Case Summary
In 1993, Michael D. Eisner of Walt Disney fame received $203 million as executive compensation. Although this award was inflated by Eisner 's exercise of stock options, many examples of compensation in millions and tens of millions raise questions on how CEOs should be paid. Critics dispute that CEOs are deserving of their pay. CEOs downsize companies or perform badly, yet continue to draw a substantial salary. Unlike low level managers, it seems there is no formula for executive compensation. The disparity between the executive pay in US and that of in other industrialized nations is great, furthering the belief that there is no rational (?) basis for compensation. Among sports and entertainment figures, there exists a
…show more content…
Thus, the Board of directors is the main decision maker in this ethical dilemma.
Public
The public would benefit from a booming American economy with the brightest talents taking the helm of various enterprises. Customers and suppliers would enjoy the stability and continued existence of major companies that they deal with. Thus, having a sufficiently high executive compensation would ensure that talented individuals are attracted to the field of management. However, if the disparity between the pay of the executive and the average employee is too high, this will lead to a serious income gap which could contribute to social problems. Indeed, it has caused public scrutiny into the fairness of executive compensation. The American increase of its Gini coefficient from 0.34 in the early 1960s to 0.47 in 2004 demonstrates this concern (United Nations University, 2007).
Analysis using Ethical Theories
Are US CEOs fairly paid? Do they deserve the pay that they draw?A combination of perspectives of Libertarianism, Aristotlean Justice, Utilitarianism and Kantian Ethics will be used to analyse these questions.
In reference to Disney 's $203 million executive compensation, the author of the case in Boatright (2007) asserts that no one can be worth that much in any just economic system.
According to Aristotle 's ideas
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
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
Over the past twenty years, America has seen a substantial amount of change and development amongst many technological industries. Old ideas have been revolutionized. Technology has been continuously upgraded time and time again. Americans slowly have to do less and less because new inventions are constantly increasing their abilities to do more for us. Cars are getting faster, phones are getting smarter and before we know it, 2-dementional televisions will be a thing of the past. Despite everything that is growing around us there are still few things that have stayed the same; for example, the average American income for 99
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.”
In Peter Eavis’ article “Executive Pay: The Invasion of Supersalaries” the conflict of CEOs and top executives outrageous pay grade is discussed. Even though the “compensation machine” of Corporate America is running smoothly, there are multiple negative and dark undertones. In fact, many people believe that these shocking salaries are the roots of inequality within America. Currently, some CEOs are being compensated millions and millions of dollars as their normal annual salary. Even though the current executive compensation system focuses on performance and can “theoretically constrain pay,” there is nothing stopping the companies from giving their CEOs more. According to the Equilar 100 C.E.O Pay Study, “the median compensation of a
Many proponents of capitalism argue that the wealth is shared with the workers. But is it true? According to an annual report in 2008, an average American CEO makes as much money in one day compared to what an average worker earns in one year1. And the disparity between business leaders and average workers continues to grow over time. From 1990 to 2005, the CEO’s salaries increased almost 300%, while a worker received a scant 4.3%2. The social consequence of this disparity is the concentration of wealth on a small percentage of population.
The economy of the United States is by far the largest and most powerful economy in the entire world. The average family income is roughly $40,000 a year and our GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is well over 10 trillion dollars. The next closest country is Japan with 4 trillion dollars of total GDP.(Johnson & Wales: Economics) The United States has so many large corporations it takes someone to run each one and it also take a lot of money to pay someone to be in charge of each one.
Cases revolving income inequality happen all over the world and is very important to reduce or eliminate this problem. The articles discussed in class describe a number of income inequalities such as the articles revolving around the compensation of CEO’s and other wealthy individuals compared to the average employees and managers. Economic inequality should be looked upon as a large problem that needs to be solved. If countries, businesses, and certain individuals reduce the amount of money they make by donating or taking a pay cut, the benefits for society could greatly increases. These actions could also increase the aggregate welfare for the population below high class individuals. For this reason the three articles that will be discussed in this paper are unjust from my point of view. Finally I will be tackling an objection that could be made about the unjust
They believe that the unfairness in pay that is so prevalent in America will slowly but surely violate the public’s feeling of what is fair. William J. McDonough is not some liberal politician or university professor exposing his views to an adulating audience or a classroom of college students. He is the former vice chairman and special advisor to the chairman at Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc., and the former President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. “America’s business leaders, McDonough believes, have a moral responsibility to end compensation excess. If society appeals to this moral responsibility, he also believes, business leaders will see the light and take steps to limit the gaps that divide us.” (greedandgood.org 1) This type of moral standing can be used as a calling card that rallies people to gather in strength and cause political change, similar to the “too much Federal Government” call of the “Tea
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