[triceratops]

> What would have happened to Kodak or Blockbuster if they had a CEO with enough grit to cut the workforce and pivot the businesses before they collapsed?

The CEO would have made less money for a few years while the turnaround was in progress. If it succeeded, the stock would take off and they'd profit handsomely. I don't see the problem with these incentives.

Let's remember again, the proposal from the article:

"freeze CEO pay and stock options and prevent stock sales for a year following any layoffs that exceed 5% of the workforce"

What you don't want is a CEO dumping the stock when it goes up after the layoff. That's a conflict of interest. And if the company needs to do layoffs to conserve cash, the CEO and rest of the leadership taking pay cuts will also help the shareholders.