Mokoetle gets R3.4m parting gift

[DreamKing]

Mokoetle gets R3.4m parting gift

Johannesburg - Embattled former SABC CEO Solly Mokoetle received a settlement of R3.4m following his resignation on Wednesday, the SABC said.

"Mr Mokoetle was paid an equivalent of his 12 months' salary which amounts to R3.4m inclusive of leave and other entitlements as a full and final settlement," SABC spokesman Kaizer Kganyago said.

"Whilst wanting to respect the confidentiality of the settlement, it is in the interests of transparency and to put an end to negative and incorrect media reports that the Board has decided to make this disclosure," Kganyago said.

Following Mokoetle's resignation, media reports had suggested that the settlement amount was believed to have been around R30m.

The disclosure of the settlement was prompted by Communications Minister Roy Padayachie, who met with the SABC board on Friday to discuss developments at the public broadcaster, his spokesperson Tiyani Rikhotso said.

"Padayachie commended the board for their approach to the corporation's protracted dispute with the former GCEO, and he was briefed about details of the settlement reached by the two parties thereof," Rikhotso said.

He said the minister recommended to the board to move swiftly in advertising and filling key vacant positions, including that of Mokoetle's.

The minister also commented on the general state of the broadcaster saying that he was confident the board and management were making progress and that things were looking positive.

"[This was] following my meeting with the board of directors of the SABC...and having received a detailed report on matters pertaining to the corporation's reporting obligations to Parliament, the execution of the turn-around strategy and preparations for the upcoming local government elections," Padayachie said.

Mokoetle was the SABC's chief operations officer between 2001 and December 2006, and appointed by former communications minister Siphiwe Nyanda.

His appointment was opposed by the SABC board as he reportedly left the state broadcaster in a huff as COO, following a damning audit report compiled by Gobodo Forensic and Investigative Accounting in 2005.

The report found he had badly failed in his corporate governance duties.

A showdown between Mokoetle and the board came after the former nominated Phil Molefe as head of news.

The board eventually suspended him for Molefe's appointment, and also alleged Mokoetle had failed to come up with a turnaround plan for the broadcaster.

The public broadcaster's chief financial officer was appointed acting group CEO.

Mokoetle's disciplinary hearing was suspended recently. He said it was no longer possible for him and the board to work together following a breakdown in their relationship.

http://www.fin24.com/Companies/ICT/Moeketle-gets-R34m-parting-gift-20110121

pay your tv licence, it is a right thing to do........

 

[MickeyD]

But that's not all... rumour has it that he has been earmarked for a top post at the Department of Communications.

 

[LazyLion]

the wheels on the Gravy Train go round and round, round and round!

 

[killadoob]

What does the CEO of a major network normally get paid?

I am fairly certain they earn a pretty penny world wide. I hear what you guys are saying but i recall the same moan when the mtn ceo and SAA ceo got millions.

 

[LazyLion]

What does the CEO of a major network normally get paid?

I am fairly certain they earn a pretty penny world wide. I hear what you guys are saying but i recall the same moan when the mtn ceo and SAA ceo got millions.

For somebody who quits? I don't think you should get anything for quitting.

 

[marine1]

TIA, I refuse to pay my TV license - screw them.

 

[killadoob]

For somebody who quits? I don't think you should get anything for quitting.

Ok so when you are president of the world you can implement this rule but does it apply to the current way the major network companies are run? He may have quit but it seems to me it was part of a deal.

How much does the CEO of a major US network get paid i wonder?

Gary and marine how do you feel about the AIG CEO getting a 47m dolla hand shake? Is there also a gravy train in america?

 

[marine1]

Gary and marine how do you feel about the AIG CEO getting a 47m dolla hand shake? Is there also a gravy train in america?

Whoever approved it should be jailed. Difference is things generally work in the USA, how do I know this? I have lived there.
GVT departments are not all corrupt and useless like here.
Remember the SABC is not a private company though

 

[TJ99]

So the lying liar who everyone knew was lying, lied. BOOM. Twist.

 

[killadoob]

Whoever approved it should be jailed. Difference is things generally work in the USA, how do I know this? I have lived there.
GVT departments are not all corrupt and useless like here.
Remember the SABC is not a private company though

Things work because the US has spent trillions on bail outs, perhaps when you lived there you never read the news or maybe you were sheltered from the trillions spent on bail outs.

Feb. 24 (Bloomberg) -- The following table details how the U.S. government has pledged more than $11.6 trillion on behalf of American taxpayers over the past 19 months, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Yes anything can work if you keep chucking money at it. F me i thought we had it bad in this country. 11.6 trillion dollars!!!!!!! Things work?

