In the Context of a Strike, a Focus on the Extreme Pay of Executives is Legitimate

John Clarke, former major organizer for the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty, recently posted the following on Facebook:

Someone should make a movie about this.
May be an image of 1 person, television, crowd and text that says 'BREESES HIGHEST-PAID HOLLYWOOD IN LAST 5 YEARS EXECUTIVES 498,915,318 $346,935,367 $209,780,532 $195,092,460 $192,171,581 DAVID ZASLAV ARI EMANUEL NETFLIX REED HASTINGS BOB IGER NETFLIX TED SARANDOS FOX RUPERT MURDOCH FOX LACHLAN MURDOCH COMCAST BRIAN ROBERTS JOSEPH IANNIELLO PATRICK WHITESELL $174,929,867 $171,359,374 $170,158,088 $152,793,125 $143,584,597 CNBC Oര &MSNBC REPORTS'
I have pointed out that leftists should not focus on individuals who are rich in the struggle against the power of the class of employers since it is not just individuals who are the class enemy but also the economic, political and social structures that sustain the wealth of employers. However, in the context of a strike, the level of so-called “pay” of executives constitutes a focus for contrasting the pay of regular workers, who are exploited and oppressed, and the so-called pay of excutives, whose pay reflects, not a wage, but the exploitation of regular workers.
Although the use of such executive pay is legitimate, Marxists should, in addition, indicate that such pay is only the tip of the icerberg–that profits of capitalist companies in general flow from the exploitaiton of regular workers and from the exploitation of regular workers in the particular industry in question.