 | Sundiszno (30)
08/01/2005 |  Perhaps I'm just envious, but I think that CEO salaries are wildly disproportionate to the services rendered by the CEOs. A lot of companies nowadays seem to be able to run themselves for the most part, and don't really need the wisdom of a Solomon to help them turn a profit. I may be totally misinformed, but I don't think that a single individual can exert so much influence over the running of a company that he or she is worth multiple millions of dollars, plus bonuses and stock options, yearly. The corporate spinmeisters come up with all sorts of rationalizations and justifications for what I consider to be grossly excessive salaries, especially when the companies are losing money quarter after quarter, or are only marginally profitable. I'm not even going to get into cases like Enron or Worldcom and the duplicity, chicanery, dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, etc. that is connected with them. I'm not sure what could be done, short of across-the-board shareholder revolts, to fix the problem, but it strikes me as inherently unfair, especially to the rank-and-file workers, that there is such a disparty between the salaries of CEOs and the worker bees without whom the CEO wouldn't be worth a nickel, let alone millions. There needs to be more balance in compensation.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
