http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hi...z2it1XT9a6

Quote:The average CEO-to-worker pay ratio in 2012 was about 350 to 1. That's down somewhat from where it was before the 2008 recession, but it would have to come down a great deal more to return to the non-obscene range.

Quote:Congress thinks that corporate disclosures also can serve a social purpose. Why saddle the SEC with the job of overseeing these rules? It's because the SEC is the only agency with the legal power to mandate corporate disclosures; Congress is simply putting this preexisting authority to use. Nor is this the first time that's happened. As far back as the 1970s, the SEC was ordered to force companies to make environmental disclosures.

Quote:... "requiring companies to post potentially embarrassing information … can be a very powerful motivator to change corporate behavior.... There is a significant risk that people will keep pushing for it."

Quote:For one thing, the second figure should underscore that a board that pays an incoming CEO that much may be out to lunch. Smart investors try to find out everything they can about a company, so what's the argument for leaving this nugget out?

Report it, don't report it, it's not going to make a difference.

Life's not fair son.
No amount of government will make it so.

Quit worrying about what everyone else makes.
Work hard. Work smart. Make your own happiness.

(10-27-2013 09:43 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Life's not fair son.
No amount of government will make it so.

Quit worrying about what everyone else makes.
Work hard. Work smart. Make your own happiness.

Of course life isn't fair. The point is that this is a case where a little bit of awareness could spur social change rather than government imposed "fairness".

The article doesn't mention Gates, Buffett, or Imelt.

(10-27-2013 09:49 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The article doesn't mention Gates, Buffett, or Imelt.

Those people are still part of that average.

(10-27-2013 09:48 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:43 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Life's not fair son.
No amount of government will make it so.

Quit worrying about what everyone else makes.
Work hard. Work smart. Make your own happiness.

Of course life isn't fair. The point is that this is a case where a little bit of awareness could spur social change rather than government imposed "fairness".

I'm really not grasping what the social change is?

(10-27-2013 09:50 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:49 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The article doesn't mention Gates, Buffett, or Imelt.

Those people are still part of that average.

They make a lot more than the average CEO who probably makes about as much as a congressman.

(10-27-2013 09:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:48 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:43 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Life's not fair son.
No amount of government will make it so.

Quit worrying about what everyone else makes.
Work hard. Work smart. Make your own happiness.

Of course life isn't fair. The point is that this is a case where a little bit of awareness could spur social change rather than government imposed "fairness".

I'm really not grasping what the social change is?

Reducing the massive (and increasing) gap between rich members of society and everyone else without turning to socialism.

(10-27-2013 09:54 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:50 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:49 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The article doesn't mention Gates, Buffett, or Imelt.

Those people are still part of that average.

They make a lot more than the average CEO who probably makes about as much as a congressman.

350 to 1 is the average. That's a lot more than a congressman makes regardless of the company's median pay.

(10-27-2013 09:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:48 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:43 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Life's not fair son.
No amount of government will make it so.

Quit worrying about what everyone else makes.
Work hard. Work smart. Make your own happiness.

Of course life isn't fair. The point is that this is a case where a little bit of awareness could spur social change rather than government imposed "fairness".

I'm really not grasping what the social change is?

Reducing the massive (and increasing) gap between rich members of society and everyone else without turning to socialism.

I guess that could happen. I just think it's either going to lead to "we'll keep paying our CEOs the way we like while sending jobs overseas" or "we'll lower CEO pay, while sending jobs overseas."

(10-27-2013 09:59 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:54 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:50 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:49 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The article doesn't mention Gates, Buffett, or Imelt.

Those people are still part of that average.

They make a lot more than the average CEO who probably makes about as much as a congressman.

350 to 1 is the average. That's a lot more than a congressman makes regardless of the companies median pay.

Take out the relatively few mega buck CEOs and that average goes down substantially, quite possibly to what a congressman makes.

(10-27-2013 10:00 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:48 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:43 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Life's not fair son.
No amount of government will make it so.

Quit worrying about what everyone else makes.
Work hard. Work smart. Make your own happiness.

Of course life isn't fair. The point is that this is a case where a little bit of awareness could spur social change rather than government imposed "fairness".

I'm really not grasping what the social change is?

Reducing the massive (and increasing) gap between rich members of society and everyone else without turning to socialism.

I guess that could happen. I just think it's either going to lead to "we'll keep paying our CEOs the way we like while sending jobs overseas" or "we'll lower CEO pay, while sending jobs overseas."

I don't see how CEO pay is related to jobs overseas.

(10-27-2013 10:02 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 10:00 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:48 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Of course life isn't fair. The point is that this is a case where a little bit of awareness could spur social change rather than government imposed "fairness".

