This post is part of a feature on companies and products that our bloggers think are in need of a makeover. See all 26.
You may have noticed, as I did, that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson seemed colossally uncomfortable during his testimony before Congress in September. Obviously, no one would enjoy jumping into Paulson's shoes and defending the merits of the government's $700-billion bailout bill to skeptical senators. However, the good Secretary's level of discomfort went up to 11 when the legislators began grilling him about the obscenely fat pay packages received by Wall Street CEOs -- even those who, you know, bankrupted their companies and stuff?
I can't blame Hank for breaking a sweat. Before he assumed the role of Treasury Secretary, Paulson was better known as the handsomely compensated CEO of Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS). To his credit, Goldman is one of the few titans of Wall Street still standing in the wake of the mortgage-backed securities mess. Although he managed not to drive his company into the ground, I'd argue that Paulson is not quite impartial enough to lead the charge for CEO pay reform.
On the other hand, I have never received a salary that could be described as "scandalous." Plus, I have a healthy amount of indignant rage regarding the pay packages scored by such Wall Street ne'er-do-wells as Richard Fuld of Lehman Brothers and Martin Sullivan of AIG (NYSE: AIG). With this arbitrary sense of entitlement, I feel more than qualified to suggest some new guidelines for executive pay.
First, stop pretending you only earn $1 per year. Really, CEOs, how gullible do we look? Major tech firms love this PR ploy, including Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL), Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO), and Google (NASDAQ: GOOG). The funny thing about CEO compensation, though, is that it's rarely limited to a flat salary. Once you factor in stock options, travel compensation, bonuses, and whatever other perks make their way down the pipeline, some of these selfless execs are raking in a sum well north of Greenland's annual GDP. Eliminating these window-dressing "dollar" salaries is a critical first step to greater transparency in executive pay.
Next, implement the Reese Witherspoon pay cap. The adorable Southerner won an Academy Award for her role as June Carter Cash in the 2005 film Walk the Line, an assignment for which she raked in $15 million. Sure, it could be argued that Hollywood entertainers are overpaid; but that's an entirely different commentary. For our purposes, $15 million sounds like a rather healthy dose of cash. Until someone discovers a cure for cancer, HIV, or the common cold, I can't think of anyone who truly deserves to make more than $15 million a year for doing anything. Thus, I submit this number as a firm ceiling for CEO pay.
The purpose of the controversial Witherspoon Doctrine is twofold. First, it represents what I deem to be an entirely reasonable limit on annual compensation. (If you need more than $15 million to cover the bills, you're doing something wrong.) Plus, this initiative also short-circuits the dangers and pitfalls of hubris, which some claim was the Achilles' heel of Mr. Fuld. Ask yourself this: If you're the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, but you pull in the same salary as the bubbly star of Legally Blonde 2, how much excessive pride can you truly indulge in? Yeah ... not so much.
Of course, there's no way to enforce this mandate in the private sector, and I imagine a few CEOs may take issue with my bold proposal. I'm not an unreasonable person, so I have an alternative plan ready for these holdouts: try working a minimum-wage job at Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) for a week, and get back to me with a real problem to complain about.
Elizabeth Harrow is an analyst and financial writer in the research department at Schaeffer's Investment Research. She is featured in the video series Schaeffer's Daily Q&A on SchaeffersResearch.com.
Does executive compensation need a makeover? What would you suggest? Be sure to check out the other makeover posts.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
10-23-2008 @ 7:20AM
ken said...
CEOs should be held to no more than $350,00, as no CEO has as more responsibility than the President of the USA.
Also, people need to learn to live a better than average life rather than the FAT CAT. No sport player is worth more than the above mentioned, and I have friends making more. It is all greed and screw the little man. Familys can't go to ballgames as they are too expensive. The people on Capital Hill also receive too many perks, and their retirement pay is also too much. Yes, even some are in office too long. America needs to get back to reality, and that goes for our government
10-23-2008 @ 10:00AM
Ray said...
I get a kick out of Michelle Obama saying we need to get health care costs under control, while she makes $6,000 a week as CEO of a hospital! No one needs to make that kind of money. Funny how she can be the problem, and complain about it, at the same time. Pure greed.
