FedEx CIO Robert Carter Pay Hikes 80%

hypo hanna

Well-Known Member
Why not? It's hard to nail down exact figures but the last big study in 2000 said the average fortune 500 CEO made 531 times the amount that the lowest paid employee did. Seeing as how they are all on each others compensation committees, I suspect it hasn't gotten any better. Meanwhile your pay continues to lag behind inflation.
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
I say let them quit. I'm sure there is some hungry dedicated young exec waiting in the wings who could do the job better and would be happy to do it for less. THat would be a benefit to the company, wouldn't you agree?

Are you making the argument for limiting exec pay or for having Ground deliver Express packages?

Anyhoodle, yes it would benefit the company. If you can find him, you get all the credit.

You see Dano, this blade cuts both ways. The only differance being the execs control both pay scales. They are consumed by greed and lack the ethics to do what they damn well know is right.

All execs are greedy and crooked? If you say so.

I find the idea that these clowns are somehow indispensable to be ludicrous. Considering their track record over the past 10 to 15 years , I would say they were no more competent then the driver who threw the monitor over the fence.

At least he got the pkg where it was supposed to go.

Get a driver to set up the program to ensure the company complies with GAAP.
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
Probably because you haven't heard of it until now, so nothing to recall.

You didn't make it up until now. That's why.

They weren't at all "get whatever you can", far from it, warned us actually.

Is that why they created an unregulated economic climate?
 
Last edited:

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
Why not? It's exactly what the Costco CEO does, taking a salary of $350k a year, which he says is 10 times what his average employee makes.

You got 1 guy who chooses to compensate himself in that manner for whatever reason and good for him if that's the way he wants to do it. By the way, he'll make it up in stock and bonuses, which is why he got over $2 million in 2011. Execs aren't going to work for chump change. You can limit their pay and they either won't work at all in the US or they'll take a position that's more in line with what's offered.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
All execs are greedy and crooked? If you say so.

No, but the drive to cash in with company stock is ruining the work lives of employees. This isn't the way it has always been, it's just what the corporate world has devolved too as bigger and bigger corporations employ a greater % of the workforce. And with the outsourcing of labor meaningful, well paid jobs are in short enough supply as is, so downsizing us to make a buck just magnifies the problem. It looks like it's time to legislate conditions for executive pay. Corporations are already regulated entities, subject to the oversight of the S.E.C. so I don't think it's a stretch to be able to regulate corporate officer compensation. Company execs are used to calling the shots but in a "one man, one vote" democracy our overwhelming numbers could force changes. If only our politicians weren't bought already.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
You got 1 guy who chooses to compensate himself in that manner for whatever reason and good for him if that's the way he wants to do it. By the way, he'll make it up in stock and bonuses, which is why he got over $2 million in 2011. Execs aren't going to work for chump change. You can limit their pay and they either won't work at all in the US or they'll take a position that's more in line with what's offered.

He made a point of saying he didn't need a bigger salary because his stock made him wealthy.
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
No, but the drive to cash in with company stock is ruining the work lives of employees. This isn't the way it has always been, it's just what the corporate world has devolved too as bigger and bigger corporations employ a greater % of the workforce.

Jensen and Murphy were a pair of economists who studied CEO pay and wrote a paper on it in 1990. At the time most CEO's got a salary and a performance bonus. The bonus was usually a very small percentage of the increased performance. I can't remember and don't have the time to go look it up, but they got something like a 1% bonus for a 20% increase in the company's performance. Needless to say, there wasn't much of an incentive to really push the company upward and forward and there was a question of just exactly how much impact a CEO had on a company's performance, or more specifically, it's stock price.

There arose a debate between paying CEO's more or rewarding them for performance via stocks and stock options. We all know which side won.

If there is anyone to blame, it's the people who didn't want to give CEO's higher salaries and better bonuses a couple of decades or so ago.

And with the outsourcing of labor meaningful, well paid jobs are in short enough supply as is, so downsizing us to make a buck just magnifies the problem. It looks like it's time to legislate conditions for executive pay. Corporations are already regulated entities, subject to the oversight of the S.E.C. so I don't think it's a stretch to be able to regulate corporate officer compensation. Company execs are used to calling the shots but in a "one man, one vote" democracy our overwhelming numbers could force changes. If only our politicians weren't bought already.

