But America being the land of greed and selfishness, there would be a simple solution: Split the company into two legal entities. One which employs all the jamokes getting next to nothing and another which employs the C-suite folks. Even without such a dramatic split, a law like this would likely mean that they’d shift all low paid employees into contract roles.

None of which is to say that I disagree with the goal, just that one should never underestimate the greed and psychopathy of the typical C-suite individual. These are people who will have employment contracts that guarantee them a multi-million payout if they get fired because they’re shit at their job.

I mean sure, but the argument of "people will just try and work around it" can be made for basically any regulation ever put in place. That doesn't negate the importance of the regulation, and it doesn't make the regulation ineffective. It only acknowledges that the game of cat and mouse between regulators and the people playing the game exists.

It's in the same vein of "criminals will just find a way to get guns if you make guns illegal". Some will, certainly, but the argument itself is an argument against the rule of law entirely. Some criminals will speed on highways, some criminals will steal, etc. But laws are still effective in curtailing this behavior on the macro level.