It's no longer a secret. The rich get richer. But when I dug beneath the headlines for my undergraduate honors thesis, I discovered something more jarring than anticipated: for some of America's largest companies, CEOs make more than 20 times what a full-time minimum wage worker earns.
Since 2009, the federal minimum wage has remained $7.25/hour, even while inflation and workers’ productivity have increased significantly. This means an individual earning the minimum wage who works full time every day would earn just over $15,000 per year. By contrast, CEO compensation has not only increased over the same time but, at times, increased to shocking heights. By analyzing earnings data from 30 of the largest publicly traded companies in America from 2010-2023, I found what most workers already know: we live in a society where those who put in the hours do not receive the payoff. This is less of an economic issue and more of an empowerment issue.
Why I Did This Research
While inequality is discussed in daily headlines, on picket lines, and in public debates, I wanted to assess how bad the situation really is. Using financial data that public companies are legally obligated to disclose, I sought to contrast CEO compensation with the compensation paid to someone earning the federal minimum wage.
I looked at earnings data published by the top 30 largest U.S. companies in the Fortune 500 as part of these companies’ SEC DEF 14A proxy filings. These filings show how much each CEO received in salary, stock, bonuses, and perquisites. I used the Bureau of Labor Statistics CPI calculator to adjust pay to 2023 dollars to allow an accurate comparison across years. For minimum wage workers, I used the Department of Labor's mandated minimum for a full-time schedule (40 hours/week, 52 weeks/year).
While comparing CEO pay to the minimum wage helps illustrate income inequality, it is important to note that the federal minimum wage is not representative of what the average American worker earns. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median weekly earnings of a full-time U.S. wage and salary worker during the first quarter of 2025 would amount to around $62,000 per year. Most workers earn well above the federal minimum wage – either because they live in states or cities with higher minimum wage laws, work in occupations or industries with higher wages, or negotiate higher pay. Still, the comparison between CEOs and minimum wage workers is useful for demonstrating how vast the pay gap can be at its most extreme. The result: a clear picture of how America's corporate wealth is actually distributed.
The Illusion of “Stable” CEO Pay
At first glance, CEO compensation seems surprisingly stable. My assessment of 30 companies spanning 2010 to 2023 shows that average CEO compensation rose by only 1.93% ($22.6 million to $23 million). But that statistic alone doesn’t tell the whole story.
When I looked at CEO compensation within individual companies, some of the increases were staggering. Kroger's CEO compensation increased by over 100% (from $7.55M to $15.71M). Verizon's CEO compensation increased by nearly 33%. Comcast's more than doubled. Meanwhile, the federal minimum wage did not increase even one cent.
This means that these companies also had some staggering ratios. In 2023:
-
Comcast's CEO made 2,352 times what a full-time minimum wage worker makes.
-
Verizon's ratio was over 1,600:1.
-
Kroger's ratio was over 1,042:1.
The Missing Piece: Union Power
So, why does executive compensation continue to rise while the minimum wage remains stagnant?
One key factor is the decline in union power. Unionization rates were significantly higher in past decades. Through collective bargaining agreements, unions have historically helped workers negotiate better wages, benefits, and workplace protections. These agreements have played a crucial role in raising compensation for large numbers of employees – not just in unionized workplaces, but across industries. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, union membership in the U.S. has declined from around 20% in 1983 to just about 10% in recent years, with even lower rates in the private sector.
Of course, the minimum wage is not set through collective bargaining. It is set by public policy. Unions have led major public campaigns to raise the minimum wage nationwide. For example, the SEIU’s Fight for $15 movement has successfully pushed for higher minimum wages in states like California, New York, and Illinois, as well as in dozens of cities and municipalities. However, the national decline in union density has meant that workers now lack the power to force Congress and the President to raise the minimum wage. They simply do not have unions that are sufficiently large and powerful to reward the federal-level supporters of higher minimum wages and punish the federal-level opponents. Corporate power remains too strong and largely unchecked for the measly federal minimum wage to be increased.
As union density has declined, CEOs and corporations also have faced less pressure to keep executive pay in check. Without strong unions at the negotiating table, it becomes easier for companies to reward top leadership while leaving frontline employees behind. Many corporations have actively resisted unionization efforts, going as far as union busting or refusing to bargain even after workers vote to unionize. High-profile examples include Amazon, Starbucks, Trader Joe’s, and companies owned by Elon Musk, all of which have faced public criticism for anti-union practices.
Many studies support this claim. For example, the Economic Policy Institute has found a clear correlation between the erosion of collective bargaining and wage stagnation for low- and middle-income workers. Without collective worker power, the balance tips heavily towards executives and shareholders enabling those groups to take an ever-larger share of corporate profits – while the workers who create that value see little to no gain.
A Culture of Corporate Greed
It's not only about money. Without a union, there's no avenue for transparency and education regarding fair pay; without collective bargaining agreements, there is no way to ensure proper pay equity standards, nor can employees avoid situations where companies can game the system with excessive stock options and unrealistic performance bonuses.
The data also supports what many workers already sense: this isn’t market economics, it’s corporate greed.
When a CEO’s pay in one-year amounts to a minimum wage worker’s pay over 2,000 years, that’s not an accident. It’s the result of intentional decisions: by boards of directors, lawmakers, and the companies themselves.
In theory, CEO pay is supposed to reflect performance. But time and time again, compensation rises even when profits fall, or stock prices dip. In fact, some CEOs in my study received multimillion-dollar compensation increases despite overseeing layoffs, service cuts, or declining share prices. For example, Comcast’s CEO saw significant pay increases even as the company lost subscribers, closed divisions, and faced customer service scandals. Verizon’s CEO received more than $20 million in annual compensation while the company cut jobs, and its stock underperformed. These examples underscore how executive compensation can soar even during periods of company decline.
Without meaningful oversight, or pushbacks from workers through their unions, these practices become normal. And when workers are divided or disempowered, executives can readily reward themselves at everyone else’s expense.
What Needs to Change
Fixing this won’t be simple, but it’s not impossible. Here are some starting points:
-
Raise the federal minimum wage so that full-time workers aren’t living in poverty.
-
Continuing campaigns to raise the minimum wage at state and local levels.
-
Close tax loopholes that reward CEOs with inflated stock packages.
-
Rein in executive compensation through binding shareholder votes or oversight rules.
-
Most importantly: restore worker power through stronger organizing protections and collective bargaining rights.
None of these changes will happen unless workers organize, vote, and fight for them. Data helps make the case, but power brings results.
Why This Matters
I’m not a policymaker. I’m not a CEO. I’m a student who wanted to understand how one person could make more than 2,000 people combined, and what that says about the country we’re building.
The more I investigated it, the clearer it became that this isn’t sustainable. Inequality at this scale threatens our economy, our democracy, and our basic sense of fairness.
But inequality isn’t a law of nature. It’s a result of policy choices, corporate structures, and power dynamics, all of which can be changed.
That change starts by telling the truth. Then it moves into action.
