iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

SEC Urged To Enact Dodd-Frank Rule On Executive Pay

Ceo Pay

The Huffington Post   First Posted: 03/14/2012 1:11 pm Updated: 03/14/2012 1:14 pm

You know your boss makes more than you. But do you know how much more?

The architects of the Dodd-Frank act would like you to know. That's why they included a measure in their landmark financial-regulatory package that requires CEOs to reveal how much they get paid, compared to the median earners in their companies.

In an age where income growth is accelerating far faster for the wealthy than for anyone else, and where the widening divide between rich and poor has brought people to the streets in protest, we're betting that highly-compensated executives wouldn't want to advertise the fact that their earnings are many, many multiples of what their employees make. The CEO of Verizon earns 613 times as much ($36.75 million in cash compensation) as an employee in the middle of that company's pay scale. The head of CVS out-earns ($16.56 million) his mid-level employees by a factor of 456.

Lawmakers are upping the pressure on the Securities and Exchange Commission to implement the CEO pay disclosure rule.

In letters to the SEC penned last week, members of Congress -- including Senator Robert Menendez, who wrote the pay disclosure rule -- urged them to put the rule into practice.

The disclosure rule is a relatively little-known aspect of the Dodd-Frank act, which was passed in the aftermath of the financial crisis. Other measures in the raft of legislation have received more national notice, like the so-called Volcker rule, which aims to prevent banks from trading with their own money, or the watchdog agency known as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which Dodd-Frank established.

But many major corporations are paying close attention to the measure on CEO pay. A business group representing more than 80 big companies was lobbying against the disclosure rule last year, according to The Washington Post.

And in January, some two dozen business groups implored SEC chair Mary Schapiro to consider what they called "the potential issues and unintended consequences" of the pay disclosure rule -- arguing that it would be costly and time-consuming for businesses to crunch the necessary numbers.

Some companies already set limits on the amount their CEOs can make, although such pay ceilings have a way of creeping higher. Executive salaries at Whole Foods Market Inc. used to be set at eight times the average worker's paycheck -- a figure that later rose to 14 times the average, then 19 times. The ice cream company Ben & Jerry's underwent a similar progression, with executive pay growing from five times the salary of the lowest-paid employee to seven times to 17 times, to an amount that is undisclosed today.

James Sinegal, the former CEO of Costco, had a self-imposed pay cap of $350,000 for several years, but he stepped down earlier in January and was replaced by Craig Jelinek, who now earns a salary of $650,000.

It's not clear when or how the SEC plans to take action on the pay disclosure rule. Schapiro told the House appropriations committee last week that the SEC is trying to figure out the logistics of implementation, according to ABC News.

The pay disclosure rule does not have a deadline attached, but even if it did, it might not make a difference. Regulators have already missed some three-fourths of deadlines so far for putting the Dodd-Frank rules into place.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS

You know your boss makes more than you. But do you know how much more? The architects of the Dodd-Frank act would like you to know. That's why they included a measure in their landmark financial-re...
You know your boss makes more than you. But do you know how much more? The architects of the Dodd-Frank act would like you to know. That's why they included a measure in their landmark financial-re...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 41
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
yoozum
I hate double standards.
09:01 AM on 03/15/2012
I could absolutely care less what the CEO of my company makes. He runs the company, I don't.
redonthehead
The mud, the blood and the beer
07:49 AM on 03/15/2012
So the important thing is for executives to disclose their pay. Why? Executive pay packages are set by the board of directors who are elected by the shareholders or the owners of the company. This is simply another attempt at class warfare.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blackranger
03:34 PM on 03/14/2012
Executive pay ought to appear on their disclosure statements, the actual pay including fringe benefits and bonuses for each executive that makes over 100k per year, then investors would know what they are paying their employees. (the stockholders are the owners of the company)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mr MOTO
Three Strikes And You're Not Out!
04:27 PM on 03/14/2012
Public companies already do disclose executive compensation. Pick up a 10k.
MWA1111
I'll let you set the tone for our conversation
09:38 PM on 03/14/2012
That's a lot of folks... those that make over $100K. If you're "demanding" that, why stop there, why not disclose everyone's pay to the public?
frankieshoes1
lookitupyerdamnedself
12:05 AM on 03/15/2012
It is pretty much public information already. Car loan-bank loan- all information is passed to subsidiaries who pass it on to subsidiaries. I doubt it would take much for anyone to figur out exactly how much you make.
03:30 PM on 03/14/2012
Instead of secretive boards of directors, all compensation decisions should be made publicly, democratically and openly by workers committees.
MWA1111
I'll let you set the tone for our conversation
09:40 PM on 03/14/2012
FYI, in public companies these decisions are public knowledge. If you don't like the way a company is run, don't work there and don't own stock, simple solution. But to force what you want on others is laughable.
02:58 PM on 03/14/2012
If this executive pay bill gets passed, it could be one of the first steps toward ensuring more equal pay among a company's employees over all. It's no wonder there are so many lobbyists working against it.

