I think they deserve it. Keep in mind...Ford is the only one of the "big three" not operating on gubbmint money. Their executives made good decisions along the way. But yeah....I think that the average CEO is overpaid.

Now clowns that get $10M a year to put a ball through a hoop, catch a baseball, etc. Lol.

 

Drudges are valuable in groups, but replaceable and expendable as individuals.

In what Communist society are classes wrong? The only way to make everyone equal is forcibly restrain the competent and competitive to the level of the average drooling, ignorant moron on the street.

Some people accomplish more than others, and are therefore more VALUABLE than others. Anyone wanting Mulally's job is perfectly free to pursue and attain that job if they can COMPETE. He worked for decades to get where he is, and in the process sustained and created many jobs for simple peasants who wouldn't otherwise have them. Pointing out that there are "classes" goes against populist propaganda, but classes are a reality.

Want that CEO benefit package? Make thyself VALUABLE enough TO OTHERS so they PAY YOU.

Think athletes make too much? They are paid to generate a PROFIT for team owners, which means that those team owners COMPETE to pay enough to get players to work for them.

 

Exactly. What we're working on creating is a society that punishes the successful and rewards the lazy. In order to get into $100k+/year jobs...the AVERAGE person (who gets there) has attained a high degree of specialization/experience and has had to actually pay...at some point (attain a degree and/or certification) to get there.

I'm sick of hearing the "99%" talk about how the "1%" are to blame for their woes. At the end of the day...most people are expendable. They don't have knowledge and/or a skill-set that makes them valuable. If a manager can go down to a temp agency (or wherever) and find someone that can perform your job to your level of competence TODAY...what makes you special? Why should you be compensated in the same ballpark as someone who has an advanced degree, leadership experience, and has had to make tough calls before? People (i.e. liberals) are simply too stupid to wrap their head around that.

 

Believe me, I am all for capitalism and a free market. It's what makes this country great. But to everybody here who agrees with these salaries, just remember one thing: The next time you are at your friendly Ford shop having some work done to your vehicle, or stop in to the parts department and pay $200 for something that Cracker Jack would be ashamed of putting in their box of caramel popcorn, please don't complain to anybody about the cost that you have to pay. That would be a complete double standard.

 

CEOs are just as expendable as individuals.......The 'myth' that a CEO is unique and deserves the fat compensation that others can only dream about because somehow they're solely responsible for a company's success is just that---a myth.

Nothing like adding a little drama to the debate.......

Who said anything about making everyone equal? And who said anything about forcible restraint? That would be Government, which I explicitly said shouldn't be involved in this debate. Again....It's a moral issue.

But if you think it's moral that Mulally make 600-times what your average Joe making $50,000 on the factory floor, then you've completely bought into the elitist view of the superstar CEO.

Let me clue you in. The company would survive fine without any of those 3 gents. Plenty more could step in and take their place. Those 3 couldn't do s--t without the folks on the floor making the product that the company is peddling. The company would die, as would the astronomical compensation the suits get.......

But it's interesting how you somehow turned the Ford workers into drooling, ignorant morons.......

Again, no one ever made a claim about equal pay........I would expect a CEO of a large company to make a lot of money....A LOT of money.......But when does the sum become ridiculous and an insult to the rest of the company employees? Hmmmm?

You know, your average employee at any given corporation used to receive stuff like profit sharing.......Stock options.....and not too damned long ago. Seems only the 3rd floor gets that s--t anymore.......

But hey.....Some people are more valuable than others........

And you could have half the company with high intelligence and the highest amount of ambition and the fact remains...only one person can be CEO at a time.......And in Ford's case, only 3 at a time can be at the very top......

Do the numbers..............

There are classes, and there are classes.....For the first time in this nation's history, we really ARE about to see the entrenched emergence of a permanent upper, and a permanent lower class. Real classes from the bad old days of Bourbon France.......

