D_G

And now that I've given it more thought, my previous statement is wrong. 1 takes 700k, offers 100k to 5,6,7. If 2 makes it to vote, they would only need 2 other votes, however 5/6 votes stock drops, because they stand to gain nothing when it reaches 4. likewise 7s vote would only be vitally important in 1s vote, while 5/6 would be targets until 4, but 4 stands to make the most money by always voting no. If it reaches 4, he could literally offer anything to 7 and get a yes, since the same would also apply for 5s vote. and 2 and 3s vote would most likely be the same, offering themselves the lion's share while offering a pittance to 5 and 6. to ensure the vote goes through, 1 would offer 1/10, since it would be far more than 5,6,7 stand to gain by voting no.

Even though this is late, I think the answer would go like this. 1 offers 2,6,7 1/3. This is the only viably solution for everyone to keep their jobs. 2 will vote, because if it comes to him, he will have to offer the same deal to 3,6,7. and of course 6,7 would vote because if it drops to number 3 the only way then to keep their job would be to offer 4,5 half. Since they all wish to keep their jobs first, and they all hold the same position, this is the only viable way for everyone to keep their jobs. (Seniority does not imply a higher position, and in most cases does not mean the next person in line would inherit their salary should it be more.)