birdog1960 Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21647937. this really surprises me. brilliant or stupid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21647937. this really surprises me. brilliant or stupid? As long as it is shareholders that can make the call, i dont really see an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 As long as it is shareholders that can make the call, i dont really see an issue. Read all the way down. There are limits like bonuses of no more than 1x annual salary with some exceptions up to 2x annual salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Read all the way down. There are limits like bonuses of no more than 1x annual salary with some exceptions up to 2x annual salary. But it's sunday!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 It's going to be tough to pull something like that off unilaterally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 But it's sunday!!! So don't be a Monday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 So don't be a Monday! Where do Wops fall in the day of the week racism scale? Someone get Toure on this!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 (edited) I've spoken on this topic some and it's a complicated subject that doesn't have any obvious solutions. I don't believe limiting CEO pay is the way to go for obvious reasons. However, I do believe that there has to be clawback arrangements for corporate malfeasance and negligence. There are too many decisions done by the upper ups, that are too near-sighted that produce short-term gains that put the company at risk. And far too often these beneficiaries of these decisions walk away with their gains, golden parachutes only to leave shareholders and some cases tax payers on the hook. So the question is how and what do you implement to help solve these issues? Well for one, I think that bonuses and CEO pay should largely be paid in company stock with the provision that much of the stock can't be liquidated in X period of time. What this would do is create more long-term accountability. Important decision makers would think long and hard about the decisions that they would make simp,y because it would affect their pay. Now, how do you implement this? Well I certainly don't believe in government mandates. I believe it is something that needs to happen organically, more a culture of a way of doing things. If you begin to see some of the Fortune 500 companies doing this, more will follow suit. Edited March 4, 2013 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted March 4, 2013 Author Share Posted March 4, 2013 I've spoken on this topic some and it's a complicated subject that doesn't have any obvious solutions. I don't believe limiting CEO pay is the way to go for obvious reasons. However, I do believe that there has to be clawback arrangements for corporate malfeasance and negligence. There are too many decisions done by the upper ups, that are too near-sighted that produce short-term gains that put the company at risk. And far too often these beneficiaries of these decisions walk away with their gains, golden parachutes only to leave shareholders and some cases tax payers on the hook. So the question is how and what do you implement to help solve these issues? Well for one, I think that bonuses and CEO pay should largely be paid in company stock with the provision that much of the stock can't be liquidated in X period of time. What this would do is create more long-term accountability. Important decision makers would think long and hard about the decisions that they would make simp,y because it would affect their pay. Now, how do you implement this? Well I certainly don't believe in government mandates. I believe it is something that needs to happen organically, more a culture of a way of doing things. If you begin to see some of the Fortune 500 companies doing this, more will follow suit. makes sense. when the swiss are responding to this i'm beginning to think we may have finally reached a tipping point on executive salaries and bonuses. your solution seems a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I've spoken on this topic some and it's a complicated subject that doesn't have any obvious solutions. I don't believe limiting CEO pay is the way to go for obvious reasons. However, I do believe that there has to be clawback arrangements for corporate malfeasance and negligence. There are too many decisions done by the upper ups, that are too near-sighted that produce short-term gains that put the company at risk. And far too often these beneficiaries of these decisions walk away with their gains, golden parachutes only to leave shareholders and some cases tax payers on the hook. So the question is how and what do you implement to help solve these issues? Well for one, I think that bonuses and CEO pay should largely be paid in company stock with the provision that much of the stock can't be liquidated in X period of time. What this would do is create more long-term accountability. Important decision makers would think long and hard about the decisions that they would make simp,y because it would affect their pay. Now, how do you implement this? Well I certainly don't believe in government mandates. I believe it is something that needs to happen organically, more a culture of a way of doing things. If you begin to see some of the Fortune 500 companies doing this, more will follow suit. The issue lies with corporate board stacking. The executives of companies sit of the board of others, and they vote to puff the parachutes and handshakes for each other. I'm not sure what the solution is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I think it's obvious that it would have to include effective clawback provisions. The question is what and how do you implement it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I think it's obvious that it would have to include effective clawback provisions. The question is what and how do you implement it? That's just it; the executives of other companies who sit on the boards and award the handshakes and parachutes are not going to include clawback provisions. It's a culture change they don't want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 That's just it; the executives of other companies who sit on the boards and award the handshakes and parachutes are not going to include clawback provisions. It's a culture change they don't want. You never know. I would think that these sort of changes could maximize long-term shareholder value and sustainability. If the case could be demonstrably made, the power of the shareholder could demand change of culture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Maybe they could start with a clawback on a restatement of earnings when a bonus was given for the original statement of earnings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts