Are CEO's Paid Too Much?
OUTLINE
This report explores the issue of the pay that top executives make, and the reasons why they do. It also suggests improvements that can be made to make the system better. High Pay Seems Small When Compared To Company Profits Many companies pull in profits that are extremely high. When an employee of such a companies salary is compared to the amount of profit that the company earns, it starts to seem reasonable. It only makes sense that if the employee is directly responsible for the success of their company, then they deserve to get their payback. It seems ironic, but many salaries even look small once compared with a companies profits. Top Executives Are Under A Lot Of Pressure Being the CEO of a
…show more content…
There are few, if any other positions that put an employee in this situation. Important decisions are made by them everyday, many of which decide whether a company will prosper, or go under. Many of these men had to work their way to the top. They usually have extensive business backgrounds, and know their field well. There are very few people qualified, or knowledgeable enough to perform well in executive positions. That makes the ones that are, a hot commodity. Thus allowing them to demand the high pay that they earn.
High Pay Seems Small When Compared To Company Profits
When the public sees a salary that they consider to be too big; they are usually looking at only half of the picture. It is impossible to look at just the salary, without taking any other factors into consideration. One must look at the amount of earnings, compared to the profits of the company. For instance, Robert Allen, who runs ATT, was recently pointed out by 60 Minutes as being an overpaid executive. Their major problem was that he had been responsible for laying off 40,000 employees, while still managing to give himself a large pay increase. At first glance, this situation may appear to be one involving a greedy and overpaid executive. However, upon closer examination, it proves to be much to the contrary. The situation wherein the 40,000 employees were laid off was not a matter of getting rid of people for an unfounded reason. It was more a matter of getting rid
In “The Overpaid CEO” Susan Homberg and Mark Schmitt bring to attention how CEO pay in America is ridiculous in numbers as opposed to other parts of the world. Looking back, in the nineteen hundreds CEO pay was relativity average. As businesses and companies began to expand there was a demand for higher pay. Between 1978-2012 CEO pay increased by 875%! Many rules and regulations were put in to place to limit the pay of a CEO, such as the Securities Exchange Act that I will explain later on, regardless CEO pay kept getting higher and higher as many loopholes were found. Bonuses pay a large part in the salaries of CEOS’, as an effect CEOS’ tend to partake in risky behavior in order to score those big paychecks.
CEO compensation has been a heated debate for many years recently, and it can be argued
Executive Compensation. I’m in agreement with Thomas Piketty that the one cause of rising inequality in the United States “the rise of supersalaries” for top executives (Piketty & Goldhammer, 2014, p. 298). The average American estimates CEO to worker pay ratio at about 30-to-1, which is more than 4 times what they believe to be ideal. The career review site Glassdoor reported from 2014 data that the average pay ratio of CEO to median worker was 204-to-1 and that at the top of the list, four CEOs earn more than 1,000 times the salary of their median worker with the very top pay ratio of 1,951-to-1. In some cases a CEO makes in one-hour what it takes the average employee six-months to earn. In comparison, the Washington Post reported for the
CEOs usually get paid a lot more than any of their employees and it is believed that the ratio between the CEOs salary and the average employee salary has continued to increase throughout the years (Mackey, 2014). The increase in the CEOs salary is mainly attributed to two factors: First, the required skills and the high responsibilities that are associated with this position. Second, the number of qualified people who could fill such a position is really limited (Executive Compensation, n.d.). This does explain the
2. There is no world in which the current CEO salaries would be considered justified or rational. Today, CEOs make about 344 times the average pay of workers which is up from 30 to 40 times about thirty years ago (Doc A). While they should be rewarded for success and advancing their business, there is a point where it begins to hurt both the company and the rest of the economy. It takes money away from taxpayers and is used to increase the personal wealth of millionaires.
Number Ten: The company pays its workers pretty well. The average hourly rate was at $18 in 2013, while the mean annual wage was set at $40,000. The executives’ pay is capped at 19 times the average worker’s pay. This means that they cannot earn more than 19 times the average
Executive pay – excessive pay for top executives is one problem that will not go away. It is a response to public concern about pay rises that are unrelated to effort, plus a number of high-profile cases of failed executives getting pay-offs of up to US $100 million and others having stock options backdated to give them a share of earlier capital gains. This at least tells shareholders exactly what their top executives are earning.