10-23-2008 @ 10:48AM
harley said...
lol fix it by making them get paid less than the president of the united states. why should ceo's make more than the president of the usa they do less than the president.
10-23-2008 @ 11:38AM
Dave Olson said...
It bothers me a lot when a CEO receives bonuses that exceed the shortfall in their employees/retirees' pension plans. When companies have lackluster performance, CEOs don't deserve those huge bonuses and valuable stock options. It's even worse when companies pay executive perks out of retirees' pension funds. It appears that the major skill possessed by CEOs is that of negotiating fat employment agreements. I'd like to see all executive bonuses and perks paid out of operating profits (no profits, no bonuses or perks), capped executive pay based on company performance (like those executives impose on their sales teams) and executives being personally (criminal and civil) responsibile for company actions. That sounds like a really good start.
10-23-2008 @ 11:56AM
Les said...
CEO's should be compensated based on performance. Like Iacoca when he saved Chrysler and all the jobs. But they should also be penalized for poor performance.Professional athletics pays handsome rewards for performance. When they no longer meet certain goals rhey should be compensated less. You can't set arbitrary pay limits because it eliminates incentive to perform. Outlandish compensation for just being in the job is also a mistake.
10-23-2008 @ 1:12PM
Dan said...
One of the few CEO's that I respect is Jim Senegal, the CEO of Costco. It is more important to him to pass the money back to his workers and to his customers than himself. His annual pay is capped at $350,000 and the only true corporate perk he allows himself is a corporate Jet to visit his stores on a regular basis. The guy doesn't even have his own administrative assistant. Check him out to learn more about how corporations should be following his example.
10-23-2008 @ 1:37PM
Jill said...
In 1960 the average CEO received a salary 42 times as large as his lowest-paid workers. Now the average CEO receives a salary that is 411 times as large as his (and let's face, it usually is a male) lowest paid workers. How about if a cap on CEOs' salaries is set at 100 times as much as their lowest paid workers? That's still a helluva lot of money. And include stock options, etc. in that calculation!
10-23-2008 @ 7:31PM
Dow said...
Board of directors should be held accountable for the pay of CEO's and suffer cash losses if he screws up. Golden parachutes should be illegal and stock options, severance packages and other back door deals should be null and void if a company tanks.
10-26-2008 @ 11:39AM
Lori said...
Ray,
Agreed 150%. Someone should take a look at Michelle Obama's hospital and her record there to see if she has implemented changes that would aid lower-income ppl in receiving insurance or low-cost healthcare.
She could have cut INSANE salaries (6g/week???) and put that additional money toward her institution's general medical fund (every hospital has one, it helps pay hospital costs, medication costs, etc for those pts. whose insurances don't).
And her husband's campaign talks about right-wing greed. Hypocrites.
10-28-2008 @ 6:15AM
Beltway Greg said...
Lori. No doubt you're a McCain supporter so why should you care about CEO pay? How much does Cindy McCain get for being the shadow CEO of a beer distributorship? That's got social redemption written all over it. It's survival of the fittest in your world and unfortunately Michelle Obama and Cindy McCain are much more fit educationally and by birthright than you therefore they deserve whatever the market will bear. The CEO's of the investment banks and the insurance companies give to both parties. How can you blame people when they play by your rules and play the game so much better? Do you really buy into that wealth redistribution garbage? If Barack simply wanted cash he could've landed a job at any Ibank on Wall Street at a king's ransom. African-Americans are are rare in the Ibanking world and the editor of the Harvard Law Review could've written his own ticket. Instead he became a community organizer on the mean streets of Chicago. He's a much better man than I. Barack Obama has played this game so well and in the end has forced John McCain to attack his own party and the sitting president openly. What a deft hand. He'll make a great president. Oh and btw, while in the senate he helped author the legislation that created a website that forced states to reveal the recipients of pork barrel spending and helped corral loose nukes. Both of those are fairly important issues I'd say. So what say you?
Beltway Greg
10-28-2008 @ 3:30AM
PandaBear said...
Lori is a jack @ss.
6g a week for an excellent work well done is nothing. I am making 2g a week as an engineer and my boss' boss is already making 6g a week. If you think 6g a week can solve the health care problem you should be put on a brain surgery. That salary is not enough to do a surgery per week, that's the problem facing the health care industry today.
