Top CEOs paid nearly $9M last year, 184 times average worker salary

[ickyflex]

I care less about the article and more about the comments. Does everyone really hate success that bad? I rarely read comments on news articles but I'm a little surprised at how negative they are. Just curious if it's always been like this or if it's just an anomaly as a result of a shitty 2015.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/ceo-pay-2015-1.3388235

"The compensation of Canada's highest-paid CEOs dipped two per cent from 2013 to 2014, but each still raked in an average of $8.96 million, according to a new study.

In a report published Monday, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives looked at salary information from 249 TSX-listed companies. The think-tank then calculated numbers based on the 100 people at the top of that list.

According to the group, the richest 100 CEOs in Canada took in $8.98 million last year, a drop of about two per cent from 2013's level. That figure includes salaries, bonuses, share grants and stock options.

But that's still well ahead of the $48,636 that the group says the typical full-year, full-time worker earned last year.

Based on last year's earnings, Canada's 100 top CEOs will earn by 12:18 p.m. today — Jan. 4 — what the average Canadian will make in a whole year.
25% gain since financial crisis

It's not yet clear if the slight drop in CEO compensation between 2013 and 2014 is a blip or the start of a new trend, says Hugh Mackenzie, a research associate at the think-tank.

"It's not clear from the data at this point, because we've only seen one year, whether this is indicative of a slight downward trend or whether this is just a blip," said Mackenzie.

"My gut instinct tells me that it's a blip," he says, adding that a change in how stock options are being valued, given the slide in commodity prices that began in 2014, may be responsible for the slight decline.

Between 2008 and 2013, the country's 100 top-paid CEOs saw their compensation climb about 25 per cent to $9.2 million — roughly twice as fast as the average wage for Canadians.

The highest-paid CEOs, according to the study, in order were:

BlackBerry's John Chen, who took home $89.7 million in total compensation.
Donald Walker of Magna International Inc., pocketing $23.4 million.
Gerald Schwartz of the private equity company Onex Corp., who was the top paid CEO the previous year, earned total compensation of $21.1 million.

Peter Blake, former CEO of Ritchie Bros Auctioneers, was the lowest-paid CEO on the list of the top 100, earning $4.3 million.

Only two women made the list — Linda Hasenfratz, of Linamar Corp., who was compensated a total of $10.1 million, and Dawn Farrell, of TransAlta Corp., who earned $4.5 million."

[vengie]

Does everyone really hate success that bad?

I wouldn't so much say they hate the successful person or the thought of success, they are more jealous of that person's success... Yet aren't willing to take the steps to create the same level of success for themselves.

The age of entitlement is strong.

[ExtremeSi]

Originally posted by ickyflex
Based on last year's earnings, Canada's 100 top CEOs will earn by 12:18 p.m. today — Jan. 4 — what the average Canadian will make in a whole year.

I think this is the stat that hurts me the most every year.

As for how high their salaries are, I say good for them.

[Xtrema]

Income inequality is the narrative that sells right now.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by vengie


I wouldn't so much say they hate the successful person or the thought of success, they are more jealous of that person's success... Yet aren't willing to take the steps to create the same level of success for themselves.

I don't really believe this :dunno:

There is no verifiable proof that a CEO being paid $9mil per year is worth more than 90 employees at $100k per year. The CEO doesn't produce anything at all for a company. That's what bothers me the most about it.

So my actual issue isn't with the CEO at all. F*&kin rights good for them they are bringing in that cash. But the argument that as CEO they are "worth" being paid that much per year? I dunno, would love to see some studies about it if anyone has read any?

[ExtremeSi]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


I don't really believe this :dunno:

There is no verifiable proof that a CEO being paid $9mil per year is worth more than 90 employees at $100k per year. The CEO doesn't produce anything at all for a company. That's what bothers me the most about it.

So my actual issue isn't with the CEO at all. F*&kin rights good for them they are bringing in that cash. But the argument that as CEO they are "worth" being paid that much per year? I dunno, would love to see some studies about it if anyone has read any?

If the CEO is running a company that's basically on auto-pilot than sure I could see your argument. But if they built it from nothing than they created jobs for those 90 employees and for that reason alone I can see them being worth a lot more. Without the CEO, there would be no jobs.

As for $9mil+, ya that's a little steep, but you also have to consider that it is very risky and difficult to start a business so they do also deserve to be rewarded for the risk. IMO of course.

[HuMz]

As long as it's not publicly owned companies who cares. Im not surprised to see CBCs audience feel they are some how entitled to that money, taxpayers have been paying for CBC to push this narrative for years.

[Feruk]

Originally posted by ickyflex
Does everyone really hate success that bad?

There's a big difference between "hating success" and seeing a problem with a 184X multiple being paid out by a publically traded company where the CEO is not the owner. Let me put it into perspective. Say a top 100 CEO was paid 10X more, so $90 million, which would be 1,840X as much as the average Canadian. Would that be the image of success, or would that look very disproportionate? Let's make it more extreme and times by 10 again to 18,400X the average Canadian citizen. Is that success? Obviously these numbers are huge, but are they really that much more unreasonable than 184X? If so, why?

