entremet

You wouldn't toast a NES cartridge
Member
Oct 26, 2017
61,031
Scare quotes are obvious here. It's a critical piece of executive pay.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/17/...l?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Good opinion piece overall. Nice history lessons on how we got here.

Annual-meeting season is unfolding for corporations, and the script is playing out as usual — chief executive officers will get their way. They may endure the verbal lashings of a couple of shareholders, perhaps face a slightly embarrassing "say on pay" vote about their princely income and then intone that after careful analysis, a compensation committee, advised by experts, unanimously approved their ridiculous pay package.

Extreme executive compensation is hardly a new issue — in the late 1970s General Motors executives were under fire for accepting $1 million paychecks while union workers were absorbing cutbacks. A Clinton-era law tried to pinch pay by limiting to $1 million the tax deduction companies could claim for the C.E.O.'s cash compensation. Boards responded by granting C.E.O.s more in stock and stock options.

That switch to equity-based pay is one reason chief executives have benefited disproportionately, with some now earning more than 1,000 times the median salary of their employees. According to a study by the Economic Policy Institute, C.E.O. payouts rose about 1,000 percent between 1978 and 2017 in 2017 dollars. The Standard & Poor's 500, by contrast, rose 637 percent, while the typical worker's salary increased all of 11.2 percent. The average American worker's wages were flat in real terms from 2000 through 2018 before picking up this year.


The extravagance of C.E.O. pay surfaced anew when Abigail Disney, granddaughter of the Walt Disney Company co-founder Roy Disney, called Bob Iger's $65 million compensation "insane." She then criticized the company for bragging, in its response to her, that it paid theme park workers a minimum of $15 an hour — twice the federal minimum. Big deal, she countered. "Cast members" still struggle to make ends meet while Mr. Iger is earning 1,424 times the median employee pay. This is the same Scrooge McDisney company that in 2015 imported lower-paid foreign workers on special visas to replace the local technical staff in Orlando, Fla., — and compelled the fired workers to train their own replacements.
 

Copper

Banned
Nov 13, 2017
666
It should really be time to consider economic growth at the median, and not average level. This top loaded "growth" inequality is killing all the potential for actual economical growth and social justice.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,846
The point about boards voting for increases because they can use that as a plank for their own increases was an interesting suggestion I'd never considered feeding into it.

Of course the op-Ed doesn't really suggest a good path forward. They're not going to dock themselves if the above is true.

Increasing capital gains taxes would have some impact but I feel like unless the federal government stopped working with vendors that massively overpay their CEOs you're missing the needed stick.
 
OP
OP
entremet

entremet

You wouldn't toast a NES cartridge
Member
Oct 26, 2017
61,031
The point about boards voting for increases because they can use that as a plank for their own increases was an interesting suggestion I'd never considered feeding into it.

Of course the op-Ed doesn't really suggest a good path forward. They're not going to dock themselves if the above is true.

Increasing capital gains taxes would have some impact but I feel like unless the federal government stopped working with vendors that massively overpay their CEOs you're missing the needed stick.
The argument is more pragmatic.

CEO performance today is incredibly overrated as a cohort. SP500 performance hasn't really justified a lot of the compensation many are receiving. Especially since the markets have been buoyed by stock buybacks. You may have geniuses like Iger, but then you mediocrity across the board.

Here it is:

Top executives deserve to be rewarded for their leadership. And tying some of their pay to their company's performance is reasonable. What's not reasonable is leaving employees 1,000 miles behind their leaders under the assumption that he or she would bolt for something else.

Top talent may be scarce, but so are top jobs. Why don't boards take the approach they use with their workers? Test the idea of paying less — would someone else work for half the pay and deliver 90 percent of the value of Oracle's two $100 million co-bosses?

At the very least, boards need to link C.E.O. pay raises to employee pay raises, so that workers can share in some of the growth they've helped to create.
 

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
28,173
It's been so easy for these guys since the last recession. The stock market soared thanks to Central Banks printing money. In some cases the CB's have been directly buying shares with that printed money, something which if you'd said 10 or 15 years ago might happen you'd have been labeled a crackpot. The Bank of Japan is the #1 shareholder in multiple Japanese companies, and a top-10 shareholder in 50% of them. The Swiss National Bank has about $90BN in US stocks including Apple, Facebook etc. That's insane. Then you have the corporate buybacks to juice stock prices. The recent tax cuts for the rich and corporations not surprisingly went to buying their own stock, which means the execs not only have a lot more money, they also get taxed less on it. A feckless CEO can easily walk off with tens of millions in a year or two.