Go cut all the tax you want and bankrupt the country, so in the end you are just a drug czar in a 3rd world country. Yeah, this is real patriotic. Borrow against the future to pay for tax cut to the rich. When everyone in the future pay 20x as much after interest, and have to sell our country to China, India, Russia, and Japan.
10-28-2008 @ 8:14AM
Ed said...
Why don't the search committees of the major corporations narrow the number of candidates who would be entirely acceptable to them to be their CEO's down to say 3 or 4.
After they agree that any one of the candidates would do, then give them a list of all the types of compensation items and "perks" that the company would be willing to consider (car, boat, house, monthy living expenses, bonuses, stock options, etc.) and say "OK guys, lowest bidder is our new CEO..."
I know a ton of highly qualified people in my profession (myself included) who would gladly take $250k/yr, as opposed to the $500k/yr my boss makes to be CEO.
I can only imagine that corporations like United Airlines might actually get someone from that industry (instead of the timber or steel industry) who understand the business and don't need to get a bonus for getting their company into Chapter 11 and an even bigger bonus for getting them out.
I think a lot of corporations could quickly curb the giant bonuses, golden parachutes and save a lot of operating capital, not to mention getting a CEO who wants the job, not the buck$...
10-28-2008 @ 9:09PM
john said...
i was watching the movie V for vandarera... and there was a quote in that movie .. poeple should not be afread of there goverment.... there goverment should be afread of it poeple .... that sould also be true for all these richs fucks there should be afread of us
10-31-2008 @ 9:39PM
Gary said...
I agree with Ray. It is just plain -------- that Michelle Obama makes that kind of money. Not only that but her husband made sure her hospital got a substantial grant, then all of a sudden her salary goes over 300K? Look, this woman is crooked, her husband is crooked. They are both a joke.
10-31-2008 @ 9:28PM
Gary said...
I agree with Ray. It is just plain -------- that Michelle Obama makes that kind of money. Not only that but her husband made sure her hospital got a substantial grant, then all of a sudden her salary goes over 300K? Look, this woman is crooked, her husband is crooked. They are both a joke.
11-01-2008 @ 12:35AM
Gary said...
Look, this CEO pay is ridiculous. There is NO ONE ON THE PLANET, NO ONE worth that kind of money. I agree with alot of the other commentators here, not one of these people should EVER be paid more than the president of the United States. Who are the idiots in these companies that offer this kind of compensation? I could run any one of these companies with my knowledge and degree. We should be stripping them of all their assets, they should not get a dime, but instead should have to pay back every dime they have defrauded their investors of. Come on America, when are you going to wake up and start holding these people accountable. I am going to fun for office. The first thing I am going to do it outlaw lobbying in Washington. I am going to take away excessice CEO pay, I am going to cut spending and make these politicians tow the line. How many of you have to balance your check book every month? Well so should they. I would vote down EVERY piece of legislation that had special interest money tagged to it. Look! we need to get control of the politicians and make them realize that if they do not perform, they are out of office! Period! Anyone here for term limits? Get rid of ANY unproductive CEO or congressman, senator, or president who is not performing. No more congressmen, senators, or CEO's for more than 8 years, and no more guarantedd retirement at full salary. If they do not perform, they do not get paid. End of story!
11-03-2008 @ 1:08PM
jo said...
CASH&CARRY WILL PICK YOUR POCKETS CLEAN
11-08-2008 @ 5:07PM
heidifido said...
Jim Senegal of Cosco needs to be recommended for his frugal practices and all CEO's should be given only what he makes plus maybe an expense account not to exceed 100.000 for expenses
plus 1 assitant to help him .
I always woner if any big shots ever
read the comments that are made in here and listen to the average
workin People ?
11-08-2008 @ 5:11PM
heidifido said...
I made a mistake in my last posting
I meant to say $ 350.000
11-14-2008 @ 2:22AM
Nemo1 said...
Blame the boards of directors. Until the stockholders get some kind of direct control of negotiating CEO compensation this is going to go on. The Foxes are guarding each others henhouses.
I had to laugh when Paulson said that without these enormous compensations you couldn't get talented people to run these companys. Thats the kind of crap they sell, and they hope if they say it enough you'll believe it.