See, Bob Reich isn't the just a single to notice disparity. Indeed, even most corporate chiefs are worried that soaring CEO compensations are askew with corporate benefit, and also normal worker wage. As working mom Nancy Rasmussen says, it just doesn't seem right. "I took a pay cut of $12 an hour. My benefits have gone down," Rasmussen says. Her voice cracking with emotion, she asks, "If you have millions of dollars, why do you need that little bit that I have?" We see it all around us: A CEO gets a huge bonus the same year he lays off hundreds of
Steve Jobs and Kanye Wests’ names are synonymous with innovative technology and award-winning music, but following these enormous reputations are larger-than-life egos. In today’s highly-competitive society, it seems as if big egos are the norm rather than the extreme, with many individuals gaining an overly dominant and unhealthy belief of self-importance that devalues organizations and teams. This notion has been quantitatively proven in a study by Michael Cooper that determined “CEO pay is negatively related to future shareholder wealth changes for periods up to five years after sorting on pay”, in other words, despite the poor performance of their respective companies, CEOs get paid even higher than normal. Though choosing status over results has never been an experience I’ve personally had, choosing status over other important things like happiness and friendship are. These temptations
Take severance packages for example. When the average employee in no longer benefitting the company, chances are they will be let go. Besides a final paycheck for hours worked and the possibility of unemployment collection, they do not receive anything else from the company. When a CEO is no longer performing up to standards, they are forced to resign but walk away with much more than a final paycheck. Chuck Prince of Citigroup was shown the door after the company lost $64 billion in market value, yet he left with $68 million and a cash bonus of $12.5 million (Nickels, McHugh & McHugh, 2010). Not only are CEOs paid a substantial amount more for their work, they are paid a substantial amount more to leave the company all together. In 2009, President Obama and Congress put limits on executive compensation of firms receiving money under the federal government bailout programs. The payout to CEOs leaving their companies was limited to $500,000 but it wasn’t for all companies across the board. This new limit only applied to companies who had borrowed money from the government during periods of economic downfall and hadn’t yet paid it back. Despite the decrease in monetary payout, CEOs were still allowed a decent portion of restricted stock which amounted for a fairly large payout when the stock could be sold a few years down the line.
Federal governance in executive pay is essential to a stable and healthy economy. I offer that the issue of Federal governance in executive pay is bigger than equity in compensation. “Taxpayers and politicians and others disapprove of these levels of compensation precisely because the leaders of these firms, in the words of Treasury Department officials, nearly caused the financial system worldwide to collapse.”
While these citizen protests and legislative actions could be an overreaction to a few isolated cases of executive compensation excess, the data suggests otherwise. According to the AFL-CIO (2013), executive pay has increased dramatically over the past several decades compared to worker compensation. In 1982, the pay ratio between executives and workers was 42:1, but by 2012 it had increased to 354:1. This 8.4-fold differential in compensation suggests that the productivity of executives has also increased 8.4-fold relative to productivity of workers. If executive pay is positively correlated with a firm's bottom line, then higher pay should predict success. Unfortunately, researchers have found the opposite to be true.
According to Matsumura and Shin (2005) the ratio of executive to worker pay has climbed from 42:1 in 1982 to 301:1 in 2003. This has invited a lot of criticism from the shareholders, employees and has attracted the attention of restrictive regulators. Perel (2003) tried to assess the issue by examining both the claims that CEOs are overpaid for the value they add to an organization and that CEO pay is inherently
The amount of money executives receives in compensation is a concern of many people who disagree and have opposing views. The average worker believes it is a prime example of inequality of income and the status quo divide between the rich and the poor. The executive pay is high, the average worker pay is low, and the average family income has gone down. Only in situations when companies receive financial assistance from the government to help save their business from financial distress, the government should react in a way where they can protect taxpayers. While executives receive millions in bonuses, high paying salaries and perks of all kinds, millions of people are living in poverty, losing their homes and jobs. Even people on unemployment
In 2003 the average pay for CEOs at 200 of the largest U.S. companies was $11.3 million--but there are a good number whose compensation packages approach the $100 million mark. Faced with these figures, Americans from all walks of life--who revile CEOs as greedy fat cats--are overcome with bewilderment and indignation. Astonished to learn that what an average worker earns in a year, some CEOs earn in less than a week--people ask themselves: "How can the work of a