« Heads Up Marketers and City Planners: The US City of the Future (part 3 of 3) | Main | Housing and the Recovery »

November 24, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

What do you think about the growing ratio or CEO to Worker pay?

i.e.
"In 1965, U.S. CEOs in major companies earned 24 times more than an average worker; this ratio grew to 35 in 1978 and to 71 in 1989. The ratio surged in the 1990s and hit 300 at the end of the recovery in 2000."

http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/webfeatures_snapshots_20060621/

I like pay for performance as a concept but when I hear about CEOs driving companies into the ground and collecting huge golden parachutes or continue on with large bonuses despite their failures I scratch my head about board accountability.

That's exactly right. The issue is with the board, and the shareholders who vote them in. I have no issue with the ratio disparity and I've been on both ends of that spectrum, too. A gap incents people to work harder and smarter to earn more, to reach higher, to become indispensible or, if you feel you won't be sufficiently rewarded when working for someone else, then put your own money at risk and become the boss, the owner. Why would anyone put themselves out there, working their tales off, to "achieve" evenly redistributed wealth?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Blogroll

July 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31