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.
It also touched on something I was referring to in the politics issues thread about how companies have paid those at the top, like the executive of Con Ed getting a 4% hike.
A 4% raise with inflation and COL higher than that, I see no problem.
You seem to have a problem with high achievers.
He may be under paid, for all we know.
Surely he's qualified to run his own business, and possibly earn much more.
Do the math and see how much his 4% raise effects utility rates.
You seem to have a problem with high achievers.
He may be under paid, for all we know.
Surely he's qualified to run his own business, and possibly earn much more.
Do the math and see how much his 4% raise effects utility rates.
Not at all, but again, let's not overlook this fact. From the article:
"Why is Con Ed hiking rates?
True, execs at the company did enjoy a pay bump in 2022, with CEO Timothy Cawley getting a 4% hike in base compensation."
So, it isn't just the top guy that is getting a raise and this is a great example of how it isn't necessarily a cut and dry political reason for increases.
Not at all, but again, let's not overlook this fact. From the article:
”Why is Con Ed hiking rates?
True, execs at the company did enjoy a pay bump in 2022, with CEO Timothy Cawley getting a 4% hike in base compensation.”
So, it isn't just the top guy that is getting a raise and this is a great example of how it isn't necessarily a cut and dry political reason for increases.
I'm sure it was an across the board raise, or there would have been a lot of noise. Still don't get the problem. Executive pay of public companies is public knowledge.
I'm curious why the ”green” surcharge or the HEAP programs weren't highlighted in why rates are so high?
I'm sure it was an across the board raise, or there would have been a lot of noise. Still don't get the problem. Executive pay of public companies is public knowledge.
I'm curious why the ”green” surcharge or the HEAP programs weren't highlighted in why rates are so high?
Why can't it be a little bit of both? I think when these things occur, it is always viewed from a political lens versus looking at what people at the top are doing as well. Especially given the American worker buying power(has been flat since the 1970's) that has been discussed on here.
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.