Read up on how the 'upper' classes lived 50 years ago....and how they live now......In 1960, their 'mansions' had maybe an extra bedroom or 2...and more than one bathroom.......They also had remarkably similar views on life, politics, etc. to their neighbors in the middle class (who didn't live that damned far away.....).

All of this is changing....or has changed.

Sounds like you've got it all figured out........

Not really. The athletes ARE the team. They truly ARE the factory floor....and they are not a tiny minority at the top lording it over the teeming masses on the factory floor.......

Well....If you want to compare a privately-owned sports franchise to a publically-traded company......

As an example, the Charlotte Bobcats (majority-owner Michael Jordan) has a very few number of employees. The team comprises 14 players. In addition, there are 4 coaches (1 head coach, 3 assistants), a team doctor....trainers.....The 'front office' which comprises about 8 or 9 VPs (legal affairs, government affairs, media affairs, etc.)......and oh......a couple of dozen folks who work in admin, human resources, legal, etc........Unlike with CEOs of large corporations, the players literally ARE the team...and there is no team without the players.

Ford has what? 160000? 170000 employees? A small percentage of that comprises the middle and higher managment. A tiny percentage of THAT comprises the executive level of the company (a half/dozen folks) with the CEO at the top.

Making 600 times what the average worker makes.......

Again....What the Hell happened to your loyal, long-term (oh....5 years and up) average worker getting some of that juice? Hmmmmm? I know they're just drooling morons and 'peasants' to you, Monckywrench......But I think if a company has a good year, they SHOULD get some profit-sharing and/or stock options.

Enough of the bulls--t that only the top suits deserve it. B.S.

 

Yeah.....By reining-in exorbitant CEO pay, we're punishing the successful and rewarding the lazy.......

And this has WHAT, exactly, to do with Mulally's $29-million + ONE-YEAR compensation?

Dude, he's got math whizzes and marketing geniuses to do all the effing leg work for him....All he has to do is understand and place his 'mark' on the dotted line......

Oh....And have power lunches (with martinis, of course) and golf games with other CEOs, and politicians and their staffers to get those Government goodies......

(make no mistake......Bailout or no bailout....Ford lobbies the Government just as hard as any other company.....Don't kid yourselves........)

And I'm sure the 99% is sick of being laid-off.....or having their salaries stagnate while CEO compensation is higher than ever.......And only the 1% seems to have the ear of the politicians any more.......

Or don't you think there are no legitimate biches?

Your argument is looping itself into a knot........

This is an argument over whether or not Mulally deserves the compensation he got?

Or are you talking about the job market in general? (scratching head)

Define the 'same ballpark'.........

 

Agree with Monckeywrench -- you are as valuable as marketplace is willing to pay you for. Don't like it? Go get another job. And stop getting in people's pants.

No one gave it it to Mullaly. Good or bad, he does something owners of the company are willing to pay for. These owners hired Mullaly at their free will. They want to pay. Yet, some of us are saying "no no no, you're paying too much". Their answer probably is "huh? WHo the **** are you to tell me how much to pay?"

Earning too much? Who judges what's moral or not? How do we determine that? How do we ensure that immoral does not happen or punished? Can we please not get the Govt involved in this too?

It sounds like since we mandated what minimum wage to pay, now we are about to mandate maximum wage. Moral? That's all propaganda, and smoke and mirrors in my view.

 

When they can COMMAND juice, they may have juice.

That's why people form unions, which (when run properly) are the ONLY way for many people of little individual value to bargain effectively. Collective bargaining has always made logical sense, and is not inherently good or bad. Only people of unique personal attributes can command money individually. Team up or be stepped on.

Business is war, Loyalty in either direction is absurd. Corporations exist to benefit stockholders.

There is no "deserve", there is the market and what you can SELL your labor for. If you don't like the ROE, change it if you can.

Populist envy much? If the employees don't like it they are free to strike and (attempt to) cut a contract where their delicate feelings will be protected from "insult". Freedom of association is Constitutionally protected should they choose to exercise it.