America is quickly becoming the new Russia, with a small minority of corrupt oligarchs trying to increase their already extravagant amounts of wealth while the majority struggle to barely get by. This is and will be one of the biggest detriments to our society for our time as well as for our future.

This is the Tragedy of the Commons.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elamatt
Ever the optimistic realist
01:55 PM on 03/14/2012
HuffPo, you DO know don't you, that any photo of a fat, cigar-smoking dude is an Instant. Turn-off. to more than half the population??! Yeah, you knew that; you crafty group, you!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CSNC
Living on the edge -- not taking too much space
01:49 PM on 03/14/2012
"Still Waiting On That CEO Pay Rule, Guys"

The first rule should be... 95% tax rate on any income after $1,000,000 -- no loopholes.

H
MWA1111
I'll let you set the tone for our conversation
09:42 PM on 03/14/2012
Why? Your simplistic rant really reeks of jealousy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CSNC
Living on the edge -- not taking too much space
10:27 PM on 03/14/2012
MWA1111,

Do some research about the significance of tax rates before St. Reagan, please?

I have my millions -- no jealously here. Only thinking about the common good -- do you do that?

Then write back... would love to continue this conversation with you -- if you dare.

H
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CSNC
Living on the edge -- not taking too much space
09:07 PM on 03/15/2012
MWA1111,

I read you latest posts... way too long for me to comment on. Please:

1) Focus on one or two topics at a time.
2) Avoid the "I believe..." type of statements -- use facts instead.
3) Thanks for noticing my from 95 to 90% -- but I will not drop any further.
4) I am not attacking... I can but I wasn't. I was just telling you what I saw
5) We disagree on future approaches... you want to keep the status quo (that is not working) and I want something different (that may work). That is, the past versus the future... guess witch one we are moving to?

Take care,
H
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Julie Baker Morse
Mostly harmless
11:21 PM on 03/14/2012
I support higher taxes for the wealthy, but we really need to start by closing ALL the loopholes, assessing the additional revenue, and going from there. I also feel that 95% is incredibly excessive, and would remind you that our government already spends far too much on things that don't benefit most Americans; more money from the wealthy will only encourage even more excessive spending. And a million isn't nearly as much as it used to be, and it's certainly not enough to justify a 95% tax rate.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CSNC
Living on the edge -- not taking too much space
11:32 PM on 03/14/2012
Julie Baker Morse,

"95% tax rate on any income after $1,000,000" -- did you miss the "after?"

By the way, it was about 90% when we had great economy and no bubbles... please do some research -- higher taxes are good for everyone, including the rich.

H

H
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
CSNC
Living on the edge -- not taking too much space
12:17 AM on 03/16/2012
Julie Baker Morse,

Re. "“The rest of the world isn't exactly all the Third World, you know. One developed nation is pretty much the same as another. Right now, our effective corporate tax rates are among the lowest on the planet, despite the moaning and groaning of the wealthy. But if we jack our tax rates up TOO high, yes, many of those who can afford to do so will move . If we can manage on less--without ending necessary social programs--then why jump higher than we need to? I'd rather not addict Congress to spending THAT much, because they're not about to lower tax rates for the rest of us.”"

---

You do not seem to understand -- all I read from your post were the same lies and misconceptions that one hears from cheap talk radio and fox so-called news TV.

Please, I am begging you, educate yourself about the benefit of higher taxes, government programs, current tax rates, and what (for example) Germany, Norway, Sweden, etc... are doing about these issues.

Then get back to me... until then, no.

H