you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

So the profit from the for-profit is passed up to the non-profit.

This is a really common organisational structure and not bizarre.

There's loads of worthy criticisms to make of mozilla but this is not one of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Sure, whereupon the CEO alone can receive an 8 figure compensation package. That is not at all an issue to the viability of a non-profit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's not as simple as just deciding to hire people at lower rates of pay.

    Cost cutting is a tricky game. When an organisation is not on a positive trajectory, cost cutting has a very high risk of re-enforcing the underlying problems.

    That's not to say cost cutting isn't a worthy objective, but it needs to be carefully considered.

    If you want a CEO with the right skills and connections you need to pay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    But they have a strong history of paying a lot for CEOs that don't have the right skills and connections. It's not just this one, it's a systemic issue for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    On one hand you're correct in that their CEOs haven't been able to turn the situation around.

    On the other hand it's hubris to suggest that you know better than whoever is doing the hiring.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments