Saturday, September 4, 2010
CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions
This article talks about the massive payouts that CEO's are receiving when they leave a company. The companies that were laying off the most workers in the recent years were giving there CEO's the biggest packages. Where as they should of kept some of the employees on board and just gave smaller packages. This article says that the top 50 companies gave out an average of $12 million to there CEO's. I just can't believe how selfish people are and how some companies don't manage there money better. That money could have given many people jobs that are now currently out of work and collecting money from the government. In the past CEO's would receive k prices. stock options which would not be that risky for the corporation. This also gave incentives to drive up the companies stocThe total number is estimated to be $598 million awarded in compensation to the top 50 CEO's. For how bad huge corporations have been performing in the "Great Recession," they are handing out a lot of money to there top employees.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
The only argument I have ever heard that somewhat justifies extremely high CEO payouts is it is an incentive provider. If a certain corporation is looking for someone to run their company, what better way to attract qualified people than huge bonuses. Also I would imagine lofty bonuses would improve productivity. In general, people work hard because they want earn more money. However, 12 million does seem a bit excessive. On a side note, I find it interesting that more people are not disgusted by the ridiculous salaries professional athletes make, even when their team is not performing well.
The United States is the only country that pays their CEO's more than anywhere else in the world, even china. I believe that the head of HP got paid 25 million dollars and he laid off some 25,000 workers. I agree with you in saying that its wrong to essentially pay CEO's to make massive layoffs. Companies need to do a better job of managing their money for sure. And im sure giving more money to workers not the CEO would provide higher production levels.
I agree with Spencer. Companies should spend much more money on their workers, rather than million to the CEOs. The workers are much more responsible for productivity and output in the markets. CEOs, it seems, just take flights around the world, go to meetings, and lay-off employees. Though these processes are important for daily business, workers should receive the large amounts of money rather than the CEOs.
I think that a little ignorant to say that all CEO's do is fly around and make lay-offs. CEO's at the end of the day are the one moving the company forward, and looking for new ways to make money for their respective companies. There is a reason they are in a position of power, they got their by success and tons of employees benefit from the decisions made by these CEO's every year. Sometimes the results hurt employees was well but business is not always fair to people.
If this recession has proven anything, it's that CEO's at the end of the day actually don't have to move the company forward or make money for their companies in order to be rewarded with bonuses grossly disproportionate to the amount they work in comparison to the employees who produce the goods and services that generate the profits. Not all CEOs got there by success - many got there because they come from well-connected families and inherited wealth. Daddy's money is the number one factor in determining who gets a business degree from an Ivy League and who gets to be the figurehead of a company. I agree with Spencer and Kody that businesses would perform better if they paid workers more instead of CEOs.
Post a Comment