Suck all you want, you'll still get rich...

[Muuuuah 0]

Give me his job and i will suck at it also for that kind of money

What else would you suck for that kind of money?

[Ban Hammer 14,801]

When it comes to money ill suck like a vacum lol

calm down, hoss. i have yet to hear of a sequel to brokeback mountain.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It's the former. Obviously, there are some very competent top execs out there. I have no issue with top execs raking it in big time as long as the company they're running and the employees working for said company are doing extremely well. Most of the time, though, it seems that compensations is plain out of whack...

I'd agree with a stipulation that if the CEO is making the big bucks because the company is performing well, then he/she should ensure that ALL employees share in this success in some substantial form.

That's what I said. But let's not hold our breath...

They are more likely to share their wealth if they are rich.

It's not "their" wealth. They're not entrpreneurs, they're employees who effectively get to write their own paychecks.

Exactly!

[kaydee457 13]

This is for all those still thinking and believing that top executives are paid what they're paid because they "earn" it.

If your argument is that they are paid too much, as a corproate peon, you'll get no argument for me. Anyone who makes more than I do is paid too much. I'm paid too little and people who make less than I am are the Goldilocks contingent of corporate America, they are paid "just right" mmm mmm mmm.

If your argument is that all top executives are incompetent (I don't think that is what you are saying) then clearly that is not true.

It's the former. Obviously, there are some very competent top execs out there. I have no issue with top execs raking it in big time as long as the company they're running and the employees working for said company are doing extremely well. Most of the time, though, it seems that compensations is plain out of whack...

Since 1990, average worker pay has increased 28%, just slightly more than inflation, while CEO pay rose 481%. The faces of women and people of color also reflect the widening pay gap. According to recent Census Bureau data, women earn just 74 cents for every dollar earned by a man.

Our resolutions seek to restore a corporate social fabric tattered by frequent downsizings and compensation policies that offer a few leaders boundless rewards, while undervaluing the contributions of the broader workforce.

Solutions...

1. Link CEO and Average Worker Pay

This resolution asks that the company establish a maximum ratio between the pay of the CEO and the pay of the lowest paid worker. The resolution does not specify what the ratio should be, and instead asks the company to wrestle with this question and justify its response to shareholders. Though opponents of this resolution have argued it would cap CEO pay, this is not the case. CEOs would be able to earn more as the company's wage floor was raised. Criterion for selection: companies with large and growing disparities between CEOs and lowest paid workers.

2. Freeze CEO Pay during Periods of Downsizing and Cost-Cutting

Despite record corporate profits during the 1990s, layoffs have continued at levels usually only seen during recessions. A study completed by the American Management Association concluded that fewer than half the companies that undertake restructuring activities, including employee downsizings, experience any improvement in earnings following the restructuring. Still, corporate executives have commonly received large compensation increases following cost-cutting announcements. We believe that in a shared enterprise, both rewards and sacrifices should be shared among all employees. A standard that increases the rewards to executives while asking all other employees to sacrifice leads to poor morale and related problems. This resolution calls for a pay and option freeze for executives in years when more than 5% of workforce or 1,000 employees are laid off.

3. Pay Equity Report

While some women and people of color have successfully advanced into the leadership ranks of U.S. corporations, the experience of many women and people of color is that they continue to be paid significantly less than their male and white colleagues doing the same work. Pay discrimination has been illegal in America since 1973. Enforcement, however, has been lax. Initiatives by the Clinton Administration during the last two years have stepped up enforcement, opening pay discriminators to adverse publicity and legal liabilities. This resolution calls on companies to join other leadership companies and conduct pay equity audits to identify and correct pay equity violations.

