moan about an individual CEO.
That's why Mitbestimmungsgesetz can be goddamn fucking awesome.
That would literally change everything for the better.
I've never heard of that. That's a cool idea.
That would be awesome, but would have limited results if there are still a few enormous companies with patent and IP laws preventing competition.
You can't have that eternal fight between democratic egalitarian monopoly and competitive jungle. The whole point of civilization is to have both representation and competition.
I don't see how paying him so much is actually increasing dividends though.
Pay him half as much or find someone else who will do it for half as much
Current profitability is up. Profit margins are also up from last year. But I could see investors looking at the lack of any path after the current Xbox and wondering why they employ so many there. I'm sure other areas have also seen some stagnation.
They should be paying 90% tax over 1 million.
This is why every profession, blue or white collar, needs to unionize.
The entire point of AI as it stands right now is to allow more of those layoffs. Anyone telling otherwise is a liar.
Also I hate how currently, AI is used to remove the fun parts of creating things at a computer. Take coding for example, I think I can speak for many people when I say that the fun part of their job, is not the planning or the meetings, it's the actual coding and stumbling upon a hard problem to solve. Now with AI you the human will only keep the boring parts of the job!
Don't overestimate LLMs, it can't code and never will be. It can create templates convincingly enough and do boilerplate parts that are nonsense only sometimes, but those aren't the fun parts of the coding process anyway. In my experience, LLM isn't helping at all and I spend more time fixing it's nonsense than I would do if I don't use it at all, so I don't
As someone without a computer science background and who started learning Python for data science shortly before LLMs became mainstream, I gotta say it's been pretty useful for the learning process. I don't mean I just use it to write scripts for me but rather it can be a useful sorta of guide the way a scripted advisor mihht be in a game. Seems to me that one of the good sides of LLMs is that they can make technically dofficult fields more accessible as long as you understand its limits and know what it can and cant do._ i would never use it for any sort of subjective issue but I find it great for logical tasks. And this is not to say that's its perfect for that either but it has increased my efficiency for certain work tasks tremendously.
Exactly how I am feeling. AI took the fun part away of cracking a problem and the satisfaction of solving it is now gone.
CEO = SIC: Shareholder in Chief
Regulate monopolies. Eat the rich.
Because, not despite.
Immaculate concision
Thank god, all these employees lost their jobs so Satya Nadella can pad out their already insanely high salary.
We don't want Satya to starve like the rest us of plebs!
This is the shit we need to be thinking about when we read about a black person getting shot by a cop for stealing a loaf of bread, if you ask me.
Pretty standard issue corporate psychopath.
His salary increase must be inversely proportional to the quality increase in Windows 11.
You're saying he deserves more?!
Well Windows wasn't an important Microsoft product for like 15 years now. It's been like 7 years when Microsoft is a company mostly selling cloud Linux services. Ridiculous I know, but that's from their yearly financial reports. It seems their plan is to cash out Windows as fast as possible before dropping it.
Well, yeah. How do you think they could afford Nadella's pay raise?
He's doing what the Board wants, stock price is up. If there was a worker advocate on the board, maybe things would be different.
stock is regularly at a new all time high with $400++/share.
I would like to propose some changes to that title:
Microsoft CEO's pay rises 63% to $79m,
despite[because of] devastating year for layoffs: 2550jobs lost[employees were fired by their greedy CEO] in 2024 [because he wanted more money]CEOs gonna CEO.
fuck him not just for making those people's lives miserable, but for stamping down the fucking wages of everyone else in tech by flooding the fucking market
An old friend was one of the people who got laid off in January. Fuck MSFT.
“Look timmy, it’s a man made entirely of bullshit”
I just want one outlet to break the shit cycle and report it for what it is : CEO got big pay rises thanks to savings made by eliminating jobs.
That is simply the neutral truth.
It’s not some freakish occurance, not some overtime golden goal shit, this is how it works. It’s the norm.
his payrise is equivalent to something like 3000 US workers minimum wage annual salaries
if my math is correct (which it probably isn't)
Yup, that checks out for me.
That said, that's the federal minimum wage, which almost nobody actually gets (article says $1M people).
Thinking of all the cool products this CEO has killed off. I would love to see this company split up so that maybe they could innovate again.
Go Copilot!
Let's start exercising that 2nd amendment y'all!
@ForgottenFlux disappointed but utterly unsurprised
He deserves it. He made the deal to own 49% of OpenAI, which is quickly becoming one of the most valuable companies of all time.
You can feel that he made good business decisions, but it's pretty awful to be rewarded so much for being the root cause of so many layoffs, don't you think?