General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBloomberg: Shell's income drops, lays off workers, triples CEO pay to $32 million
The only people not hit by the drop in oil price are the CEOs running the companies
Bloomberg Oils plunge has forced the worlds biggest energy producers to lay off workers and stall projects. Their chief executive officers have so far proved immune. Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Europes biggest oil company, paid CEO Ben Van Beurden a total of $32.2 million last year, almost three times the amount his predecessor Peter Voser earned in 2013, according to data compiled by Bloomberg Intelligence. At BP Plc, where shareholders will vote on compensation at the annual general meeting on Thursday, CEO Bob Dudleys total pay rose 4.9 percent to $15.4 million.
The only people not hit by the drop in oil price are the CEOs running the companies, said Gregory Elders, a London-based analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence. BP may face irate shareholders again over climbing executive pay during its annual meeting this week. Shells net income has dropped in nine of the past 12 quarters and BPs has fallen in six. Oils 50 percent decline in the past year has forced industrywide cutbacks and thousands of job losses, including at Shell and BP. The global industry may lose 50,000 to 100,000 jobs in the next six months, oil-services company Weatherford International Plc said Tuesday.
The workers are paying a heavy price for the greed of those at the top, said Tommy Campbell, a regional officer with the U.K.s Unite trade union, which represents 8,000 North Sea workers. Its morally reprehensible. Pensions & Investment Research Consultants, which advises institutional shareholders and issues proxy vote recommendations, advised shareholders to reject Dudleys pay at the April 16 meeting in London. His increase exceeds the companys performance over the past five years, Pircs press officer Andrew Whiley said.
BPs shares have declined in four of the past five years after an explosion at the Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010 resulted in the biggest oil spill in U.S. history, forcing the company to pay billions of dollars in fines. Shells have dropped in two of the past three years and are down 5 percent in 2015 in London trading. CEO renumeration is far outstripping shareholder returns, Whiley said by phone. Theres a growing concern about renumeration and thats something that boards cant ignore.
http://www.pa-journal.com/people-hit-drop-oil-price-ceos-running-companies/
Actually, capitalism works pretty welluntil it doesnt. Capitalism in this country is going to fail if theres not a significant, substantial number of people who believe that capitalism works for them and people are beginning to doubt around the world and in this country whether capitalism works for them.
-Howard Dean
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=thread&address=10026524237
mnmoderatedem
(3,727 posts)sadly this kind of thing is never surprising any more...
malthaussen
(17,193 posts)... one question keeps coming to mind again and again: what the hell do they spend it on? I couldn't burn through a million a year if I tried, nevermind 32 million.
-- Mal
n2doc
(47,953 posts)Lots of things to spend that kind of money on. And of course, hoarding it so that your progeny never have to work a day in their lives. Usually running some sort of Foundation or 'charity' scam.
sorefeet
(1,241 posts)a year. To spread propaganda to the stupid that these salaries ore justified through hard work. These people actually think they earn and deserve this kind of money. I would feel guilty making that kind of money, no one deserves that kind of dough. Especially knowing what your corporation had done to actually get that kind of profits in the first place.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)n2doc
(47,953 posts)Unless one holds or controls a significant stake in the company (more than 5-10%) your voice is not heard. There are cases out there where even a majority vote by shareholders has been ignored by the company's Board and CEO. Essentially there is no control on the CEO's actions anymore if they have enough buddies on the board.
douggg
(239 posts)Jim Cramer's optimism.
about 1:10 on the timeline
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)How many times does this story need to be repeated before anyone cares?
People don't care until it happens to them and then they find no sympathy from anyone not effected by similar layoffs and job loss.
But hey, the economy is improving.. Z
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)is a strong indication that those engaged in such behavior are morally reprehensible. When it becomes obvious that the reprehensible behavior will not change, those affected must make a decision about what, if anything to do about it.