nakedjaybird

Netflix, Adobe, and Google Rated Among Top Places to Work

Well then, let's make sure the worst-places-to-work CEO's get ZERO Bonus' as long as they are in that grouping, and maybe should also be considered candidates for replacement with no exiting parachute, in addition to actual PAYCUTS until then.

AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, let's make sure that all the other CEO's get only their pay, no bonus', because they are doing their job - and that's what they get paid for. And that pay should be no more than 20x the LOWEST PAID WORKER ON THE PAYROLL FOR THE WHOLE CORPORATION - maybe $200-300,000/yr, tops.

NO MAN IS WORTH A LIFETIME INCOME IN ONE YEAR (especially when they are only managing some public entitiy with stockholders and have many layers of management below them from which many qualified folks several layers down who are capable and eager to run the company would do so with a 20% raise from where they are.)

Addemdum to Myth Buster 101: you don't have to pay lots to get the best. Much proof available. Look around!

Poor Performance Often Linked to Excessive Executive Pay

WE agree somewhat Ex Corp Guy; my experience has been that the passed-over guy (generally a minimum of 2 out of three, sometimes 4-5, lose out to the winner); and those not winning the promotion carry on running their portions of the business waiting for the next opportunity - and all 4 or 5 of the losers are really capable and qualified - maybe not the personality for the ones chosing the winner - which changes the next time around; often, the top guy surrounds himself with his team where possible. Point being, those not winning ie., the passed over, are not really losers or lesser thans, they just did not win this time. The really good ones move on - and are good. Those passed over within GE are not generally poor executive material. In fact, probably better than most. And what I am saying is that quality runs several layers deep. Lots of capable guys. Now, when these folks are just managers, like a housewife runs a household, not much to say. Problem is, most corporations could do well having a housewife run the entity. Sometimes, that's all it takes when good people do their jobs below them. Most of wall stree and the Govt regulators don't qualify as housewives running a household. Lot's of proof for that. They thought there was not tomorrow or responsibility for what they were doing. No husband to be accoutable to, nor children; responsibiltiy and accountabiltiy, both.

Poor Performance Often Linked to Excessive Executive Pay

The turnover and promotions within major corporations tells the truth and provides the facts about capable folks down the organization: first, where do you think the top guys came from?? Below. Waiting for the opportunity. And when passed over, they become the top guys hired elsewhere. It's happened for generations. Where you been Montanaman?

Further evidence occurs way too often in professional sports. And I'm not suggesting then that top executives get paid as atheletes do. That's way out of whack due to poorly led corporations writing off all the marketing expenses for stadium seats; a 5% cost that would better serve the stockholders. Same for the peoples tax dollars to pay for the stadiums; IT'S A BUSINESS; LET THEM BUILD THEIR OWN FACILITIES.

Poor Performance Often Linked to Excessive Executive Pay

It goes understood, that if one does not perform, he does not get paid: he get's fired. No parachutes allowed!!! No pay to leave. Duh!!!!

Poor Performance Often Linked to Excessive Executive Pay

It is a myth that one must pay a lot to get good executives: look around at the evidence.

Reach down a couple levels of management in most corporations and you will find ample numbers of very capable folks hungry to run the company for a 20% raise above their $200,000 salary. No bonus'.

Pay for performance at that level. If they perform; they get paid. If they don't; they get replaced. Their pay is their pay. That;s it.

If they want perks like country club memberships, stadium seats, etc., they pay for them themselves out of their pay (all those real costs to a corporation that get written off as marketing expenses which would bring another 5% of revenue to the bottom line).

Bottom-line: NO MAN IS WORTH A LIFETIME INCOME IN ONE YEAR.

Second bottom line: NO MAN SHOULD BE PAID ANY MORE THAN 20X THE LOWEST PAID EMPLOYEE ON THE PAYROLL (NO, NOT EVEN THE AVERAGE PAID EMPLOYEE!).

It's the Ben and Jerry Icecream model folks. It works. The owners win and so do the consumers. It's "LEGAL THEFT DENIED!!!.