This is exactly the argument I am talking about. It's fine that we can't judge CEOs, but then why are they taking home millions of dollars?
If we can't judge them for failures then we shouldn't be able to judge them for successes as well and they shouldn't be able to pull out the "rare skills" argument
They are taking home millions of dollars because the owners of those companies want to pay them as much, and they have the final say over how much to pay.
It's perfectly possible Mayer did unique work that paid her compensation and much more in savings. Without the counterfactual, we cannot judge her.