This policy would limit the amount a CEO can earn compared to the average salary of their employees. Proponents argue that it would reduce income inequality and ensure fairer compensation practices. Opponents argue that it would interfere with business autonomy and could discourage top executive talent.
Statistics are shown for this demographic
Constituency
City
Postal District
Postal Sector
Response rates from 1.9k London voters.
65% Yes |
35% No |
65% Yes |
35% No |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 1.9k London voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 1.9k London voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from London voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@9QVJ4JV5mos5MO
Yes implement the 20:1 pay ratio rule which will help to reduce income inequality and exploration of workers.
@9QKSWMR5mos5MO
If the company does well then everyone should get a pay increase IF they have met their annual targets
@9QD2HSZ5mos5MO
There should be categories of business levels Privatised: Energy companies British rail BA Buse companies All former government companies should have capped dividends to shareholders aswell.
@9Q7Z36G5mos5MO
So long as the workers get compensation for their effort success will breed success from the lowliest operative to the CEO
@9Q6R8ZZ5mos5MO
yes providing the CEO has a majority share in company. Otherwise it should be determined by vote of shareholders.
@9PZK7VW5mos5MO
Yes, the wealth and profits of the business should go to the employees that make the money and not the onlookers
@9PWDD5L 5mos5MO
Yes in pure salty terms. Share based compensation should not be limited but there should be a threshold of CEO pay relative to employees to encourage salary increases across the company when companies experience growth and profits.
@9PVH7KB5mos5MO
Companies that provide basic utilities, as well as, health should all be capped unless they can perform better than expected.
Join in on the most popular conversations.