Although in typical fashion a US supporter is clueless about bail outs or anything involving the the US government. Now that is a gravy train i wanna ride.

 

[LazyLion]

Ok so when you are president of the world you can implement this rule but does it apply to the current way the major network companies are run? He may have quit but it seems to me it was part of a deal.

How much does the CEO of a major US network get paid i wonder?

Gary and marine how do you feel about the AIG CEO getting a 47m dolla hand shake? Is there also a gravy train in america?

I think awarding CEO's this much is a crime anywhere... here or in the USA.
I like the CEO's who ask to be rewarded in stock... that way... the performance of the company depends on them and their succesors.
Doesn't Steve Jobs do that? He only gets paid $1 a year... the rest is stock.

 

[LazyLion]

Things work because the US has spent trillions on bail outs, perhaps when you lived there you never read the news or maybe you were sheltered from the trillions spent on bail outs.

Feb. 24 (Bloomberg) -- The following table details how the U.S. government has pledged more than $11.6 trillion on behalf of American taxpayers over the past 19 months, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Yes anything can work if you keep chucking money at it. F me i thought we had it bad in this country. 11.6 trillion dollars!!!!!!! Things work?

Although in typical fashion a US supporter is clueless about bail outs or anything involving the the US government. Now that is a gravy train i wanna ride.

Bank of America got a bail out... they paid it back to the Government (with interest) two years later.

 

[TJ99]

I think awarding CEO's this much is a crime anywhere... here or in the USA.
I like the CEO's who ask to be rewarded in stock... that way... the performance of the company depends on them and their succesors.
Doesn't Steve Jobs do that? He only gets paid $1 a year... the rest is stock.

Good point, although I cringe at the thought of anyone using Steve Jobs as an example of anything good. On the other hand, if the CEO's had stock in the company, they could still screw up and leave, and then profit off the next guy who might actually know what he's doing there.

 

[LazyLion]

Good point, although I cringe at the thought of anyone using Steve Jobs as an example of anything good. On the other hand, if the CEO's had stock in the company, they could still screw up and leave, and then profit off the next guy who might actually know what he's doing there.

Ja, but if he screws up, they don't have to give him anything. In the USA at least!

And I think they have also passed some legislation now to minimise the amount that they can pay these guys???

 

[LazyLion]

U.S. Targets Excessive Pay for Top Executives

Yep, here it is... they are actually trying to limit the excessive bonuses some CEO's get. See here...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/10/AR2009061001416.html

The Obama administration named a "compensation czar" yesterday to set salaries and bonuses at some of the biggest firms at the heart of the economic crisis, as part of a broader government campaign to reshape pay practices across corporate America.

Senior officials said they will install Washington attorney Kenneth R. Feinberg with the power to determine compensation, including retirement packages, of senior executives at seven firms that have received massive federal bailouts, such as Citigroup chief executive Vikram S. Pandit, Bank of America's Kenneth D. Lewis and Fritz Henderson of General Motors.

The initiative reflects public uproar over executive compensation, which has been stoked by the financial crisis. Lawmakers who approved the government's $700 billion bailout for the financial system last fall worried that taxpayers would end up financing the lavish lifestyles of top Wall Street executives. Then, controversy erupted in March when the Obama administration revealed that insurance giant American International Group, a recipient of a $180 billion rescue package, had decided to pay $165 million in bonuses to its most troubled financial unit.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said yesterday that the administration is not interested in "capping pay" or "setting forth precise prescriptions for how companies should set compensation." Instead, he said, the government wants to rein in pay practices that motivated executives to take excessive risks in pursuit of profit.
ad_icon

But with the spotlight now on executive pay practices, senior administration officials are moving to address concerns at firms well beyond those implicated in the crisis. Yesterday, officials proposed two pieces of legislation that separately empower shareholders and the Securities and Exchange Commission to exercise more oversight over executive compensation at all publicly traded firms.

The first measure would give shareholders more say on what companies pay executives. Traditionally, stockholders have had limited influence and the authority only to elect a small number of members who sit on a company's board of directors.

The second measure would expand the SEC's power to ensure that the corporate committees responsible for deciding compensation act independently of the top executives whose pay they set. Most large corporations have such committees, and their record in rewarding risky management has at times been troubling. Conflicts of interest between committee members and executives are common.

These efforts reflect the administration's conclusion that companies cannot police themselves on matters of pay.

"This financial crisis had many significant causes, but executive compensation practices were a contributing factor," Geithner said yesterday.

And more initiatives to address these practices are coming. The Federal Reserve is examining how regulators can oversee pay at all banks. Geithner and senior White House officials, meanwhile, plan to make executive pay a focus of their efforts to overhaul financial regulation, which officials say will be detailed next week.

