> then figure out a way to NOT fire them

like reduce the salary of the c-suite staff by 50% so they are only making 300% more than the average workers. or reduce c-suite salary to the lowest wage while allowing them to live off of their stock and other benefits like company cars, expense accounts, etc. granted, that's for the larger companies, but the bigger companies never do anything like that

▲

fourseventy 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

1.) The c-suite is like 6 people, reducing their salary isn't going to make much of a dent.

2.) The c-suite are compensated at market rate the same as anyone else. If the CTO at Patreon is making 400k/yr you can't just cut his salary to 200k, he will leave and take a job somewhere else.

▲

KellyCriterion 20 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Ah, no, for sure you can just cut the salary by 50%?

And believe me, most people in well-managed company would accept it to keep the company alive. And y CTO with 400k wont "just find a new job with same payment" next day, thats an illusion. Especially nowdays in these times.

If I would be asked: "reduce your salary by 50% or get fired", for sure I would stay if there is a perspective that the situation may recover in the future. If the company has no perspective future, then you would leave anyway (either implicitly or explicitly by them)

▲

surgical_fire 9 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The c-suite is like 6 people, reducing their salary isn't going to make much of a dent.

Depends on how much those 6 people make.

Have you seem C-level compensation in comparison to worker's salaries?

▲

Gud 41 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Many of the C suite are just nepo babies.

▲

buellerbueller 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>1.) The c-suite is like 6 people, reducing their salary isn't going to make much of a dent.

It makes much more than a dent to the ~20 people not laid off, and a likely morale boost to everyone remaining.

Edit: who are the sociopaths who downvote this? You don't think that someone not being laid off isn't going to have a much better outcome than had the been laid off? At least make an argument to the contrary...

	▲	john_strinlai 25 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		>Edit: who are the sociopaths who downvote this? there are some people on this venture capital company forum that are venture capitalists. layoffs to boost profits is just another monday
	▲	surgical_fire 7 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> Edit: who are the sociopaths who downvote this? There's a large contingent of HN users that are all too happy to brown nose their corporate overlords. Also, this is still a ycombinator forum, it wouldn't be surprising if some people around are the ones that lay people off. You know, the sociopaths themselves.

▲

miltonlost 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The corollary to 2 is: reduce all CEO pay across the board because of how disproportionate it is.

▲

dewey 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Like reduce the salary of the c-suite staff by 50%

Perfect way to lose your staff to your competitor.

▲

UmYeahNo an hour ago | parent [-]

Let 'em have em. They already messed up this company, let them go mess up the competition now. Sounds like a plan. Encourage the lowest performers to go.

▲

dewey an hour ago | parent [-]

There's perfectly fine reasons for a company to fail that are not the fault of anyone working there. Small startups relying on revenue from a bigger client at the beginning that shifts their spend, market changing quickly etc.

	▲	UmYeahNo 32 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Which I think are all in the domain of the C-Suite to anticipate and handle, aren't they? If they aren't preparing for those situations then maybe they aren't the right folks for the job.

▲

vanuatu an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

if a company is doing poorly enough to lay off people the c suite has already taken drastic pay cuts from their stock compensation