Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Propelled by a soaring stock market, the median pay package for a CEO rose above eight figures for the first time last year. The head of a typical large public company earned a record $10.5 million, an increase of 8.8 percent from $9.6 million in 2012, according to an Associated Press/Equilar pay study.
Last year was the fourth straight that CEO compensation rose following a decline during the Great Recession. The median CEO pay package climbed more than 50 percent over that stretch. A chief executive now makes about 257 times the average worker's salary, up sharply from 181 times in 2009."
.
.
"The second-highest paid CEO among companies in the S&P 500 was Leslie Moonves of CBS. Moonves' total compensation rose 9 percent to $65.6 million in 2013, a year when the company's stock rose nearly 70 percent.
"CBS's share appreciation was not only the highest among major media companies, it was near the top of the entire S&P 500," CBS said in a statement. "Mr. Moonves' compensation is reflective of his continued strong leadership."
Media industry CEOs were, once again, paid handsomely. Viacom's Philippe Dauman made $37.2 million while Walt Disney's Robert Iger made $34.3 million. Time Warner CEO Jeffrey Bewkes earned $32.5 million.
The industry with the biggest pay bump was banking. The median pay of a Wall Street CEO rose by 22 percent last year, on top of a 22 percent increase the year before. BlackRock chief Larry Fink made the most, $22.9 million. Kenneth Chenault of American Express ranked second with earnings of $21.7 million."
I think the market normally does an excellent job of establishing fair worth. However, it doesn't make sense to me that a relatively small revenue company like CBS would have the second highest CEO pay. Nor does it make sense to me to think that the CEOs of media or Wall Street companies are particularly valuable relative to their peers.
My goodness, people are paid for what they negotiate. How difficult is that to understand?
If you don't like what compensation you are offered to work, don't accept it, work someplace else. People need to grow up and stop waiting for someone else to take from others and give to them.
The reason for the ever increasing gap between the highest compensated and lowest compensated is because of the reductions in the highest marginal tax rates.
In the 50's, the highest marginal rate was upwards of 90%. Kennedy reduced that to 70% effective 1964 IIRC.
The real change came when Reagan reduced the highest rate to 50%. The 80's was when we began to see the huge increases in CEO compensation and higher multiples of highest compensation versus lowest compensation.
I find it amusing that Reagan is held up as such a champion of free market capitalism for reducing rates to 50% and those same hero worshipers are now whining that the highest rate might move from 36% to 39% and OMG the world is going to end!
My goodness, people are paid for what they negotiate. How difficult is that to understand?
If you don't like what compensation you are offered to work, don't accept it, work someplace else. People need to grow up and stop waiting for someone else to take from others and give to them.
How far can you negotiate for a typical job?
Don't accept the job? And be poor? Another company is going to do the same thing, it's hard to find honest pay in this country.
If you're not happy with your pay, do something about it. If you are stuck in a dead end job, do something about it. If you are a victim of the system, do something about it.
I make a good living because I did something about it. I barely passed high school. Lost my full ride to college in the first semester due to binge drinking, I've been addicted to everything imaginable including coke and meth, and yet through all of this, I found the will to better myself. I haven't made less than six figures in the past 18 years and I've even had several months that would equal what most average victims of oppression make in 2-3 years. I did this by educating myself, working smart and setting goals. You can achieve anything you put your mind to. Stop being a victim and start being a victor...
All the effort people put into being jealous, and envious, they could go make something of their life. If thats all the average CEO is making, they are probably focusing on how to make more, unlike most Americans. This country used to be the epitome of doing it yourself, being self made ect. That is the America I believe in, and I know I'm not the only one left.
"Propelled by a soaring stock market, the median pay package for a CEO rose above eight figures for the first time last year. The head of a typical large public company earned a record $10.5 million, an increase of 8.8 percent from $9.6 million in 2012, according to an Associated Press/Equilar pay study.
Last year was the fourth straight that CEO compensation rose following a decline during the Great Recession. The median CEO pay package climbed more than 50 percent over that stretch. A chief executive now makes about 257 times the average worker's salary, up sharply from 181 times in 2009."
.
.
"The second-highest paid CEO among companies in the S&P 500 was Leslie Moonves of CBS. Moonves' total compensation rose 9 percent to $65.6 million in 2013, a year when the company's stock rose nearly 70 percent.
