Is A $1 Salary Really A Major Sacrifice?

ABC News:

What was unclear Tuesday was whether that $1 salary is for 2009 and whether the executives would still get stock options, retirement benefits and other perks.

These three CEOs aren't the first corporate bigwigs to forgo their salaries and they probably won't be the last.

The $1 salaries are meant to be a symbol to shareholders, employees and taxpayers that the bosses are doing everything possible to fix their companies' problems.

In the last year, the chief executives of 32 companies in the Russell 3000 took $1 or no base salary, according to executive compensation firm Equilar.

But this handful of executives still earned millions of dollars through stocks and other forms of compensation, according to data provided by the Corporate Library, a research firm that tracks executive compensation based on company filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Read the whole story: ABC News

Comments

[Stephen C. Rose - Huffpost Blogger]

Here's a twist on the income issue:

http://stephencrose.wordpress.com/2008/12/09/am-i-worth-290000-a-year/

[Bettysdad]

Bob Nardelli of Chrysler was fired from Home Depot, and walked away with $299 million in severance.

Fire me, give me $200 million severance, and I'll happily work for $1 a year for several lifetimes.

[Irtnog]

They should agree to PAY BACK every dollar they've "earned" in past years until their companies start gaining market share. As market share increases their contribution will decrease until they actually begin to make money again. Giving them a bailout so they can throw thousands of workers out of work is crazy.

[kellygrrrl]

they are ineffective and out of touch.
we should pay them to go away.

[Damaven]

That $1 should be a billion dollar giveback from these people.

[MsRy]

The only thing better than symbols that the Big 3 are doing everything they can is for them to actually do everything that they can.

That begins with them and the BoD's stepping down voluntarily and without payout so that the companies can be reformulated.

[betz55]

WHOAH ! Back up here a moment. Didn't we just hear a while back that if the banking system didn't get our money we would have an economic meltdown ? Now we're being told that if we don't bailout the deaf, dumb, and blind american auto industry it will lead to an economic meltdown? AGAIN ? Let the oil companies bail out these car companies that keep pushing SUV's and bigger and bigger trucks down our throats !!! They have had years to get it together, remember when we bailed them out in the 90's ? Make a decent product- you're just a business like any other.....­.poor quality & performance for decades.
Ford makes well designed European models , how hard is it move a factory?
LET THEM FAIL...LET THEM FAIL....LE­T THEM FAIL....LE­T THEM FAIL....LE­T THEM FAIL....!

[calgary]

If people did some math, GM can stop paying all their high level executive and lets assume that will save $200M. GM makes about 3M cars a year which means there will be a savings of over $60 per car. On the other hand, it has been well documented that the big 3 has a labor cost disadvantage of around $1500 per car relative to Toyota and Honda. People, argue on facts and not emotions or simple false perceptions. I do agree that upper management is incompetent but cutting their salary will not fix anything other than it will make some people feel good. They should be replaced.

[Awakenedcitizen]

these guys should be able to do a brainstorming session and come up with all kinds of creative solutions, including sacrificing their compensation for a year, ALL forms of compensation, and commit to revitalizing their companies. Roll up their shirt sleeves, require all mgmt people to do the same, take pay cuts--and those who stay and work their butts off to turn those companies into successful entities, get a bonus WHEN THEY REACH THOSE GOALS.

[montemalone]

Nobody works for free; especially over-indulged, self-important CEOs.

[TexasDem0]

Salary can be a very small percentage of executive compensation, so this is symbolic at best. The other compensations are supposed to motivate the executive to pursue maximum success for the company. Why would you hire anyone who did not pursue the best interests of the company regardless of bonuses and options? In reality, executive perks provide the incentive to maximize personal financial gain through short term profit schemes which are detrimental in the long run and left for the next guy to fix, or in this case, for the taxpayers to bail out.

[rkimball]

no. many of these execs will give themselves multi millon dollar bonuses at the end of the year that does not count as pay but is part of their regular pay packages. they also receive multi million dollar value in company shares when they leave.

[TrooAmerican]

All executive compensation over the president's salary (Currently $400k + expenses) is ludicrous to the nth degree.
No EMPLOYEE deserves so much money for so many failures.
A) many get paid so much money, they literally cannot spend it all unless they buy other countries.
B) they often drive companies into the ground for a few years of fraudulent accounting to divert all profits to shareholders and leave the company an unfunded husk.
C) They fail over and over, and get rehired by other companies to do the same thing at a higher compensation.
D) they continually hold low end workers' salaries down, while puffng up their own.

The OWNERs of businesses are fine to pay themselves whatever they want to the future of their company.

But Execs are employees. And the company's fate is their responsibility. And if it fails, so should they, and contracts be damned, they need their pay removed.
They need to have some kind of repurcussions and penalties for doing a poor job.

[MsCanadian]

Thank you, well said!

[DrewRicketts]

Why The Bailout Money Should Pay For Reparations: http://newsone.blackplanet.com/nation/opinion-why-the-bailout-money-should-pay-for-reparations/

No more money for Big CEO's and failing industries until the nation pays off its historical debt to disenfranchise groups.

[Awakenedcitizen]

not.

[rachelwebster]

a sacrifice?, maybe not for these guys. But if they make $20 mil a year then giving up their salary is the equivalent of saving hundreds of auto workers jobs, so whether its a sacrifice or not, or whether it should be considered as such is kind of irrelevant­....its a good thing.

[schatsie]

They give up the salary so they don't have to pay income taxes or payroll taxes... we need to be subjecting all income over 250 grand at income tax rates not differentially for so called capital gains (which is deferred income) or dividends.

[trucap]

i would accept a penny for such a job. being close to the money making industry is more than enough for me.....bei­ng close to the money ....smelli­ng the money and the prestigious spot of being on the top of the company pyramid are enough to make makes anybody feels great.

[MattB123]

I think you'll get fired when they find out you've been sttting in your office smelling money all day instead of working

[montemalone]

If that were the case, there would be a whole lot of unemployed CEOs