[pault]

For better or worse, production workers are seen as fungible and managers (ideally) have deep domain expertise and knowledge of the company's operations that allow them to multiply the efficiency of the people working under them. I am aware that in reality this is not always the case.

Edit: In your car analogy, the management aren't the engine; they're the driver.

[TeMPOraL]

And yet when you need the car to move people or cargo from one place to another, then suddenly the driver becomes as fungible (sometimes even more) as the car itself.

I don't think there's really any moral justification for managers earning more than their subordinates. It's all power and scarcity at play. Managers get more because there is less of them and they are in position to ask for more.

[pault]

In this (stretched to breaking) analogy, drivers aren't necessarily fungible since most of them will drive the car off a cliff, and the great ones will turn a Ford into a Ferrari.

[js8]

> For better or worse, production workers are seen as fungible

Everybody in this thread agrees that it is indeed the case. However, the mystery is why some people see it that way.

> managers (ideally) have deep domain expertise and knowledge of the company's operations

The point of the car analogy was that without workers, managers are nothing, just like car without wheels or engine is useless. In that situation, why would you say one is more important?