CEO: Worker Pay Ratio Shoots Up to 431:1
El_Kabong
Posts: 4,141
http://www.faireconomy.org/press/2005/EE2005_pr.html
CEO: Worker Pay Ratio Shoots Up to 431 : 1
Biggest Defense Contractors
Raise CEOs’ Pay 200% Since 9/11
DOWNLOAD THE REPORT HERE: Executive Excess 2005 (PDF, 3.81 MB).
2004 was a banner year for CEOs and a dismal year for workers, according to a new report from the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy, Executive Excess 2005: Defense Contractors Get More Bucks for the Bang.
The ratio of average CEO pay (now $11.8 million) to worker pay (now $27,460) spiked up from 301-to-1 in 2003 to 431-to-1 in 2004.
If the minimum wage had risen as fast as CEO pay since 1990, the lowest paid workers in the US would be earning $23.03 an hour today, not $5.15 an hour.
The report found that CEOs are individually profiting from the Iraq War, with huge average raises at the biggest defense contractors.
At the 34 publicly traded US corporations among the 2004 top 100 defense contractors with 10% or more of their revenues from defense contracts – companies such as United Technologies, Textron, and General Dynamics – average CEO pay increased 200% from 2001 to 2004, versus 7% for all CEOs.
For example, David H. Brooks, CEO of bulletproof vest maker DHB Industries, earned $70 million in 2004, 13,349% more than his 2001 compensation of $525,000. Brooks sold company stock worth about $186 million last year, spooking investors who drove DHB’s share price from more than $22 to as low as $6.50. In May 2005, the US Marines recalled more than 5,000 DHB armored vests after questions were raised about their effectiveness. By that time, Brooks had pocketed about $180 million in war windfalls.
Since September 11, the ratio between median pay for defense CEOs and pay for military generals has nearly doubled to 23-to-1, up from 12-to-1 just three years earlier. The pay ratio between defense CEOs and army privates soared to 160-to-1, up from just 89-to-1 in 2001.
The report reviewed trends in CEO pay and gave CEO Hall of Shame awards to executives who have exemplified five types of excessive pay:
Pension underfunders: The CEOs of those firms with the most underfunded pensions, on average, received 72% more than the average large company CEO.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Exxon Mobil’s Lee Raymond.
Tax dodgers: 46 large companies paid no federal income tax in 2003, despite collectively earning $30 billion in profits. Some of the savings wound up in the pockets of their CEOs, who made $12.6 million in average pay in 2004.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Pfizer’s Hank McKinnell.
Book cookers: In the last ten years, CEOs of firms with shady accounting appeared 18 times on the top ten lists of highest paid executives. This includes leaders whose companies were either later found to have committed fraud or were forced to make material restatements of earnings to correct previous overstatements of profits.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Tyco’s Dennis Kozlowski, the highest paid book cooker – more than a half billion dollars.
Stock tankers: If you had invested in the stock of the company led by the year’s single highest paid CEO each year since 1990, you actually would have lost money. You would have done nearly six times better by investing in the S&P 500 index. A $10,000 investment in such a Greedy CEO portfolio in 1991 would have decreased in value to $8,079 by the end of 2004, while a similar investment in the S&P 500 would have increased to $48,350.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Computer Associates’ Charles Wang.
Gross pay: Over the last 15 years, the cumulative pay of the ten highest paid CEOs in each year together totals more than $11.7 billion.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Citigroup’s Sandy Weill, whose $1.1 billion in cumulative pay since 1990 topped all others.
Authored by Sarah Anderson, John Cavanagh, Scott Klinger, and Liz Stanton, Executive Excess 2005 is the twelfth annual CEO pay study by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and United for a Fair Economy (UFE). The IPS is an independent center for progressive research and education in Washington, DC. UFE is a national organization based in Boston that spotlights growing economic inequality.
CEO: Worker Pay Ratio Shoots Up to 431 : 1
Biggest Defense Contractors
Raise CEOs’ Pay 200% Since 9/11
DOWNLOAD THE REPORT HERE: Executive Excess 2005 (PDF, 3.81 MB).
2004 was a banner year for CEOs and a dismal year for workers, according to a new report from the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy, Executive Excess 2005: Defense Contractors Get More Bucks for the Bang.
The ratio of average CEO pay (now $11.8 million) to worker pay (now $27,460) spiked up from 301-to-1 in 2003 to 431-to-1 in 2004.
If the minimum wage had risen as fast as CEO pay since 1990, the lowest paid workers in the US would be earning $23.03 an hour today, not $5.15 an hour.
The report found that CEOs are individually profiting from the Iraq War, with huge average raises at the biggest defense contractors.
At the 34 publicly traded US corporations among the 2004 top 100 defense contractors with 10% or more of their revenues from defense contracts – companies such as United Technologies, Textron, and General Dynamics – average CEO pay increased 200% from 2001 to 2004, versus 7% for all CEOs.
