[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/10/2002 8:31:25 PM eolesen wrote:
Bob, would you prefer that AA pay market level wages to management instead? If so, then executive compensation would need to go up by about 100% or more. Look at any industry, and you'll see that airline management folks are paid considerably less than their counterparts in other Fortune 500 companies. That goes for Carty, Mullin, Bethune, etc. except for the one exception -- Wolf. And we know where his company is today...
If the company can buy back stock relatively cheap, and find key individuals who are willing to take stock options in lieu of cash, the end result is that's cash saved. Those individuals take on the risk.
And it's considerable risk. UAL's unions took that gamble with the ESOP and lost. So did a lot of people in the Dot.Com sector. A few made out like bandits.
Would you be willing to work for stock options instead of cash? JetBlue's employees had no choice -- options were a part of their employement package to compensate for lower wages. Given the stock's performance, they stand to turn a reasonable profit assuming the stock price holds its value thru the next few years.
----------------
[/blockquote]
The market rate for executives is bloated because of the fraudulent governing systems under which our corporations run. The market is controlled by the supply side, where even the supposed demand side sees a benifit in paying unrealistic, unwarranted prices because the demand side is also the supply side.They sit on both sides of the deal.The decision making body of most corporations have a vested interest in inflating executive compensation. This has been the case for some time but over the last twenty years it has gotten out of hand. Since most boards are made op of executives of other boards its a you scratch mine and I'll scratch yours network. Our own CEO sits on the board of Dell. I'm sure if mechanics sat on the boards of all the airlines we could find a way to justify paying mechanics $200k or more a year also. The fact is there is no shortage of MBAs. There is no shortage of people willing to be CEO there is however a careful manipulation of the price paid for CEOs. The ratio should be 20 to 1. The top guy makes 20 times what the bottom guy makes. Maybe all the Jack Welch's will simply retire but looking at the state of our economy and society, maybe thats a good thing.It's turned out that much of the so called performance that they delivered for their millions was more hype than substance.
Risk? Risk is measured against what you can afford to lose. So Carty risking $10,000,000 is less than me risking $10,000. Why becuase what are the repurcussions if you lose? Would Carty's financial well being be threatened by a loss of $10,000,000 or a years salary? Doubtful. However $10,000 or a year of salary is a considerable risk to me because I'm much closer to poverty level. I could not take the risk because in the meantime I still have to provide for my family.If you already have more money than you will ever spend, financial risks like this are minimal. Risking working for a year or two with no compensation, in exchange for stock is not that big of a risk for someone who has millions. The cost of food, medical care and other essentials is the same as everyone else. How can it be said that they are taking a risk if in conjuction with the options they also receive huge, when compared to other workers, salaries? I guess you might argue that the potential of what they could have seen somewhere else is the risk. But really if you make $10,000,000 or $5,000,000 is there really any difference? What would change in your lifestyle? Will you eat less steak if you only make $5,000,000 instead of $10,000,000? Will you drive a Hyundi instead of a Mercedes? Why do people who already have more than they will ever need continue to work at all? Power. The fact is people like Carty, who probably could work at any other company would be very reluctant to leave a job as CEO for any position less than CEO, even if it payed more.To a majority of people in this country anything over $100,000 is considered a lot of money. Many executives receive ten times that plus options. For them the numbers are mere status symbols that are the result of an abusive display of power, not an accurate reflection of the value of their work.