I believe Switzerland tried to pass a law that said a CEO cannot make more than ~15X what the average Swiss citizen could make. This to me sounds reasonable. Getting paid 184X more does not.


I also laughed when I saw the highest paid Canadian CEO was the CEO of Blackberry...

[SKR]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


I don't really believe this :dunno:

There is no verifiable proof that a CEO being paid $9mil per year is worth more than 90 employees at $100k per year. The CEO doesn't produce anything at all for a company. That's what bothers me the most about it.

So my actual issue isn't with the CEO at all. F*&kin rights good for them they are bringing in that cash. But the argument that as CEO they are "worth" being paid that much per year? I dunno, would love to see some studies about it if anyone has read any?

You should go be a CEO somewhere.

[ickyflex]

Originally posted by Feruk


There's a big difference between "hating success" and seeing a problem with a 184X multiple being paid out by a publically traded company where the CEO is not the owner. Let me put it into perspective. Say a top 100 CEO was paid 10X more, so $90 million, which would be 1,840X as much as the average Canadian. Would that be the image of success, or would that look very disproportionate? Let's make it more extreme and times by 10 again to 18,400X the average Canadian citizen. Is that success? Obviously these numbers are huge, but are they really that much more unreasonable than 184X? If so, why?

I believe Switzerland tried to pass a law that said a CEO cannot make more than ~15X what the average Swiss citizen could make. This to me sounds reasonable. Getting paid 184X more does not.


I also laughed when I saw the highest paid Canadian CEO was the CEO of Blackberry...

Just to note the CEO of BlackBerry got $90 million package to move to BlackBerry so of course no one at CBC outlined that. It's an outlier and would be normal under that circumstance but if you took his actual annual salary it would be near nothing near those terms.

[rage2]

You can't tie a CEO's compensation to the health of a company on a short term basis. There's a finite amount of good CEO's out there that can lead a company and compensation is pretty much dictated by supply and demand. It's no different than O&G field workers, should they really be making $200k+/year doing grunt work? Are they providing $200k/year worth of value, and if so, why aren't we paying them the same amount during the downturn?

BB needed to attract a CEO to try to fix it's problems, and you can't go and hire the bottom of the barrel cheap CEO to try to fix said problems. Look at John Chen's history with Sybase, turning the company around and eventually into a sale to SAP. That alone justifies his compensation, even though BB is in the shitter right now.

Will it pay off? Who knows. Bringing in a hockey analogy, it's no different than Shea Webber getting $14m a year by the Preds, and they're still not a cup contender. But he's still worth (arguably) that contract on his performance.

[mazdavirgin]

Originally posted by vengie


I wouldn't so much say they hate the successful person or the thought of success, they are more jealous of that person's success... Yet aren't willing to take the steps to create the same level of success for themselves.

The age of entitlement is strong.

Eh... In some cases you don't have to do shit to achieve success. The Shaw family being the case in point. All the kids get to take turns playing C-level executive and raiding the company coffers for millions. One reason I won't touch that company with a ten foot pole. Private company they can do whatever the hell they want but I don't think for a second that their pay has anything to do with somehow taking steps to create a certain level of success. Unless you think simply being born into the right family is the key here. Donald Trump would probably agree on that point...

[ZenOps]

That Donald Trump was allowed to get into a position that he was negative $900 million in net worth does show a certain amount of priveledge that is not given to the average citizen.

Political elite is where its at (everywhere but puppet colonies of the crown that is) Khadafis' 144 tons of gold and billions of barrels of oil shows how easily it is to elevate one person so far above the masses.

[Darell_n]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


I don't really believe this :dunno:

There is no verifiable proof that a CEO being paid $9mil per year is worth more than 90 employees at $100k per year. The CEO doesn't produce anything at all for a company. That's what bothers me the most about it.

So my actual issue isn't with the CEO at all. F*&kin rights good for them they are bringing in that cash. But the argument that as CEO they are "worth" being paid that much per year? I dunno, would love to see some studies about it if anyone has read any?

Is playing a game professionally for $9mil a year better than being CEO for the same money? These are society's priorities.

[ickyflex]

Yeah no mention of David Price raking in $31 Mill USD/Year to play baseball. More than the top 5 CEO's in Canada combined.

Is he worth 633 average working salaries lol.

[suntan]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


I don't really believe this :dunno:

There is no verifiable proof that a CEO being paid $9mil per year is worth more than 90 employees at $100k per year. The CEO doesn't produce anything at all for a company. That's what bothers me the most about it.

So my actual issue isn't with the CEO at all. F*&kin rights good for them they are bringing in that cash. But the argument that as CEO they are "worth" being paid that much per year? I dunno, would love to see some studies about it if anyone has read any? It's about responsibility.

Fuck man, I'll let you make the decisions for my profitable, no debt company. You'll have it bankrupt in months.