For example, David H. Brooks, CEO of bulletproof vest maker DHB Industries, earned $70 million in 2004, 13,349% more than his 2001 compensation of $525,000. Brooks sold company stock worth about $186 million last year, spooking investors who drove DHB’s share price from more than $22 to as low as $6.50. In May 2005, the US Marines recalled more than 5,000 DHB armored vests after questions were raised about their effectiveness. By that time, Brooks had pocketed about $180 million in war windfalls.
Since September 11, the ratio between median pay for defense CEOs and pay for military generals has nearly doubled to 23-to-1, up from 12-to-1 just three years earlier. The pay ratio between defense CEOs and army privates soared to 160-to-1, up from just 89-to-1 in 2001.
The report reviewed trends in CEO pay and gave CEO Hall of Shame awards to executives who have exemplified five types of excessive pay:
Pension underfunders: The CEOs of those firms with the most underfunded pensions, on average, received 72% more than the average large company CEO.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Exxon Mobil’s Lee Raymond.
Tax dodgers: 46 large companies paid no federal income tax in 2003, despite collectively earning $30 billion in profits. Some of the savings wound up in the pockets of their CEOs, who made $12.6 million in average pay in 2004.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Pfizer’s Hank McKinnell.
Book cookers: In the last ten years, CEOs of firms with shady accounting appeared 18 times on the top ten lists of highest paid executives. This includes leaders whose companies were either later found to have committed fraud or were forced to make material restatements of earnings to correct previous overstatements of profits.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Tyco’s Dennis Kozlowski, the highest paid book cooker – more than a half billion dollars.
Stock tankers: If you had invested in the stock of the company led by the year’s single highest paid CEO each year since 1990, you actually would have lost money. You would have done nearly six times better by investing in the S&P 500 index. A $10,000 investment in such a Greedy CEO portfolio in 1991 would have decreased in value to $8,079 by the end of 2004, while a similar investment in the S&P 500 would have increased to $48,350.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Computer Associates’ Charles Wang.
Gross pay: Over the last 15 years, the cumulative pay of the ten highest paid CEOs in each year together totals more than $11.7 billion.
Inducted into the CEO Hall of Shame in this category is Citigroup’s Sandy Weill, whose $1.1 billion in cumulative pay since 1990 topped all others.
Authored by Sarah Anderson, John Cavanagh, Scott Klinger, and Liz Stanton, Executive Excess 2005 is the twelfth annual CEO pay study by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and United for a Fair Economy (UFE). The IPS is an independent center for progressive research and education in Washington, DC. UFE is a national organization based in Boston that spotlights growing economic inequality.
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
It would be nice to see threads where so-called "articles" or other links are just regurgitated. Does anyone have any thoughts of their own?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
do you...?
perhaps you could bring us some happy and fun threads...have you started a thread...ever...?
Yes I have. Not many, though. When I do, I always try to include my own opinion of it.
Some threads that I remember starting include one on Warren Buffet's charitable giving and Wal-Mart's programs of charity and helpful environmental policies.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
those threads stunk....;)
please know I'm joking...or zesting, however you call it...:)
I know for me, I'll post an article for discussion, without comment, because I think by simply posting an article is a comment in itself....I think it's a given that a person agrees with the article, thus not requiring comment...
Or, they don't have many original thoughts (complaints) of their own.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
so you'd rather some rewrite something they agree with...would that be better...? something like: hey everyone, here is an article I fully agree with and it raises great points...let me repeat each point and you can reread each point in the article....
I find it amusing you are complaining about posts and posters you don't agree with...rather than addressing the content of the post itself...very orginial, indeed...
perhaps you should propose some new guidelines...or even lead by example...but I do understand it's easier to sit back and complain about how a thread is started rather than the content of the thread...
america has no fucking back bone anymore...we are all just lying down and taking it... i hope this trend continues to get worse, so MAYBE the American public will wake the fuck up and take back OUR wealth! they are earning their wealth off of the hard work of US, our 50 hour weeks, our sweat and tears...fuck them all man, i am so sick of this shit i can almost taste it...this country is getting ripe for a fucking revolution... i hope i live to see it and be a part of it!
i think by posting this article, he is expressing his view of the situation, he is also adding to the sharing and exchange of information this forum provides for socially/politically aware folks like me and you
if you dont like it, you can leave good friend, but i would rather you stay and add something instead of bitching
You are correct. I was wrong. I just saw all of those threads on the front page that were just articles with no comment and I reacted immaturely. I regret it now.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
The country has always been run as a capatalist state. There has never been an "America's Wealth" that we all share, as you seem to want. So, I don't know what you're trying to take back?
I mean, if you want to complain about the gap between the rich and poor, okay fine. But that's not what I'm hearing here. If you want a revolution for evenly distributed wealth, I wouldn't hold your breath. At least not here.
