- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,649
- Reactions
- 24,553
+1 on that, it takes the pi$$ out of working people when a ceo of a bank can get $12m in a year. That is pure obscenity.IMO
As long as it applies to CEO wages too
From an article in 2011, but doubt things have improved:
THE fixed pay of the top 100 chief executives in the nation has more than doubled over the past decade and bonus payments have increased almost 200 per cent, far outpacing returns to shareholders, according to new research. The Australian Council of Superannuation Investors’ latest research on chief executive pay in Australia’s top listed companies found median fixed pay in the top 100 ASX companies increased 131 per cent over the decade. Returns to shareholders from the S&P/ASX 100 index rose only 31 per cent over the same period. The study also found that while the benchmark index fell 30 per cent over the three years to June 30 last year, chief executive cash pay ”” the value of pay disclosed excluding share-based payments ”” remained much higher than any year before 2007. ‘‘The past 10 years have been far better for CEOs of top 100 companies than investors, given the annual cash take of a CEO from a large company has almost doubled over the decade,’’ ACSI chief executive Ann Byrne said.
Now if unions were gouging us like that tehre's be an outcry, but CEo pay is move along please, nothing to see here.
CEO's are private enterprise, they can do what they like and are accountable to shareholders.
The unionists can get rid of union leaders if they pay themselves too much, but they never know about it as these creeps just steal it dont they.
Bring on the inquiry.
I'd argue there is market failure when CEO pay is rising faster than the shareholder return. It seems that when things get hard and the bonus isn't achievable that fixed pay increases, or the criteria to earn the bonus are lowered.
Yet when the average joe gets a pay rise it's all about productivity, lost competitiveness, inflation and the rest.
Hopefully the inquiry your requesting will also examine how CEO pay is determined. I'd say it's even more opaque than anything happening in union headquarters.
Think it's time people start to think about Abbotts team.Hockey is an economic dill,Julie Bishop will be the deputy PM,nuff said.Al
I think you miss my point MrBurns,If you, as I do, believe Labour is history then surely it's time to look at the team that will be sitting on the treasury benches.AlAnyone, including me, would make a better treasurer that Wayne (Goofy) Swan
I think you miss my point MrBurns,If you, as I do, believe Labour is history then surely it's time to look at the team that will be sitting on the treasury benches.Al
To date, it hasn't done much to inspire confidence.I think you miss my point MrBurns,If you, as I do, believe Labour is history then surely it's time to look at the team that will be sitting on the treasury benches.Al
I think you miss my point MrBurns,If you, as I do, believe Labour is history then surely it's time to look at the team that will be sitting on the treasury benches.Al
To date, it hasn't done much to inspire confidence.
If it did, the Coalition would be much further ahead in the polls than they currently are.
I think you miss my point MrBurns,If you, as I do, believe Labour is history then surely it's time to look at the team that will be sitting on the treasury benches.Al
The Howard Government was not known for its fiscal restraint in its latter years, but did at least better manage its programs overall in comparison to the current government. It was also more honest, but then this government sets a very low bar on that score.I really struggle to see the difference between the two. They're both big spenders trying to give money out to shore up support. I've seen plenty of "we'll balance the budget" but I haven't seen much in the way of just how that will be done. My pig in a poke picture sums it up nicely, no one is looking inside to make sure they're getting what's written on the box.
I really struggle to see the difference between the two. They're both big spenders trying to give money out to shore up support. I've seen plenty of "we'll balance the budget" but I haven't seen much in the way of just how that will be done. My pig in a poke picture sums it up nicely, no one is looking inside to make sure they're getting what's written on the box.
I really struggle to see the difference between the two. They're both big spenders trying to give money out to shore up support. I've seen plenty of "we'll balance the budget" but I haven't seen much in the way of just how that will be done. My pig in a poke picture sums it up nicely, no one is looking inside to make sure they're getting what's written on the box.
I got your point ok but as Sails says it doesnt really matter as long as Gillard is out.
As far as the Libs go, they're smart if someone doesnt measure up they'll be replaced it will be a breath of fresh air not to have the socialist looters at the helm.
Must say the Libs will have a much harder job than Labor did.
+1.People are so desperate to get rid of Labour they don't think to critique the alternative.Al
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?