Wealth Gap Resolutions

Broadened Ownership

The pay gap between CEOs and the average American worker widened to 419:1 in 1998, according to Business Week. The largest factor in this wide gap has been the explosion of executive stock options. One means of bridging the economic divide is to increase the number of shares owned by employees. Several studies have concluded that firms with significant employee ownership grow faster and have lower turnover. A recent study by Hewitt Associates and the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern found that between 1971 and 1991, companies with employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs) had total stock returns that averaged 6.9% higher in the four years after the ESOP was set up than similar firms without ESOPs.

Resolution asks the company to establish an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) funded annually with an equivalent number of shares as are distributed to corporate officers (includes options, restricted stock and stock units).

http://www.responsiblewealth.org/shareholder/2000/index.html

Holy Sheet! We finally almost agree on something!

Someone please archive this thread.....This may, no probably, never happen again........

[eric&gen 0]

I suck like a eureka vacum that is unlike the hoover vacs dont have much sucking power like me. lol

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This is for all those still thinking and believing that top executives are paid what they're paid because they "earn" it.

If your argument is that they are paid too much, as a corproate peon, you'll get no argument for me. Anyone who makes more than I do is paid too much. I'm paid too little and people who make less than I am are the Goldilocks contingent of corporate America, they are paid "just right" mmm mmm mmm.

If your argument is that all top executives are incompetent (I don't think that is what you are saying) then clearly that is not true.

It's the former. Obviously, there are some very competent top execs out there. I have no issue with top execs raking it in big time as long as the company they're running and the employees working for said company are doing extremely well. Most of the time, though, it seems that compensations is plain out of whack...

Since 1990, average worker pay has increased 28%, just slightly more than inflation, while CEO pay rose 481%. The faces of women and people of color also reflect the widening pay gap. According to recent Census Bureau data, women earn just 74 cents for every dollar earned by a man.

Our resolutions seek to restore a corporate social fabric tattered by frequent downsizings and compensation policies that offer a few leaders boundless rewards, while undervaluing the contributions of the broader workforce.

Solutions...

1. Link CEO and Average Worker Pay

This resolution asks that the company establish a maximum ratio between the pay of the CEO and the pay of the lowest paid worker. The resolution does not specify what the ratio should be, and instead asks the company to wrestle with this question and justify its response to shareholders. Though opponents of this resolution have argued it would cap CEO pay, this is not the case. CEOs would be able to earn more as the company's wage floor was raised. Criterion for selection: companies with large and growing disparities between CEOs and lowest paid workers.

2. Freeze CEO Pay during Periods of Downsizing and Cost-Cutting

Despite record corporate profits during the 1990s, layoffs have continued at levels usually only seen during recessions. A study completed by the American Management Association concluded that fewer than half the companies that undertake restructuring activities, including employee downsizings, experience any improvement in earnings following the restructuring. Still, corporate executives have commonly received large compensation increases following cost-cutting announcements. We believe that in a shared enterprise, both rewards and sacrifices should be shared among all employees. A standard that increases the rewards to executives while asking all other employees to sacrifice leads to poor morale and related problems. This resolution calls for a pay and option freeze for executives in years when more than 5% of workforce or 1,000 employees are laid off.

3. Pay Equity Report

While some women and people of color have successfully advanced into the leadership ranks of U.S. corporations, the experience of many women and people of color is that they continue to be paid significantly less than their male and white colleagues doing the same work. Pay discrimination has been illegal in America since 1973. Enforcement, however, has been lax. Initiatives by the Clinton Administration during the last two years have stepped up enforcement, opening pay discriminators to adverse publicity and legal liabilities. This resolution calls on companies to join other leadership companies and conduct pay equity audits to identify and correct pay equity violations.

Wealth Gap Resolutions

Broadened Ownership

The pay gap between CEOs and the average American worker widened to 419:1 in 1998, according to Business Week. The largest factor in this wide gap has been the explosion of executive stock options. One means of bridging the economic divide is to increase the number of shares owned by employees. Several studies have concluded that firms with significant employee ownership grow faster and have lower turnover. A recent study by Hewitt Associates and the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern found that between 1971 and 1991, companies with employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs) had total stock returns that averaged 6.9% higher in the four years after the ESOP was set up than similar firms without ESOPs.

