![]()
- Job Market Politics to Keep Interest Rates Low
- AIG, Symbol of Crisis, Watches Its Stock Zoom Back
- Disney Profit, Sales Top Street Forecasts; Shares Jump
- Bill Gates Praises Apple's Jobs for 'Saving the Company'
- Cities With the Most Home Price Reductions
- Cramer: The Real Reason Stocks Fell Thursday
- Is Euphoric Market Ignoring Warning Signs?
- Video Game Sales Plunge, but Have They Hit Bottom?
- Despite Rhetoric, Obama Has Few Options to Boost Jobs
- Microsoft's Bill Gates Praises Apple's Steve Jobs For 'Saving the Company'
- Gold Is a Bad Inflation Hedge—Like Oil: Stock Picker
- Intel's Andy Bryant Offers An Explanation
- US 'Actively Working' on Weaker Dollar: Fund Manager
- Options Boil on Biotech Buyout Rumors
- Warren Buffett's $100,000 Offer and $500,000 Advice for Columbia Business School Students
- Activision Blizzard's "Modern Warfare 2" Sales Break Records
- 5-Star Manager's 5 Stocks for Changing Markets
- What's The Forecast from Retailers? Proceed With Caution
MOST SHARED
- Warren Buffett and Bill Gates Share Their 'Optimism' With Eager Columbia Business Students
- Pharma & Social Media
- Cities With the Most Home Price Reductions
- Warren Buffett's $100,000 Offer and $500,000 Advice for Columbia Business School Students
- Disney Profit, Sales Top Street Forecasts; Shares Jump
- China Fourth Quarter Growth Could Hit 10%: Official
- Disney CFO and Parks Chief to Swap Roles
- Housing Recovery 'Still In Uncharted Territory': HUD Secretary
- Despite Rhetoric, Obama Has Limited Options To Boost Jobs
In the court of public opinion, CEO pay is obscenely high and the verdict is guilty.
Never mind the basic question: Guilty of what? A closer look at the evidence, however, suggests that the case against what some see as wildly overpaid CEOs would end in a mistrial.
Aptly enough, CEO pay has become such a hot-button issue that it’ is now a staple of debates at financial conferences. Recently it was on the agenda at at the New York Society of Security Analysts' 4th Annual Corporate Governance Conference and the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland in January with an abundance of well compensated, high profile CEOS in attendance.
Now it's time for Congress to bang the drum. The House Financial Services Committee is holding a public hearing Thursday, March 8, where the committee's chairman, Rep, Barney Frank (D-Mass.) will push for passage of a bill he recently co-sponsored. The "Shareholder Vote on Executive Compensation Act" does not mandate limits on CEO pay, but seeks to give shareholders more voting power on the issue.
Pro or con, CEO pay may need to become an academic discipline now that it's part of the debating club.
![]() |
Charles Krupa / AP Former Hewlett-Packard Chairwoman and CEO Carly Fiorina (AP Photo/Charles Krupa) |
What drives stockholders nuts is that there’s often no thick black line connecting executive pay with corporate performance. Worse, many so-so executives such as Pfizer’s Henry McKinnell or Hewlett-Packard’s Carly Fiorina earned sweet severance packages after a mediocre performance. Home Depot’s Robert Nardelli got bad press for accepting a $210 million pay package. However, he doubled sales, increased earnings and boosted the dividend -- even if the company's share price disappointed.
This is what financial pros call the “principal-agent problem” and explores how a manager, the agent, behaves on behalf of the owner, the principal. If managers are rewarded for profit alone, it’s not unreasonable to expect some -- perhaps most -- to act in their own best interests and cut corners on safety, environmental controls, quality or service to increase their income. One solution is linking CEO compensation to value as established by the company’s stock price. Executives who boost the value of the stock and increase investor wealth are rewarded.
But the Minneapolis Fed report says there’s “little evidence” to show that a company’s solid stock market returns are a direct result of the CEO’s performance and pay.
![]() |
Dennis Cook / AP Former Exxon Mobil Corporation Chairman and CEO Lee Raymond (AP Photo/Dennis Cook) |
There’s also an element of star power in determining the pay of top CEOs. Compensation may be driven up by the current trend to hire a rock star from outside the company rather than promoting a qualified internal candidate. Some call this the “super CEO” syndrome.
The Sarbanes-Oxley law makes CEOs personally liable for their company’s financial statements, and a country club membership won’t cover this added responsibility. Prospective CEOs make a basic calculation: How much will it take to get me to sign on this added grief? The answer appears to be: Quite a lot.
In 1993, President Bill Clinton signed a law limiting tax deductibility to $1 million in compensation for a company’s top five executives. This was an attempt to limit what then was seen as outrageous pay. Before this, the Minneapolis Fed says, all CEO pay was tax deductible, like the pay of any employee. But with a cap on cash compensation, companies quickly turned to non-cash incentives such as stock options to entice top talent.
It didn’t take long before some bright boy or girl figured out that backdating the options would fatten the take.
Some analysts have argued that the CEO’s relationship with the board of directors inevitably leads to fatter paychecks.
“The thrust of the argument is that CEOs hold managerial power – simply put, leverage – over the boards that set their compensation,” the Minneapolis Fed report says. “The leverage starts at the board nomination process – typically controlled by the CEO – and is reinforced by the information advantage the CEO has over the board in terms of the company’s performance and his…role in it. It persists because board members are generally reluctant to rock the boat and are somewhat toothless to do much given their limited time commitments as directors.”
Expect that to change when politicians stop voting themselves pay raises.
“The critics of current CEO compensation levels point mostly to theory and to seemingly obvious design flaws, and the weight of anecdote can be compelling,” Wirtz says. “But they typically fail to demonstrate the ‘so what’ factor: namely, that high CEO pay has had a systematically detrimental effect on shareholder value.”
Come to think of it, the DJIA has been hitting record highs for months. But perception may become reality and those who say fat CEO pay undercuts the public trust needed to make a free-market economy thrive may be right.
However, nothing much will happen until the major funds assert themselves and enforce discipline among the top ranks.
If not, there are those in Congress eager to play smash-mouth – even if there is no constitutional authority to regulate a CEO’s pay.
- Warren Buffett and Bill Gates spoke to Columbia students, and Buffett made the students a startling offer.
- They may have wrecked their companies or saved our economy. Tell us what you think.
- Big pharma embraces social media, but how much should a tightly regulated sector say on Facebook or Twitter?
- A European dating site finds lovelorn singles from one country to be consistently uglier. Which is it?
- Contributor David Pogue looks at two of the latest efforts to perfect the digital pocket camera.
- PepsiCo is ramping up its onsite health facilities for workers.














