Hacker News Reader

Comment by wolverine876 | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

I think most people are upset that Mozilla went from a CEO with a compensation[1] of ~800K and decent market share to one earning around 7mln but with the scraps of market share that we have now. Nobody can say if Eich would have done things differently, but I guess we'll never know.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22060527

Serious question because a few more minutes of Googling than I should've taken couldn't answer it: did Baker set her own salary, or did the Mozilla board collectively set it? Is any of that released by Mozilla?

Laura Chambers, the interim CEO, is listed on Mozilla's website as "member of the compensation committee". Karim Lakhani's chair of the compensation committee and has been on the board since 2016. So I'm assuming the same people who decided to pay Baker $7M/year are still there?

CEO pay is always set by the board (the compensation committee is usually a subset of the board). It may be the case that the CEO demands certain comp and the board composed of their friends grants that request, but it's still the board.

Also, the CEO is often on the board.

It's hard to imagine why are people expecting something tangible from someone making millions per year while laying people off.

What are you talking about? Criticism comes with the territory of being the CEO of a company. A CEO is going to receive the blame or accolades for a company depending on whether it fails or succeeds. People largely perceive Mozilla to be a declining company. So, yes, she is naturally going to receive the blame for that. What also comes with the territory is massive compensation.

Whatever the justification for commenter behavior (which doesn't justify it all in my mind; it just says lots of people do it), how does that address my GP comment?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com