Resolution asks the company to establish an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) funded annually with an equivalent number of shares as are distributed to corporate officers (includes options, restricted stock and stock units).

http://www.responsiblewealth.org/shareholder/2000/index.html

Holy Sheet! We finally almost agree on something!

Someone please archive this thread.....This may, no probably, never happen again........

Let's go have a beer!

[dalegg 143]

I'm thinking I could go drop passes for the Seattle Seahawks for less than 5 million a year too.

[MichelleandCraig 1]

dalegg, Don't get started on what pro sports players get..argh!! Must be nice to do something you love to do (yes, even with the grueling practices, being away from family,etc...after all, it was their choice.) and get paid millions upon millions. I WISH! Same with celebs and singers, etc. actually. Entertainment industry...must be nice to have that kinda talent...especially when, for a lot of people (tho not all) they were born with it, and just nursed that talent/looks/whatever.

As far as the article and comments above, at my old job we didn't get raises/Christmas bonuses (which we always had) one year, yet our company bought out 3 or 4 other companies during the course of the year. Everyone was pretty impressed with THAT too. M.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

dalegg, Don't get started on what pro sports players get..argh!! Must be nice to do something you love to do (yes, even with the grueling practices, being away from family,etc...after all, it was their choice.) and get paid millions upon millions. I WISH! Same with celebs and singers, etc. actually. Entertainment industry...must be nice to have that kinda talent...especially when, for a lot of people (tho not all) they were born with it, and just nursed that talent/looks/whatever.

The main difference between entertainers and pro sports, of course, being that the entertainers don't have taxpayers foot the bills for their venues. That is what makes me angry is when local taxes go up to pay for stadium construction, then mainenance, improvements, etc. while the cities and counties that pay for it don't get any say so in terms of the use of the facilities which stand empty and do nothing but cost taxpayer money most of the year while the pro sports teams rake in the big bucks to award ridiculous contracts to their players. This taxpayer subsidized wealth really makes my blood boil.

[Jenn! 918]

The main difference between entertainers and pro sports, of course, being that the entertainers don't have taxpayers foot the bills for their venues. That is what makes me angry is when local taxes go up to pay for stadium construction, then mainenance, improvements, etc. while the cities and counties that pay for it don't get any say so in terms of the use of the facilities which stand empty and do nothing but cost taxpayer money most of the year while the pro sports teams rake in the big bucks to award ridiculous contracts to their players. This taxpayer subsidized wealth really makes my blood boil.

Gee, thanks. Now you've made my blood boil too!

[Ban Hammer 14,801]

dalegg, Don't get started on what pro sports players get..argh!! Must be nice to do something you love to do (yes, even with the grueling practices, being away from family,etc...after all, it was their choice.) and get paid millions upon millions. I WISH! Same with celebs and singers, etc. actually. Entertainment industry...must be nice to have that kinda talent...especially when, for a lot of people (tho not all) they were born with it, and just nursed that talent/looks/whatever.

The main difference between entertainers and pro sports, of course, being that the entertainers don't have taxpayers foot the bills for their venues. That is what makes me angry is when local taxes go up to pay for stadium construction, then mainenance, improvements, etc. while the cities and counties that pay for it don't get any say so in terms of the use of the facilities which stand empty and do nothing but cost taxpayer money most of the year while the pro sports teams rake in the big bucks to award ridiculous contracts to their players. This taxpayer subsidized wealth really makes my blood boil.

amen

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I still can't stop snickering every time I read the title of this thread.

[eric&gen 0]

My new knee pads should be easy to break in lol.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I still can't stop snickering every time I read the title of this thread.

That's because, unlike me, you have a dirty mind.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I still can't stop snickering every time I read the title of this thread.

That's because, unlike me, you have a dirty mind.

:lol: :lol: riiiiiiiiiiiiight