Yes, I can. As you rise in the management higherarchy, your job qualifications are less and less definable (the talent component vs. skill rises, and nobody knows what talent is). As a result you are less and less "interchangeable" with other candidates. As a consequence, you employment contract is negotiated. This in contrast to the entry positions, where the salary has a small range and hardly anything esle is negotiable.
Now, during negotiations, exit from the company is also discussed. This is because the CEO takes a big risk accepting the job: if he is fired, he is unlikely to work ever again: he has forgotten whatever entry skills he had, and other companies will not hire him as a CEO. So the contract provides him with insurance: if you are fired, etc., you will receive specified severance compensation to be abler to maintain their lives (this may happen when the person is in his 40s).
The question of compensation is a very difficult one, and we hardly know what constituted optimal compensation.
I don't know why you defend this practice. This "practice" is called labor market, and it is one of the core institutions we have in this country.
And the reason I am explaining this is to make you curious about how it functions and, if you follow the scientific method, refrain from judgement until you do, A lot of these companies are already in trouble.
That too is straight from a newspaper. They have made a few sound like most. That is the objective of the socialists --- to attack the institutions of capitalism. As you can see, they have succeded in phase I: it is possible to graduate from high school and even college without a clue about the main institutions of this society --- those that made this country great. In the absence of basic knowledge, the garbage from newspapers eventually sticks in our minds.