Capping executive salaries

Who, me? This f***wit pays himself $12 million+ per year from Telstra's bottomless pit. But 'Sol the Mexican' is not even worth $500,000. Talk about "foreigners taking Australian jobs", this corporate pig takes the cake.
Let’s just make it $500,000 max. across the board – full stop.
The move by new US President Barak Obama to cap the salaries of top executives at firms that have to be bailed out by the Government is to be applauded. But it might fall under the category of ‘too little, too late.’
I’m not criticising Obama of course, it’s not his fault that previous administrations have allowed CEOs and other executives to pay themselves obscene salaries & bonuses. He’s made a move in the right direction.
But Obama’s new rules that impose a salary cap of $US500,000 ($AUS776,000) on top executives of companies which have received federal bailout money do not go far enough, in my opinion, and should be made to apply to ALL executives in ALL publicly listed companies.
And the same goes for Australia where, in proportional terms, we’ve got some of the biggest corporate abusers of excessive salary packages in the entire world – witness our major commercial & merchant banks and companies like Telstra, AMP, etc, etc. Packages of $20 million plus are almost commonplace, even in companies that haven’t been performing.
But this shouldn’t be a question of how well the company is doing. These executives are usually no more valuable to a company’s success than its lowest paid worker and what they’re doing is just ripping off the shareholders, their own workers AND the general public by taking the cream off the top instead of re-investing it in new projects that provide new jobs.
Worse still, a lot of the so-called success of some of our bigger companies has come via their ability to shed jobs at the lower end and either outsource the work overseas to third world countries on much lower wages, or just demand more output from those ‘lucky’ enough to still be employed. Telstra’s Sol Trujillo is a prime example of “how to get rich on the back of the poor.”
If PM Rudd were to introduce a law that limited ALL executive salaries to $500,000 there’d certainly be a massive outcry from the business world. Well so what? If they’re not happy on half a mill a year then guess what? There’d be plenty of well (and better) qualified people willing to take their place.
Heck, I might even apply myself; I’d be happy with $500,000 a year, wouldn’t you? I also think I’d do a better job than the likes of ‘Sol the Mexican’ from Telstra – I mean, who wouldn’t?
Wally says: I'm taking y'all to VCAT, Woolies. Go on, git! Git out of 'my town'.
Contact: alpineopinion@gmail.com
Click
I don’t think a government can put a cap on the salaries of private companies. But if they need to be bailed out by public money, then it is legitimate to review their compensation structure.
I think they CAN do it, Alan. It’s surely just a matter of amending the Corporations Act. And if they can do it then why shouldn’t they?
[...] Capping executive salaries « Alpine Opinion Let’s just make it $500,000 max. across the board – full stop. The move by new US President Barak Obama to cap the salaries of top executives at firms that have to be bailed out by the Government is to be applauded. But it might fall under the category of ‘too little, too late.’ [...]
I agree on capping salaries but believe if this is done, then generous performance bonuses need to be in place. However $500,000 p.a is too small unless handouts are given by the government.
There are real problems with paying CEO’s ineffective salaries and bonus packages. I would much rather pay big bonuses to a CEO who earned an additional billion for a multi national company than pay a smaller salary and limited bonuses to a CEO who only achieved half this amount. What is important is to realise is that good CEO’s are head hunted around the world. If you drop the salary/ bonus package too far then you get the bottom of the pool and then perhaps a significantly reduced return for shareholders. Therefore there needs to be encouraged a smaller salary but generous bonuses.
A CEO’s job is complex in a large corporation and the “man on the street” certainly would not be able to fill his or her shoes.
Interestingly, Obama said that bonuses could be paid to Company CEO’s once the government had been paid back money loaned to them.
Lesley, I don’t agree that CEOs are, in the main, all that clever, apart from their ability to structure things to suit their own positions. Do you honestly believe that Sol Trujillo, for instance, is responsible for Telstra’s profits? I’d say that Telstra could almost be run without a CEO and still make just as much money – maybe more, especially when you retrieved Sol’s $12 million+.
I know that’s only one example but in my opinion there are plenty more CEOs and company execs who are simply scooping up the cream from the top of crap companies. Look at the recent MFS debacle – in my opinion the CEO and other execs of MFS intentionally sent the trusts they controlled (and consequently their own company) into its diabolical state while charging massive ‘management fees’ and drawing huge salaries & bonuses. Then there was HIH !!!
I’m not suggesting the “man in the street” could run a huge corporation, but there are plenty of well qualified people who could and who would gladly accept a salary cap of $500,000. Even the Prime Minister earns less than that and he’s … oh, maybe that’s not a proven example of good management just yet!
Anyway, I think we’ve just been conditioned over the past decade or so of the boom to accept that CEOs are the ‘bees knees’ and are worth these salaries and bonuses.
In the USA the bailout money is being used for “corporate meetings” at ski-resorts line Aspen and for these guys give their offices a makeover…check this link out
http://swfreedomlover.wordpress.com/2009/01/26/citigroups-misuse-of-our-bailout-money/