NP Rank:
Administration, Congress Seek to Rein in Exec Pay
This is the kind of story that needs a lot of attention to detail.
Executive compensation has been described as solely a question of "supply and demand", yet top executives in Japan or Europe receive far less money for being in charge of similar size companies than the executives in the US (Business Week).
The ratio of executive compensation to the regular workers' compensation has undergone a dramatic shift since the 1950s. As most of us would imagine, the compensation ratio has moved dramatically upward in favor of the top brass.
Some theorists have suggested that the problem lies in so-called "compensation committees" that study executive compensation, find their executives being in the lower half of the curve, which then creates pressure to get executive compensation "in line" with "industry standards", a practice that creates an escalator taking executive pay higher and higher in any given industry as the average is raised.
For example, take a look at this paper from the Wharton School:
Abstract: The presence of significant shareholders on the compensation committee (i.e., those with share stakes in excess of 5 percent) is associated with lower CEO pay and higher CEO equity incentives. Firms with higher paid compensation committee members are associated with greater CEO compensation and lower incentives.
For literally decades, there has been a movement afoot of "stockholders' rights", based on the perception that management, in effect, owns the company, that is, operationally, and boards of directors seem to be squarely in the pocket of the top managers, and that this is a theft of the legitimate power of the actual owners of the company, the shareholders.
Free marketers tend to present this as if the above scenario is either not true or irrelevant, but what Barney Frank has proposed is actually currently practiced in some countries, notably, the UK.
What happens is that executive compensation is voted on by the shareholders automatically with every annual report that they receive. This is not the same as having the government determine salaries. This is an attempt to restore the power to determine salaries and other compensation to the shareholders and end the de facto ownership of companies by top management.
Administration, Congress seek to rein in exec pay
- On Thursday June 11, 2009, 3:04 pm EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration struck a delicate balance on executive pay Thursday, blaming flawed compensation packages for encouraging disastrous risk-taking but insisting it doesn't want to dictate how corporations reward their top people.
Gene Sperling, a top counselor to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, conceded to a congressional committee that imposing compensation caps on companies could lead to a flight of talent.
"I can say with certainty that nobody in the Obama administration is proposing such a thing," he said.
Yet, at the same time, he and officials with the Federal Reserve and the Securities and Exchange Commission laid out a case for how payment structures rewarded short-term gains at the expense of long-term performance and contributed to the nation's financial crisis.
The administration plans to seek legislation that would try to rein in compensation at publicly traded companies through nonbinding shareholder votes and by decreasing management influence on pay decisions.
But some Democrats on the House Financial Services Committee said Thursday the administration's efforts to hector the private sector into reforming executive pay might not go far enough.
"I do differ with the administration in that hope springs eternal and their position seems to be that if we strengthen the compensation committees we will do better," said the committee chairman, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.
Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., said that shareholders' votes on pay should be made binding on boards of directors.
Still, Frank made it clear he did not wish to impose pay caps.
"We are not talking here about the amount. We are talking here about the structure of compensation," he said. "And I believe the structure of compensation has been flawed."
While the administration has approached the issue too cautiously for many Democrats, a top Republican said its plans amounted to "incessant government intervention."
"The president cannot continue his heavy-handed meddling in the private sector and expect it to function, much less flourish," said Rep. Tom Price of Georgia, chairman of the Republican Study Committee.
Crowd Power
-
Roy C
Vancouver, Washington, United States
Recommendations (36)
-
albertacowpoke
Canada
-
SamirJ
Vadodara, Gujarat, India -
Paschen
Narita, Chiba, Japan -
Amy Judd
Vancouver, Canada -
QueensHart
boston, USA., United States -
Jon Azpiri
Vancouver, Canada









Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (2)
at 13:40 on June 11th, 2009
For those of you who might think that I am on the right, instead of being a populist/communitarian as I maintain I am, I first heard of this story hitting the buttons on the AM dial in morning traffic on the Rush Limbaugh show.
He followed up the report on Barney Frank by playing ABBA's "Dancing Queen", something completely out of line in the same way, I will add, that Letterman's comments were about Palin.
I not only agree with Barney Frank here, I would like to add that I also agree with Obama's plans to rein in the credit card companies, who should not be able to suddenly raise your rates on money they have already loaned you, but only on future loans, or some limit that resembles this idea.
at 13:48 on June 11th, 2009
Well Limbaugh is an entertainer ...right...? That is what the other guys say making the comments they do .. Any humor against a child, gays or races is "DISGUSTING"..
BUT , if we censor them then where does one draw the line.. They will receive their reward.
they already have for one never feels good inside the body by spouting sneers, or unkind
words. I believe in Karma.