Median CEO Pay Crosses $10 Million For First Time

Median CEO Pay Crosses $10 Million For First Time

They're the $10 million men and women. Propelled by a soaring stock market, the median pay package for a CEO rose above eight figures for the first time last year. The head of a typical large public company earned a record $10.5 million, an increase of 8.8 percent from $9.6 million in 2012, according to an Associated Press/Equilar pay study. Last year was the fourth straight that CEO compensation rose following a decline during the Great Recession. The median CEO pay package climbed more than 50 percent over that stretch. A chief executive now makes about 257 times the average worker's salary, up sharply from 181 times in 2009. The best paid CEO last year led an oilfield-services company. The highest paid female CEO was Carol Meyrowitz of discount retail giant TJX, owner of TJ Maxx and Marshall's. And the head of Monster Beverage got a monster of a raise.

Many of these companies claim they can't afford to pay their employees more but can pay their CEO's millions more? A CEO making 181 times the average employee wasn't enough so they bump it up to 257 times? Couldn't they have just left it at 181 times and gave the extra to the employees so they could actually afford to be able to live without subsidies from the government? Enough of the BS from these companies saying we can't afford to pay our employees more when they can afford to pay their CEO's this much just goes to show that isn't so.

a reply to: buster2010

Pssh, and people didn't like my idea at capping income at 2m per year per person. This is ridiculous. You can't tell me that these people do 257x more work than their average employee. If anything, they probably work LESS hard than the average employee. Sure there is more stress, worrying about everything to do with the company, but is that worth 10.5m? Surely not.

a reply to: buster2010

I usually find myself in opposition to your posts in most threads however you are spot on here. I am sickened by people who can accept so much for doing so little and simultaneously observe the majority of people on the brink of fiscal doom day in and day out. There is only so long that those on top can continue their selfish ways until POP…and you know what they say "the bigger they are the harder they fall".

ETA: I don't see a point in having more money than you can possibly spend. I would have a hard time not giving money to everyone I saw who needed it…BECAUSE IT MAKES ME FEEL GOOD I COULD HELP…maybe that's where the rest of us differ…we actually care about other humans.

a reply to: buster2010

Not to mention either the amount of money the stock holders rake in either........

No wonder things are getting so expensive!

originally posted by: andr3w68
a reply to: buster2010

Pssh, and people didn't like my idea at capping income at 2m per year per person. This is ridiculous. You can't tell me that these people do 257x more work than their average employee. If anything, they probably work LESS hard than the average employee. Sure there is more stress, worrying about everything to do with the company, but is that worth 10.5m? Surely not.

People like to claim that what the CEO's do is so important and they pay them this much to attract the best and brightest. But they still pay them millions even if they run the company into the ground. Look at the last CEO of Yahoo he worked for 15 months and after he lost his job he received a 58 million dollar paycheck.

Congratulations! You have just solved the mystery of what is causing our global meltdown!
( I suspected it all along......)

originally posted by: andr3w68
a reply to: buster2010

Pssh, and people didn't like my idea at capping income at 2m per year per person. This is ridiculous. You can't tell me that these people do 257x more work than their average employee. If anything, they probably work LESS hard than the average employee. Sure there is more stress, worrying about everything to do with the company, but is that worth 10.5m? Surely not.

You are going to cap lottery winnings, athletes, actors and anyone making money on patents to 2 million also right?

A CEO is not the company the employees are the company. If a CEO takes a 200% increase the Employees should as well! But instead they are offered a .01% increase and these modern day ROBBER BARONS create golden parachutes.

This is not Capitalism this is Hyper-Capitalism and Cronyism! If we the 99% voted with our money and held up companies with good employee policies instead of the bottom line this would not be a problem...but keep shopping at Walmart.

Want to see something interesting? Compare income inequality with CEO compensation:


source


Meanwhile:

In 1989, the median American household made $51,681 in current dollars (the 2012 number, again, was $51,017). That means that 24 years ago, a middle class American family was making more than the a middle class family was making one year ago.

source

Ive always wanted to point out that, fpr those that claim that anyone can perform an entry-level job, and that there are plenty of people out there willing to take the job if need be-
The same is true of these CEO jobs.

a reply to: buster2010

While I agree with you that most companies have the money to pay their employees better and should, the CEO is a very important position and definitely deserves more money. Should it be 257 times more? No definitely not, but it should be substantially more to attract the most talented person.

I think the bigger problem is with the shareholders(stock market in general), capital gains tax, insider trading, and money manipulation going on.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71

originally posted by: andr3w68
a reply to: buster2010

Pssh, and people didn't like my idea at capping income at 2m per year per person. This is ridiculous. You can't tell me that these people do 257x more work than their average employee. If anything, they probably work LESS hard than the average employee. Sure there is more stress, worrying about everything to do with the company, but is that worth 10.5m? Surely not.

