Executive Compensation
Cristy Lawler
Bethel University
Dr. Dorothy Black
MOD 450: Ethical & Legal Environment of Organizations
January 9, 2017 Abstract For years CEO’s have been making larger salaries in compression to the employees that work for the company. How the salaries are decided can be one of two ways. Either by how much money the company brings and gives to the shareholders or by how well the CEO runs the company. The question becomes which was is not only morally but also ethically right. CEO’s will do whatever is necessary to make more to please the shareholders and give the shareholders fast money quickly? By doing this the CEO’s or executives may use morally and unethical practices. If the CEO’s put in the hard work
…show more content…
A positive workplace for not only workers but also the shareholders can be traced back to the top executives within the companies. Everyone is in a win-win situation (Edmans, 2016).
Influencing Factors When the issue of the executive leaders getting based on how much money they can make the shareholders, the problems becomes how they make the money. The CEO’s may be to do things that are unethical and wrong in an effort to make more money. Things like insider trading, stealing from the employee 's pensions plans and becoming involved in Ponzi schemes all the sake of making more money for the shareholders because the end results become the CEOs will, in turn, make more money. In the case of basing the salary on how well the executives actually perform in the leadership roles within the company, it is fair to say the better the job performance the better the pay. The thinking behind this process is simple. The better the executives perform each quarter or yearly the higher the raise or bonus is, which leads to more money for the shareholders. This plan can be used as a tool to help ensure long-term success for the company and for the shareholders (Schneider, 2013).
Potential Solutions The shareholder based salaries and the job performance series can both be successful in the executive compensation plan. The shareholder based plan needs to keep in mind that for every dollar that
Consider an organization you were/are currently involved with. After providing a short overview of your organization, reflect on the Seven Levels of an Ethical Organization, found in the Gebler article and slide deck, and write a paper answering the following questions (not more than three pages - format of your choosing):
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.
This paper will discuss the reasons why CEOs are not being overpaid. It will apply the utilitarian ethical principle to many a few aspects to CEO compensation and whether or not it is justifiable for such pay. The paper will look at whether or not their performance is justifiable for the pay because they play such a big role in the livelihood of the company along with the principle agency theory and how it is being addressed for the benefit of the shareholders and others involved with the company, the supply and demand of the CEOs, and the paper will describe the comparison of other professions to help link the idea of CEOs being fairly compensated.
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
The CEO’s compensation should be set on how well the firm performs and should be awarded based on the performance of the stocks in the long run. It is easier to measure performance by the growth rate in the profits that have been reported since intrinsic value cannot be fully
Should companies be considering ways to reduce the gap to improve the overall morale of their employees? Do you think CEO and upper management salaries are subject to ethical consideration?
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
The problem is why do CEO gets paid 354 times greater than average employee salary of the company
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.
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.
He wrote a famous article, “The social responsibility of business is to increase (maximize?) its profits”. There are two main quotes in this article that apply to this situation. “Corporate executive . . . has . . . a responsibility . . . to make as much money as possible (maximize profits) while conforming to the basic rules of society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom. There is one and only one social responsibility of business...to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud (Friedman, 1970)”. Milton Friedman was an advocate of free market forces, he would recommend that let the market forces operate freely and the executive compensation will reach the right levels. The high performing executives will command higher salaries and poor performing executives will receive lower salaries or simply become unemployed. If some executives inflated profits the law will expose them and punish
It is unethical for CEOs to be paid so much when compared to other employees their respective organizations. Per Mackey (2009), “external equity” and “market forces” are no justification for companies to compensate their CEOs up to 300 times more than that of its non-CEO employees.
It was reasonable for a CEO’s compensation to increase as the company expanded and became a larger entity, and the newly-granted shares and increasing stock options further aligned the CEO’s personal interests with those of the company and shareholders. In this sense, the second compensation package was also well-structured and not excessive. Seeing Sunbeam’s revenue rising and stock price climbing steeply upwards, Sunbeam’s shareholders and directors were fully convinced by Dunlap’s leadership, so they might perceive the increase in compensation amount necessary to retain and better motivate Dunlap to enhance the company’s value. Nonetheless, they neglected the fact that the increased portion of the equity-based compensation also further motivated the CEO’s dangerous behaviors pertaining to improper earnings management.
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
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