If it's that easy viewed from the peanut gallery, why aren't YOU competing for his job?

The argument that CEOs are interchangeable is logically disproved by the different OUTCOMES under different CEOs. The specific examples for contrast and comment include GM, Ford, and Chrysler.

 

I think Steve makes some rally valid points. Before the days of massive corporate greed took hold of the entire world, an hourly wage earner could work for the same company for say 40 years. He could build a retirement, share in the profits that his hard work helped to earn and feel pretty secure that his job would be there tomorrow.

Those days are long gone. Ford and the rest of the auto industry may not be the correct examples here as they do pay a fair wage to the hourly folks. I would aim this at Home Depot for instance where the majority of the hourly wage earners are part time employees with few or no bennies but the top execs are well compensated. Without good hourly employees, the company fails, pure and simple.

I really hate that working class folks are referred to as drones, peasants, drudges, etc. I find it really insulting that the very people that keep America's wheels turning are minimized in such petty fashion.

 

Respect for every human being, whether CEO or floor sweeper -- being respectful, no name calling -- that's only thing moral we can talk about, IMO.

On the other hand, wage disparity is a complicated matter. What's even more complicated is when we try to tame that wild mustang -- called "marketplace."

CEO getting too much - becomes even more of an issue when a company is failing and CEO still get his/her millions. At least Mullaly got his by leading a company to success.

 

That comment is directed at people who seem to think that we should have a communist society where everyone is compensated equally.

 

In a nutshell, you just illustrated exactly what is wrong in corporate America today........Congratulations.

Nossir, you are wrong. There is 'deserve'. What you are arguing for is for folks to sit on their butts and reap their payouts and not give a whit for anyone else unless they are COMPELLED to........

CEO butt-kissing much?

A populist would demand Government intervention. I've argued precisely against that from the first post.

Calling for morality in the corporate World isn't populism.

Brilliant! Be content with your crumbs or you can strike.

No freakin' middle ground, huh?

Better the peanut gallery than the mindless cheerleading section.....

Tell me....Are you doing cartwheels with the miniskirt and the pom-poms? Or are you blowing on the vuvuzela?

Wait a second. Maybe I read it wrong, but didn't someone post that at least one of these gents came from a different industry?

***In another thread, a member gave a personal anecdote about the changes his sporting goods chain went through when it went from a private company to one that is publically traded. Lots of lessons could be learned there. An OWNER....or someone who created and built the company....is more likely to be involved in the workings of the company, such as taking care of employees and customer service. The member showed the degredation in bonuses, number of employees, and customer service when it went public and the bottom line became the overriding factor in the business model. When stockholders become the owners, the ONLY thing that matters is stock value. This almost invariably causes the 'hired' CEO to slash costs to maximize profits (and the bottom line). Ergo, the situation Tim cited with Home Depot. Long-term employees with stock options and profit sharing (and customer service) became part-time and hourly employees with none of the above......

And Nardelli, when HE left a few years ago, was given a $180-million payout for a job well done (stagnant stock value.....stagnant growth.....layoffs.....)

Now, Mr Monckywrench faux capitalist....Justify THAT please......I know it's not a Ford example, but you made all KINDS of generalizations....so feel free to defend the stockholders board of Home Depot and Nardelli if you will........

 

THIS thread is about Ford. Henry Ford, who created and built the company, was a real SOB when it came to employees, unions and in the end probably customers as well. Things improved for employees after the company went public. Granted, the top spot was often, but not always, held by a Ford.

 

And are you directing that comment to anyone in this thread? I haven't seen anyone post such sentiments here......

 

THIS thread is also full of generalizations which had to be addressed and which are not strictly bound by the constraints of Ford Motor Company......

For a while there, Ford had THE highest paid employees around.........In the 30s and 40s........(granted, there were some hellacious strikes and strike-breaking also.....)....and this was before they went public.

That was a sign of the times in-general though.....