"CBS's share appreciation was not only the highest among major media companies, it was near the top of the entire S&P 500," CBS said in a statement. "Mr. Moonves' compensation is reflective of his continued strong leadership."
Media industry CEOs were, once again, paid handsomely. Viacom's Philippe Dauman made $37.2 million while Walt Disney's Robert Iger made $34.3 million. Time Warner CEO Jeffrey Bewkes earned $32.5 million.
The industry with the biggest pay bump was banking. The median pay of a Wall Street CEO rose by 22 percent last year, on top of a 22 percent increase the year before. BlackRock chief Larry Fink made the most, $22.9 million. Kenneth Chenault of American Express ranked second with earnings of $21.7 million."
I think the market normally does an excellent job of establishing fair worth. However, it doesn't make sense to me that a relatively small revenue company like CBS would have the second highest CEO pay. Nor does it make sense to me to think that the CEOs of media or Wall Street companies are particularly valuable relative to their peers.
I read an article once where the author referred to CEO pay as "rent" (cannot find the article right now).
Basically CEO pay is like a cold war type scenario, where the pay constantly tops another pay for no real reason other than to top more pay, like a never ending market bubble.
The CEO's getting this pay would all do the same job at 20% less, or even 50% less than what they get now. There is no other position available that would still even give them 80% of what they get now, except....you guessed it, except if another company gives it to them, hence why the constant rise in compensation.
It is like a pro basketball player; the NBA could cut everyone's salary by 50% and every single person will still play, you know why? Because there is no other job out there that pro basketball players can do that would even come close to what they would make at 50% of their current salary.
Same with CEO pay; there is no other position out there that compensates a CEO even at 50% levels for many of them, it is not like they are going to jump ship, they still will make more than any other position allows, except of course another CEO position (it is a circle). Not only is there the compensation of a CEO, but more importantly, the power that comes with it.
I am not ranting against the pay, as long as my money we agreed to is sitting in the bank every pay check, the CEO can go make a thousand percent of the average salary for all I care. The public if they really cared can take action by simply boycotting the company's product.
One quick answer is to reduce the labor pool, this would cause labor prices to rise, of course housing will at away at any savings; some people strive their entire lives to get out of the ghetto, thus any rise in income will allow them to get out, but that puts pressure on the housing market (see any large city for an example, ghetto areas cheap, the few nice areas absurdly expensive, complete with roommates and everything). The gov of course could assist in doing away with these ghetto areas where people strive to get out of...
The only thing that ever irritates the heck out of me regarding CEO or anyone's pay is golden parachutes; I have no idea why any company agrees to this other than those making these decisions are getting favors in return for this absurdity. Golden parachutes make absolutely no incentive for someone to succeed at their position; it is basically stating no matter how poor of a job you do, you are still going to come away with millions of dollars. Absolutely ridiculous.
The only thing that ever irritates the heck out of me regarding CEO or anyone's pay is golden parachutes; I have no idea why any company agrees to this other than those making these decisions are getting favors in return for this absurdity. Golden parachutes make absolutely no incentive for someone to succeed at their position; it is basically stating no matter how poor of a job you do, you are still going to come away with millions of dollars. Absolutely ridiculous.
Actually, typically the best way to think of a "golden parachute" is an insurance contract for/against the CEO. The CEO is typically already proving him/herself pretty well somewhere else. The CEO wants some reassurance that the company won't just turn around and undercut them 1 year later after the CEO gives up a relatively good paying job to come work for them(CEO's are rarely hired from the ranks of the unemployed, not never... but rarely). Typically this "parachute" clause ensure the CEO will be paid pretty well if the board chooses to fire them a year later.
Alternatively the company wants to make sure the CEO won't jump ship for the next company that comes and offers more money. There's usually a sign on bonus for starting as a CEO and the company doesn't want to pay that only to have to be searching for a new CEO in a few months. The "parachue" enables them to make it harder for the CEO to quit(since they'd be giving that up in some cases) and most importantly allows them to make sure the CEO of McDonald's doesn't start working for BurgerKing. No compete clauses are almost always included in these as well.
Also, most CEO's are paid primarily in stock. So yeah, they may get millions, but they would lose even more if they drove the company into the ground. In a lot of cases the parachute is really just the board buying the now Former CEO out of all his stock because they don't' want him having any say in the company anymore.
Not saying they're always justifiable, just that they're not thoughtless, and as with many things, there was usually a good intention somewhere along the line.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
