Labor Puts Executive Pay in the Spotlight

[ProSense]

Labor Puts Executive Pay in the Spotlight

By STEVEN GREENHOUSE

<...>

The site, 2011 Executive Paywatch, notes that total compensation for C.E.O.’s averaged $11.4 million in 2010, up 23 percent from the previous year, based on the most recent pay data for 299 major companies.

The Web site notes that the C.E.O.’s at those 299 companies received a combined total of $3.4 billion in pay in 2010, enough to support 102,325 jobs paying the median wage.

With this ammunition in hand, the A.F.L.-C.I.O. said that “while C.E.O. pay is still out of control,” the nation’s “shareholders now have new tools to fight back. C.E.O.’s must now give their shareholders a ‘say on pay,’ thanks to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that President Obama signed in July 2010.”

<...>

Richard Trumka, the federation’s president, said, “Despite the collapse of the financial market at the hands of executives less than three years ago, the disparity between C.E.O. and workers’ pay has continued to grow to levels that are simply stunning.”

more

[CrispyQ]

1. "... up 23 percent from the previous year..."

:grr: :grr: :grr:

[Armstead]

2. And what are we going to do about it? Not much I'm afraid.

[ProSense]

3. Let's hope "we"

do something besides complain. The AFL-CIO and other labor organizations are trying to take actions via shareholders.

<...>

Under new rules included in the Dodd-Frank financial regulations, nearly all public companies must now give shareholders a say on executive pay. Analysts and corporate governance experts are wondering how these votes will play out, even though companies are under no obligation to heed their shareholders’ advice.

<...>

New government regulations put in place after the financial crisis have emboldened some activist shareholders to try again to rein in compensation they deem excessive and undeserved. Although companies will not be bound by such votes, they will have to disclose the results in reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as how they considered the voting in setting subsequent executive pay.

<...>

Two of the most powerful shareholder advisory groups issued highly critical public reports recommending that investors this year vote against H.P.’s executive pay plans and current board members, saying that the company highly overpaid its executives.

<...>

Regulators forced just such a concession with the chief executive of Beazer Homes, Ian J. McCarthy. Though he was not charged personally, in a settlement with the S.E.C. last month, Mr. McCarthy agreed to return $6.5 million in compensation that he had received while the company was accused of filing inaccurate financial statements in 2006. Beazer restated its results for that year and resolved the S.E.C.’s claims in 2008 without paying penalties or admitting any wrongdoing.

link

[Armstead]

5. Advisory votes are nice but they are advisory only

Activist shareholder; "we think the top management makes too much, and labor costs should be more equitable."

Inside Clique: "thank you for your opinion. We disagree....Next item."

Until ther is a combination of REAL public pressure supported and led by political leaders committed to economic justice, it will continuevto be smoke and mirrors.

Tax policies that discourage revolting concentrations of wealth would be a good place to start...

[Armstead]

6. PS my remarks were not directed at unions

Unions are doing the best they can under the circumstances.

But therevis a lack of real commitment by the political class to support them, either through public messaging or policies with teeth.

[ProSense]

7. The government can't legislate pay

This along with regulations to rein in bonuses will go a long way.

"Until ther is a combination of REAL public pressure supported and led by political leaders committed to economic justice, it will continuevto be smoke and mirrors."

What nonsense! Something is being done about a specific issue so it means nothing until there is full economic justice?

[Armstead]

8. The Impact of tax policies is totally missing from the debate

Again, I am Not criticizing unions efforts on this. But the problem is lack of support and backing by the political class.

Politicians of both parties, for example, are doing NOTHING to halt the mergers and aquisitions that create the huge monolithic corporations that have a lot to do with the exorbitant income being earned by those at the top, at the expense of everyone else....Anti trust action has become a quaint notion that they will hot even pay lip servicevto anymore.

Also, tax policy does affect the overall concentration of wealth....When the personal incomectax was very high on the top income earners, there was less incentive for them to accumulate huge stockpiles of money.

As a result the disparity of wealth held by the upper brackets and everyone else was narrower and saber.....Sure there were people who were very wealthy, but as taxes on upper incomes were reduced, the trend towards concentration at the top accelerated to extreme proportions.

SO CEOs made good money, but it was more like 5 to 10 times the average pay of their employees, instead of the almost 50 times multiple we have now.

That was a mainstream situation. It was only when the dog in the manger rich started pushing to get the whole pue ( or at least 99 percent of it) through tax policies that we saw the NEW GIKDED AGE emerge.

Most Democrats, however are too timid to bring this up -- instead they continue to plat by the rules set by the GOP and their wealthy masters.

[ProSense]

9. The OP has nothing to do with tax policy.

"Again, I am Not criticizing unions efforts on this. But the problem is lack of support and backing by the political class."

What?

[Armstead]

10. I do apologize

I should not have peed on your post, because I do think it's a positive action by the unions.

However, just to clarify, my objection (which I maybe should have kept to myself) is the context of "financial reform" that is toothgless, and calling that progress. That's a symptom of the Democratic Establishment is that real action is often avoided for symbolic moves that don;t really accomplish much.

But kudos

[midnight]

4. So how many executives salaries have been reined in under the tools

that were given to share holders to correct this income disparity?