- Dan
no need for regret? and it wasnt immature? you were saying how you felt... but i think sometimes the article speaks for itself, and this one definitely does speak for itself... the funny thing is i have debated many times on here about CEO compensation and there are people making $25,000 that think it is just fine? they defend them to the death, while i think it is obvious that WE are being fucking robbed by these assholes of OUR wealth... that always blows me away...
if you havent noticed, the gap between rich and poor is growing... it wasnt always THIS bad...
i take your comments as support for this GREED, let joe do all the work while mr. CEO takes all the $
i say that is fucking bullshit...PERIOD
dont regret it. it annoys the piss out of me. it is NOT a given that the poster agrees with the article posted and if you're going to spend your day scouring the internet for articles just to post them here without comment, make one thread... the "these are the articles i found today thread" with nothing but links.
if you're going to make a whole brand new thread about it, tell us what you think. otherwise it feels like cherry-picking/baiting and ive seen this juvenille practice before. post an article, keep your views secret, wait for someone to disagree, then make snide and condescending remarks to them for it.
Have we lost our way tonight?
Have we lost our hope to sorrow?
Feels like were all alone
Running further from what’s right
And there are no more heroes to follow
So what are we becoming?
Where did we go wrong?
i also do not subscribe to the "thats how it is, and thats how it will be" attitude...
thanks for adding to the discussion as usual?
any thoughts on the topic at hand? or are you just going to bitch?
i add to plenty of discussions around here. are you going to start a revolution? or are you just giong to sit here and bitch about it?
Maybe, but poor leadership from CEO's leads to abject poverty for joe worker when the company dosen't exist anymore. See Delta Air Lines, Eastern etc.
Joe Worker makes very little money, because anyone can do Joe Workers job. If the board of directors fuck up the hiring of leadership, the company tanks and then no one has a job, not to mention putting more burden on other Joe middle class Workers who pay taxes because Joe Worker over at unemployment is there because Joe CEO was a fucking moron and didn't take into account rising fuel costs so the company went out of business and everyone lost thier jobs.
That's why CEO's make what they make, that, and they know how to bargain and they know what thier worth to the company is. Good ones know if they respect and take care of thier workers, Joe Worker will bust ass and make the company profitable and everybody gains. Bad ones, don't give a shit, they lie, cheat, steal and wreck companies. That's why the CEO makes a ton of money, not everyone is cut out for that kind of pressure. Sure the perks are great, sure they don't make the cogs, but without leadership, nothing gets done properly.
I'm not going to debate wether a CEO deserves the salary they receive or not but I do find it troubling that the salary gap between a CEO and the people who actually carry the company is so wide. I will use the agency I work at as an example. We have layed off roughly half of our staff due to budget cuts. We recently won a very significant piece of business which will undoubtably bring a nice bonus to our President, I over heard him stating that the new business win just saved his end of year bonus, meanwhile there is discussion about even more lay-offs. While people are lossing their jobs he gets rewarded for new business he had no hand in acquiring simply because he is the head of this office. I worked tireless hours on this project, and not to toot my own horn, but it was my creative work that won the client over, yet my name is on the short list of possible people to be released.
Do I think CEO pay is probably out of proportion - Yes.
Do I think CEOs should be paid many, many, many, many times more than other employees - Yes
Do I think it's unfair - No, because their pay is decided by the company and their determination of the CEOs worth.
Do I think "WE are being <> robbed by these <>" - absolutely not. WE can work elsewhere if we do not like it. It may not be perfect or fair, but it's definitely not robbery.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I didn't say it wasn't growing. I meant to acknowledge that fact.
I just took your post to mean that the solution is a "revolution" where we American's take back "Our wealth."
This sounded like blatant across the board even (or close to even) wealth distribution. I was just pointing out that it was never like this, and I certaintly hope it never is. If I didn't quite get your drift, then my bad.
But if your saying that Joe schmo should drive the same car as his company's CEO, well, that just makes about as much sense as Communism.
- Dan
i am not going to discuss this any further and contubute to the non-stop fucking bitchin gon this web site about other posters...it is fucking childish
Make your life a mission - not an intermission. - Arnold Gasglow
So quit and become the president of a company.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Sure I'll just walk into Saatchi & Saatchi hand them my resume and ask to be their president. I'm sure I'll get the job no problem. Shit bro if it was that easy don't you think I would be CEO of my own agency right now. Don't you think I've tried to start my own business. It's not that easy in the industry I'm in. I have done well for myself moved up the ladder, really don't have any ambition to be the President or CEO of an agency I was just pointing out how the average worker even someone in management like myself gets treated compared to the President.
Exactly. And if it's really not easy, then perhaps your president is reaping rewards for accomplishing this task that you admit is not easy and it really doesn't have much to do with the exact project that you were awarded.
It's odd to complain about it being unfair in one breath, but admit that it's not easy in the other.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
this from the guy who says "thanks for adding to the discussion as usual? any thoughts on the topic at hand? or are you just going to bitch?" i can see you're very opposed to belittling other posters. pot meet the kettle. way to dodge my question though.
my thoughts?
it's sickening, but i dont see there's anything to do about it. communism is ineffective. perhaps a proportionality limit, but who decides what the limit is and once you get there where's the incentive to excel? then there's the part of me that thinks this is all a moot point becos these CEO's will be no better off than joe worker once china calls in its debts and truly gets off the ground. america is so top heavy it will fold like a bad poker hand.
I'm not saying his job is easy and that he doesn't deserve what he gets, but if the agency is in trouble finacially, instead of handing out bonuses to the top tier, why not put that money back into the agency to retain some of it's people.