[Cos]

.

[rage2]

Originally posted by suntan
It's about responsibility.

Fuck man, I'll let you make the decisions for my profitable, no debt company. You'll have it bankrupt in months.
:thumbsup:

The problem stems from the fact that people believe CEO's doesn't do anything at all. You have people complaining about the Shaw family, yet shareholders don't give a fuck how much money he made and how much money his pension is worth because the Shaw family has made shareholders a truckload of money every year. Sure the entire family has a guaranteed pension of around $150m, but that's just 3 years worth of dividends for shareholders. It's a drop in the bucket for how much money the Shaws have made their investors.

[JRSC00LUDE]

It's the same tired old "life isn't fair" wealth redistribution mentality to bitch about CEO pay. If that 9 million dollar man wasn't there, would those hundreds of people making their "pittance" have their job at all?

[suntan]

And yeah if BB wanted me as CEO to turn around that piece of shit company around yeah they'd have better pay me huge coin, because if I fuckup that's it for my career.

Obviously no VP there wanted to take the top job. Imagine having to work with those useless dipshits.

[ZenOps]

$70.5 million Cy Twombly still takes the cake for amount of effort put into dollars earned.

Although, one could argue that Donald Trump had to work really hard to get to -$900 million (In any other country, they would have pulled the plug on his funding at one)

[ickyflex]

Originally posted by ZenOps
$70.5 million Cy Twombly still takes the cake for amount of effort put into dollars earned.

Although, one could argue that Donald Trump had to work really hard to get to -$900 million (In any other country, they would have pulled the plug on his funding at one)

To be fair American business is vastly different than Canadian business. I think Canadians have far less to complain about than Americans.

But I do agree with some standpoints on that.

[suntan]

Trump's dad was already rich by the time Donny got into the biz.

[timdog]

this is very simple. someone is willing to pay $x to person y. so by definition yes, they are worth that amount.
if that person (athlete, CEO, etc) is deemed to no longer be worth that amount, in lieu of contractual obligations you better believe that the company/sports team will no longer pay $x to person y. they may no longer be worth that amount due to economy, their performance or other factors.

is a 1200 sq ft starter home in the deep 'burbs worth $420k? well last year, yes it was. now, it may not be. in rural michigan, that same house may be worth $40k.
"worth" is a term that is dynamic. a baseball player making $30mil per year is worth that, because he likely brings more than $30mil of perceived value to the company or organization.

at the top athlete and CEO levels, it is more speculative. its a bit of a gamble. a company is going to pay $X to person Y because they believe that person will provide more than $X in value. in reality, this speculation/gamble occurs at all levels however.

if you want more money, provide more value. very simple concept, much less simple to actually achieve.

[max_boost]

Go be a top CEO then?

It's similar to complaining how much money hockey players make, go be a hockey player.

:rofl:

[rx7boi]

Originally posted by max_boost
Go be a top CEO then?

It's similar to complaining how much money hockey players make, go be a hockey player.

:rofl:

:rofl: then they'll come back complaining how the odds were stacked against them because they couldn't compete with others physically.

[flipstah]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


I don't really believe this :dunno:

There is no verifiable proof that a CEO being paid $9mil per year is worth more than 90 employees at $100k per year. The CEO doesn't produce anything at all for a company. That's what bothers me the most about it.

So my actual issue isn't with the CEO at all. F*&kin rights good for them they are bringing in that cash. But the argument that as CEO they are "worth" being paid that much per year? I dunno, would love to see some studies about it if anyone has read any?

http://edit.stage.hollyscoop.com/sites/hollyscoop.com/files/HS_Laughing_03.gif

A CEO steers the ship, embodies the company's vision, and directs the minions to produce.

[blitz]

It seems like everyone who has an issue with this thinks a CEO is a symbolic figurehead, rather than someone who bears a crushing amount of responsibility.

It is interesting though how the CEO to average employee ratio has skyrocketed in the last 20 years.

As for comparisons with top athletes, it would be interesting to see what players would make if the teams stadiums/arenas weren't subsidized by the tax payers.

[suntan]

Lebron James signed a lifetime endorsement deal with Nike for $500million.

[flipstah]

Kobe Bryant is retiring and the Lakers are definitely in rebuild stage next season. Go, Golden State!

[Disoblige]

Originally posted by flipstah
Kobe Bryant is retiring and the Lakers are definitely in rebuild stage next season. Go, Golden State!
NBA Wager? Reply in Ask Leo Thread it if you're up for it lol.

[max_boost]

Originally posted by Disoblige

NBA Wager? Reply in Ask Leo Thread it if you're up for it lol. What's the wager? Kobe said he's retiring and ain't no one beating Golden State haha

[msommers]

http://fortune.com/2015/06/22/ceo-vs-worker-pay/

[flipstah]

Originally posted by Disoblige

NBA Wager? Reply in Ask Leo Thread it if you're up for it lol.

I'd love to but I ain't balling. Can't gamble anymore :(

Those days left left with$100 oil :(