I'm really not grasping what the social change is?

Reducing the massive (and increasing) gap between rich members of society and everyone else without turning to socialism.

I guess that could happen. I just think it's either going to lead to "we'll keep paying our CEOs the way we like while sending jobs overseas" or "we'll lower CEO pay, while sending jobs overseas."

I don't see how CEO pay is related to jobs overseas.

Higher profits equals higher pay and bonuses.

(10-27-2013 10:01 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:59 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:54 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:50 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:49 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The article doesn't mention Gates, Buffett, or Imelt.

Those people are still part of that average.

They make a lot more than the average CEO who probably makes about as much as a congressman.

350 to 1 is the average. That's a lot more than a congressman makes regardless of the companies median pay.

Take out the relatively few mega buck CEOs and that average goes down substantially, quite possibly to what a congressman makes.

That's speculation. You could take out the outliers on the low end too. The average could be exactly the same.

(10-27-2013 10:03 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 10:02 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 10:00 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I'm really not grasping what the social change is?

Reducing the massive (and increasing) gap between rich members of society and everyone else without turning to socialism.

I guess that could happen. I just think it's either going to lead to "we'll keep paying our CEOs the way we like while sending jobs overseas" or "we'll lower CEO pay, while sending jobs overseas."

I don't see how CEO pay is related to jobs overseas.

Higher profits equals higher pay and bonuses.

You're assuming that CEO's are being paid solely on merit, and the article addresses that:

"It's plain that this ratio typically has little to do with an executive's performance. The CEO-to-average-worker pay ratio of the 250 largest companies in the Standard & Poor's 500 index ranges from 1,795 to 1 (J.C. Penney's Ron Johnson) to 173 to 1 (Agilent Technologies' William Sullivan), according to Bloomberg, which ran the data for 2012.

Do those figures reflect the two CEOs' relative value to their companies? Well, no. Agilent shares have risen 49% over the last year, while J.C. Penney's have fallen 73%. Johnson's compensation was the product of his November 2011 recruitment by the Penney board, which expected him to work the same magic on the stumbling department store chain that he had at Apple, where he created the fabulously successful Apple Stores. But he was terrible at Penney, and within 17 months he was gone."

(10-27-2013 10:02 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 10:00 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:48 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Of course life isn't fair. The point is that this is a case where a little bit of awareness could spur social change rather than government imposed "fairness".

I'm really not grasping what the social change is?

Reducing the massive (and increasing) gap between rich members of society and everyone else without turning to socialism.

I guess that could happen. I just think it's either going to lead to "we'll keep paying our CEOs the way we like while sending jobs overseas" or "we'll lower CEO pay, while sending jobs overseas."

I don't see how CEO pay is related to jobs overseas.

It's not. But to me the "social change" of CEO pay won't help with the bigger issue at hand.

(10-27-2013 10:04 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 10:01 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:59 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:54 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:50 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Those people are still part of that average.

They make a lot more than the average CEO who probably makes about as much as a congressman.

350 to 1 is the average. That's a lot more than a congressman makes regardless of the companies median pay.

Take out the relatively few mega buck CEOs and that average goes down substantially, quite possibly to what a congressman makes.

That's speculation. You could take out the outliers on the low end too. The average could be exactly the same.

So you think there are the same amount of low paid CEOs as there are mega buck CEOs? Really?

How about if we go with the mean CEO salary and see what we come up with?

(10-27-2013 10:05 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 10:02 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 10:00 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:57 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I'm really not grasping what the social change is?

Reducing the massive (and increasing) gap between rich members of society and everyone else without turning to socialism.

I guess that could happen. I just think it's either going to lead to "we'll keep paying our CEOs the way we like while sending jobs overseas" or "we'll lower CEO pay, while sending jobs overseas."

I don't see how CEO pay is related to jobs overseas.

It's not. But to me the "social change" of CEO pay won't help with the bigger issue at hand.

Sure, but that's something that should be discussed in a different thread. This problem isn't reduced by the existence of a bigger problem.

(10-27-2013 10:06 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 10:04 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 10:01 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:59 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(10-27-2013 09:54 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  They make a lot more than the average CEO who probably makes about as much as a congressman.

350 to 1 is the average. That's a lot more than a congressman makes regardless of the companies median pay.

Take out the relatively few mega buck CEOs and that average goes down substantially, quite possibly to what a congressman makes.

That's speculation. You could take out the outliers on the low end too. The average could be exactly the same.

So you think there are the same amount of low paid CEOs as there are mega buck CEOs? Really?

How about if we go with the mean CEO salary and see what we come up with?

Average = mean.