|
|
Post by CMF Newsman on Mar 29, 2007 8:55:21 GMT -5
WASHINGTON - A House panel on Wednesday approved legislation written by majority Democrats to give shareholders at public companies a formal say in executives' compensation packages. The House Financial Services Committee, on a 37-29 vote mostly along party lines, sent the bill to the full House. No comparable measure has yet been put forward in the Senate. The proposal by committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank (news, bio, voting record), D-Mass., would give shareholders a chance to cast a nonbinding confidence or no-confidence vote on executive pay plans, allowing them either to ratify or disapprove of them. Such shareholder votes are the practice in Britain, Australia and Sweden. Advocates say pay packages are rarely voted down, but the knowledge that they must be voted on has helped keep executive compensation in check overseas. complete story |
|
Jay
Senior Forumite
Captain Cupcake
Posts: 5,070
|
Post by Jay on Mar 29, 2007 22:45:38 GMT -5
Yah, it's always nice how CEO's lead a company downward, do massive firings and still get fat bonus checks...... Makes a lot of sense to me...
Maybe this'll help.....
~J
|
|
|
|
Post by traveler on Mar 30, 2007 9:55:46 GMT -5
This is absolutely absurd. What are the dems going to do when corporations begin shutting down US operations entirely and relocate to a friendlier business environment? What will be their answer then?
They complain about offshoring jobs but then pass legislation that will not only drive jobs offshore, but entire corporate entities!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by el Gusano on Mar 30, 2007 21:37:45 GMT -5
Follow Detroit's lead: Raise the taxes on them.
That will help.
Then, just pass a law making it illegal to close down or to fire anyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by traveler on Mar 31, 2007 9:02:10 GMT -5
Gus, the sad thing is that is exactly what many of the dems in Congress will probably try to do. They just don't get it.
|
|
|
|
Post by damnyankee on Mar 31, 2007 11:04:38 GMT -5
This is absolutely absurd. What are the dems going to do when corporations begin shutting down US operations entirely and relocate to a friendlier business environment? They already have...  |
|
|
|
Post by el Gusano on Mar 31, 2007 12:17:14 GMT -5
To quote Traveler:
"They just don't get it."
Companies move to a friendlier place, so the solution the dems put forward is to make it that much more unfriendly.
That'll show 'em!
|
|
Thorne
Global Moderator
God of Thunder
Posts: 533
|
Post by Thorne on Mar 31, 2007 12:50:28 GMT -5
Actually, I think that this is a good move and one that I'm rather surprised that the business market hasn't made before now (and one that would end up happening in the end anyway). Enron is a good example of why this makes sense.
Or look at it another way: Why is it that the CEO's of Pepsi Co. and McDonald's, for example, make a couple of million a year after salaries and bonuses are figured in, yet they pay minimum wage to their employees, their prices increase every year and the food portions get smaller every year. The executives say that rising costs force the higher prices and smaller portions, but those same rising costs don't affect their salaries, do they?? And please explain to me how it is that the senior executives have earned those high salaries?? They have so many different lower-level flunkies to make the decisions for them and to put new measures in place that I'd bet that most of them wouldn't know who originally came up with the idea. And these are two companies who can't out-source to overseas markets.
This move was something that the business community would do in the end, anyway. It only bothers me that Congress is doing this, as that means that it will be controlled by Congressional oversight, which means more government nosiness into private business.
|
|
Jay
Senior Forumite
Captain Cupcake
Posts: 5,070
|
Post by Jay on Mar 31, 2007 13:19:17 GMT -5
Yeah......that's not usually a good thing.... Dang big government..... Hmmm, if only there was a way for companies to be more ethical without government interference...
|
|
|
|
Post by Justin Thyme on Apr 1, 2007 6:18:28 GMT -5
So let me get this straight. If I start a business and decide to sell off a big portion of the company in little tiny pieces I can't make one of the conditions for buying any of the tiny pieces that compensations to the CEO will be made at my discretion? That sounds a little overbearing to me. Why not just let the buyers of those tiny pieces decide if they want to buy under those conditions?
|
|
|
|
Post by legaltender on Apr 1, 2007 10:46:48 GMT -5
I'd give shareholders direct access to nominating directors.
And the current bill is a NON-BINDING vote of confidence in CEO pay packages.
|
|