I'll retort that the task of regulating an exec's pay lies with the stockholders and the board of his company. I don't think I should have any ability to force a CEO to take a pay cut any more than I think I should be able to force my neighbor to take one.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
So he gets his money either way, huh?

Interesting. Guy creates a very successful business but is responsible in his compensation and yet you attack him? Greed is what got us into this mess, and I'd like to see many more CEO's act responsibly and make taking care of their employees a top priority. We all that won't happen, but if you are asking me to point to a CEO I admire it certainly won't be the ones trying to leapfrog each other on the Fortune 400 list.
 

hypo hanna

Well-Known Member
Are you making the argument for limiting exec pay or for having Ground deliver Express packages?

Limiting Executive pay. The two are unrelated in the context of this discussion. Nice try at the misdirect though.



All execs are greedy and crooked? If you say so.

Not all. Just the ones who rapacoiusly enrich themselves at obscene levels all the while cutting the pay/benefits of the front line employees. At the same time they paint a picture of gloom and doom to the employees and beer and skittles to wall street.


Get a driver to set up the program to ensure the company complies with GAAP.

I've met plenty with the intellect to do just that. I bet they would do it for a half a million.
 

hypo hanna

Well-Known Member
I'll retort that the task of regulating an exec's pay lies with the stockholders and the board of his company. I don't think I should have any ability to force a CEO to take a pay cut any more than I think I should be able to force my neighbor to take one.

I would agree except those that set that pay only see the profit margin. They could care less about the damage it causes to American families and the American economy. The other issue I have is that it is a very small club of individuals who serve on those boards of directors and the compensation committees.
 

Manager Wants Buyout

Well-Known Member
As far as the comment (Kinko's employee's making $7.50 an hour) you couldn't be more wrong. Actually, you should be right but most of them make double that. It's a 7.50 job but that's not the pay. In fact, some make $20 to ring a cash register and sell flash drives and do the best wiping this side of the toilet. Some managers have been allowed to be stay in position to run stores for 90k.
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
Interesting. Guy creates a very successful business but is responsible in his compensation and yet you attack him? Greed is what got us into this mess, and I'd like to see many more CEO's act responsibly and make taking care of their employees a top priority. We all that won't happen, but if you are asking me to point to a CEO I admire it certainly won't be the ones trying to leapfrog each other on the Fortune 400 list.

I'm not attacking him, but I wonder why he gets a pass for his millions in annual compensation when you imply that others are greedy for taking millions in compensation.
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
Limiting Executive pay. The two are unrelated in the context of this discussion. Nice try at the misdirect though.

It was a bit of a sarcastic joke. Nice try, though.


Not all {CEO's are greedy}. Just the ones who rapacoiusly enrich themselves at obscene levels all the while cutting the pay/benefits of the front line employees. At the same time they paint a picture of gloom and doom to the employees and beer and skittles to wall street.

What's an obscene level of wealth?

I've met plenty {of drivers} with the intellect to do just that {ensure GAAP compliance for a multinational multi-billion dollar company}. I bet they would do it for a half a million.

Sure you have! It just so happens that they didn't want to go through the work of becoming a CPA and working in the field for 10 or 20 years to get to that point and earn a half a million dollars. But they could do it!
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
I would agree except those that set that pay only see the profit margin. They could care less about the damage it causes to American families and the American economy.

Changing their pay has little to no effect on Americans or the economy. Unless you're talking about stopping the practice of compensating them based on the performance of the company.

The other issue I have is that it is a very small club of individuals who serve on those boards of directors and the compensation committees.

What about them?
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
I'm not attacking him, but I wonder why he gets a pass for his millions in annual compensation when you imply that others are greedy for taking millions in compensation.

Because he isn't using his workforce as a major source of profit enhancement. His compensation comes primarily from stock growth and dividends. FedEx on the other hand keeps taking away from us to show stockholders they are increasing profits.
 
Top