The administration is giving Feinberg authority to influence pay at scores of companies. Feinberg, who previously managed the government's efforts to compensate the families of those killed in the Sept. 11 attacks, will control compensation at seven firms that have received large federal bailouts, including Citigroup, Bank of America, American International Group, General Motors, Chrysler as well as Chrysler Financial and GMAC, which provide loans to auto customers. He will be able to determine salaries, bonuses and retirement packages for all executive officers and the 100 most highly paid employees at each company.

He will also have the authority to set overall compensation, but not precise salary levels, for firms that have received smaller bailouts. The goal, officials said, is to curb the practice of tying pay to performance in a way that induces traders and executives to take big risks. Feinberg can also decide whether executives who have received what he considers excessive compensation should return some of that money.

For months companies have awaited clarification of the compensation restrictions imposed on recipients of bailout money. In February, the administration said it planned to limit salaries to $500,000 at banks that have taken "exceptional assistance." In addition, any bonuses would have to be paid in stock and could not be cashed in until after the government was repaid.

Later that month, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) wrote legislation that trumped those efforts and capped bonuses at one-third of executives' salaries. The new law applied only to firms that took bailout funds after Feb. 11.

Dodd's maneuver upset some Obama officials because his amendment and the administration's earlier guidance together curbed pay more than the White House intended. The officials began to worry that firms would drop out of government rescue programs or lose talented employees.

As a result, the administration announced yesterday that most firms receiving federal bailouts will face a limit on bonuses but not on salaries. For companies that accepted less than $500 million, the restriction would apply only to top executives. For those receiving more, the limit would also apply to 20 other top earners at each firm.

The response yesterday from industry and business experts varied widely. Some faulted the government for meddling in the private sector while others said the proposed changes were needed but may not prompt real reform. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who leads the House Financial Services Committee, said the measures did not go far enough and plans to introduce legislation directing the SEC to outline guidelines for how compensation committees should determine pay.

Under the Obama plan, members of these committees would not be able to accept fees from their respective firms other than what they make for serving on the panels. Attorneys or consultants that help members in their work must be hired by and report to the committee rather than a chief executive.

Administration officials said they also hoped their efforts would pressure firms to rein in lavish pay by giving shareholders the right to vote on an executive's overall compensation package. This proposal, know as say-on-pay, would be nonbinding.

Some analysts warned that the vote wouldn't be taken seriously by companies because it is only advisory. About two dozen firms allow say-on-pay, and in no case has a proposed pay package been rejected by shareholders. "Will companies treat this as a compliance exercise they're being forced to do or will they embrace the process? It's an open question," said Patrick McGurn, a compensation expert at RiskMetrics, which advises big investors. "We hope it goes into the direction of an annual constructive dialogue on pay issues."

The proposal could give could give large investors such as mutual funds, pension funds and labor union retirement funds greater influence in expressing opinions on compensation. Administration officials said they hope companies will consult investors in designing pay packages.

President Obama proposed legislation to advance say-on-pay when he was in the Senate in 2007, but the bill stalled after facing stiff opposition from the Bush administration and big corporations.

The Obama administration cited Britain's say-on-pay legislation, enacted in 2002, as a model yesterday. A Harvard Business School study of the initiative found this year that it failed to curb pay among top executives at companies but succeeded at pressuring companies to scale back severance packages for executives whose companies fared poorly, according to Fabrizio Ferri, the professor who conducted the study.

 

[TJ99]

Ja, but if he screws up, they don't have to give him anything. In the USA at least!

And I think they have also passed some legislation now to minimise the amount that they can pay these guys???

Well I don't know about that, but what I do know is that although Apple might be more successful at mind control than the CIA ever was, it's still a private company. The SABC, not so much. That sort of system would never work for anything our government has it's finger in. There's no way the ANC would let one of their comrades leave empty-handed, no matter how bad he ****ed up. It's part of the cultcha. They all have dirty secrets on each other, and threaten to expose them if they're not given what they feel entitled to.

 

[killadoob]

Bolt
Horse
or
horse
bolt hmmmm

For some reason i hear those words in my mind when i read that story gary. I guess someone in the think tank realized when a company gets bailed out they should not have millions to pay the ceo's. I would have accepted that in africa but it is expected in america .

 

[TJ99]

Interesting read, but still, the government is the major shareholder in eg. the SABC, so even if a law like that were implemented, they'd just vote to give him the huge gtfo-bonus anyways.

 

[Vrotappel]

Nice for a useless AA crony.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Wait a minute....

You quit and you get paid out a settlement?!?!?! wtf, I'm clearly in the wrong place...

I still have such an issue with these kinds of things, because this moron didn't do anything to actually DESERVE that money.