The Executive Officer, Ron Johnson

As times goes by, the country’s debt amount continuously grows by enormous steps. Even though quite a few actions have been taken to attempt to dwindle this number; none have been prosperous. According to Robert Reich, in the article, Opinion: A crisis of public morality, not private morality, “CEOs of large corporations now earn 300 times the wages of average workers” (Reich). The income of CEOs has drastically changed since three decades after World War II; previously CEOs “earned no more than 40 times what the typical worker earned” (Reich). It is also believed that those that have a high ratio of pay to typical employees should pay higher taxes so that it is proportional to their earnings. In the same way, the employees that earn less

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

CEO Johnson’s time with JC Penney’s was short lived and only lasted 17 months. The three core processes of business that he ignored was People, Strategy, and Operations. From the people aspect, he missed several key details. Johnson just assumed that people thought JC Penney’s prices were too high, so he lowered them and quit having sells (Tuttle, 2013). He also drove customers that had been shopping there for years away. With too many changes happening at one time, loyal customers did not agree with the changes and started shopping elsewhere.

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.

Issue 3: Siding with Ira Kay, I agree with his position on the issue. The “American Dream” is to essentially start from nothing, working up the ladder to gain money, power, and the image of a lavish, executive lifestyle; resulting from hard work paying off and wages that compensate for it. Annual pay and stock incentives for most executives will fluctuate with the company’s performance, as well as their personal efforts. If a cap was to be implemented on a CEO’s salary, what would be the incentive to stay at the helm of a corporation when the financial “glass ceiling” has been reached?

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.

Directors have awarded compensation packages that go well beyond what is required to attract and hold on to executives and have rewarded even poorly performing executives. These executive pay excesses come at the expense of shareholders as well as the company and its employees. Furthermore, a poorly designed executive compensation package can reward decisions that are not in the long-term interests of a company. Excessive CEO pay is essentially a corporate governance problem. When CEOs have too much power in the boardroom, they are able to extract what economists' call "economic rents" from shareholders (Economic rent is distinct from economic profit, which is the difference between a firm's revenues and the opportunity cost of its inputs). The board of directors is supposed to protect shareholder interests and minimize these costs. At approximately two-thirds of US companies, the CEO sits as the board's chair. When one single person serves as both chair and CEO, it is impossible to objectively monitor and evaluate his or her own performance.

According to a report created by Ruetschlin (2014) stating that compensation practices that is seen within companies of fast food industries is “out of line” with rest of our economy. We can see that CEOs have the greater and greater economic rewards while workers don’t seem to reap those rewards so luckily. In Ruestschlin studies, she was able to piece together that CEO average pay since 2000 has quadrupled in numbers than the typical workers. That in 2013, the average CEO took home a whopping $23.8 million dollars unlike typical works that doesn’t even have that much if we were to combine each worker in every food establishment. We can

We tend to activate parts of the brain associated with negative emotion when considering unfair offers. Cross-cultural studies suggest that fairness is an important consideration in every society that has been tested, though its strength may vary across cultures. Even monkeys tend to respond to unfairness by refusing to work for rewards. Pay differentials play a key role in dictating organization-level outcomes. Companies with more pay equity tend to produce better products than ones with pay inequity. Major league baseball teams with more pay equity tend to perform better than those with pay inequity. The gap between CEO pay and the pay of the average executive is negatively correlated with performance. Pay differentials have important consequences because we use others’ outcomes as reference points to help us determine the acceptability of our own

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.

There is currently a large wage gap between CEO’s of a company and the regular workers. Companies are not investing their profits in better technology or hiring new employees. This is having a profound negative effect on our economy and creating greater social inequality in our country. So far, strikes and protests by workers have had no effect on corporate compensation practices. Economic prosperity does not trickle down from the wealthy to the lower and middle classes. People need to rally and have their representative pass legislation that will cap executive salaries and increase minimum wage.

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