You are going to cap lottery winnings, athletes, actors and anyone making money on patents to 2 million also right?

Seeing how he said income cap the lottery wouldn't be included. Two million a year should be more than enough for the average person to live on.

originally posted by: buster2010

Many of these companies claim they can't afford to pay their employees more but can pay their CEO's millions more? A CEO making 181 times the average employee wasn't enough so they bump it up to 257 times? Couldn't they have just left it at 181 times and gave the extra to the employees so they could actually afford to be able to live without subsidies from the government? Enough of the BS from these companies saying we can't afford to pay our employees more when they can afford to pay their CEO's this much just goes to show that isn't so.

No doubt they will come out with usually nonsense : "we have to pay these salaries to attract the best for the good of the company". Well to my knowledge I do not not know of one company that has ever collapsed due to the lack of finding a GM. Since a lot of companies are older than the working life of a person surely thousands of companies should have collapsed as the lack of "top people" occurred due to retirement instead of pay !!!!!!!!! Oh hang on younger people get promoted and learn the skills to take over.......BUSTED

When this myth is finally exposed daily and these corporate heads are told "Well bugger off to a.n.other country then" only then will we break this vicious cycle of corporate greed.

Then there is another aspect of this. Who would you rather ran a company. The person who is doing it for money or the person who is doing it for the good of the company and all its employees? BUSTED.

The IRS taxes lottery winnings as income, just saying.
Besides, who are you to tell anybody how much money they are allowed to earn?

Another non-issue. Liberals think the CEO's paycheck is stealing money from the poor. It is no more than Bruce Springsteen's $33 million dollar income last year stole from the poor. Or the $60 million Lebron James made. Or Tom Hanks $350 million net worth. They generate value, and are paid accordingly to what the free market dictates. Why would you cap a CEO's pay and not cap a musicians pay? Or an atheletes? Or an actors?

And I've never heard a conservative say anyone has to give the rich money. It's a straw man argument. Say your opponent says something just so you can refute it. Conservatives believe in earning their money, and keeping it. The idea if giving money to people is called redistribution and is a liberal's wet dream.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
The IRS taxes lottery winnings as income, just saying.
Besides, who are you to tell anybody how much money they are allowed to earn?

Income equality has gotten so bad that something needs to be done about it. McDonalds CEO makes around 14 million a year Walmarts CEO makes around 35 million a year and the American taxpayer spends billions giving aid to their employees. Why is it right to pay one person millions and not pay another enough to live on? My tax dollars should not be going to help pay any companies employees bills simply because that company is too cheap to pay all their people a decent wage.

a reply to: jjkenobi

And I've never heard a conservative say anyone has to give the rich money. It's a straw man argument. Say your opponent says something just so you can refute it. Conservatives believe in earning their money, and keeping it. The idea if giving money to people is called redistribution and is a liberal's wet dream.

Were you asleep during the wall street bailout? This may come as a shock to you but that money didn't go to poor people. The poor people lost their homes while the people that got the bailout received millions in bonuses.

a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

I agree with buster on this. What you cite is an act of God. Ie, winning the lottery. That is a gamble and a single pay day. Good for the winners!

However, "peeing" down my back, and telling me that it is raining, is totally another. That 10m a year, will keep going up. 10 years from now, it will be 20m. Will your pay have doubled in that time too? Doubtful.. payroll will have to find that extra 10 million from somewhere.

We haven't even gone into stock options, which can net enormous gains with little cash. Especially with some inside knowledge. Some companies buy those for vip's as pay of the salary, by the way.

So called golden parachutes are pretty pricey to.

CEO/Corporation gains needs to be clobbered back down to earth. I am all for a 100% Robin Hood tax over a certain VERY small threshold. Like after that 10% meeting operational threshold small. There is not any reason for this horde mentality.

What is the GDP of the world, vs, solving the real problems of the world?

a reply to: Not Authorized

Funny you mentioned Robin Hood, he was a thief.

I completely agree that ceo's are paid to much, but I think its a very slippery slope to put a limit on how much someone can be paid. How far is that from saying you can only have 2 guns cuz thats enough for anyone? Your using to much electricity, were gunna shut you off. You've seen a doctor to many times this year, come back in January. I don't like the government to have their hands in my pocket any more than necessary. People look at the huge corporations and sees billions of dollars so that makes them evil. Everyone overlooks the school superintendent that make $125k a year to run the schools into the ground, plus pension.
How about actors making 20 million a movie so the poor lil guy has to pay $10 to watch it. What about a college football coach making a few million so we can buy $75 football tickets. I learned a long time ago, your worth what you can get somebody to pay you.