Should CEO's salaries be capped?

Should CEO's salaries be capped?

  • Yes, they should be capped

    Votes: 100 38.9%

  • No, they should not be capped

    Votes: 139 54.1%

  • Other

    Votes: 18 7.0%
  • Total voters
    257
I don't have an issue with CEOs earning high wages and benefits but I have an issue with CEOs who deny their staff inflation related increases while the company is making record profits and the shareholders are living it up.

Yes, it's a free market but when all local companies have that attitude it limits a lot of options for blue and white collar workers as not everyone has the aptitude or resources to start their own mining company, private bank, manufacturing facility, etc. Also not everyone wants to be a CEO. Some people prefer hands on engineering, finances, IT, etc. so the whole idea of "if you don't like it, start your own company" isn't always an answer.

I would say, don't cap a CEO's salary but limit the maximum to minimum salary to a ratio of say 100:1. That way a CEO can still be paid R100 million per annum but it means that the tea lady can't earn less than R1 million per annum. In other words it pulls everyone up with the success of the business instead of leaving people behind. If the CEO isn't doing a good job and the business is suffering then it will be impossible for the shareholders/board to pay the CEO insane amounts of money while screwing the employees over.
 
Paul_S said:
Yes, it's a free market but when all local companies have that attitude it limits a lot of options for blue and white collar workers as not everyone has the aptitude or resources to start their own mining company, private bank, manufacturing facility, etc. Also not everyone wants to be a CEO. Some people prefer hands on engineering, finances, IT, etc. so the whole idea of "if you don't like it, start your own company" isn't always an answer.
Click to expand...
A CEO doesn’t have to be the founder of a business. If they want to be a CEO, why not just become the CEO of their current company? If they don’t like what they’re paid, for what they do, they really do have to do something else, then - market forces aren’t always convenient.

Paul_S said:
I would say, don't cap a CEO's salary but limit the maximum to minimum salary to a ratio of say 100:1. That way a CEO can still be paid R100 million per annum but it means that the tea lady can't earn less than R1 million per annum. In other words it pulls everyone up with the success of the business instead of leaving people behind. If the CEO isn't doing a good job and the business is suffering then it will be impossible for the shareholders/board to pay the CEO insane amounts of money while screwing the employees over.
Click to expand...
A business that pays the tea ladies R1m+ is going to have trouble competing. Lowering this and the CEO comp accordingly will limit the company’s ability to hire the best CEO that makes sense for them.
 
Christ. I get called a libtard and a commie quite often here.

And yet we have conservative leaning people arguing that the owners of companies shouldn't decide on exec remuneration and that it should be government dictated?

The shareholders carry the risk and they deal with the consequences.
 
Quicks said:
Please elaborate on that point?
Click to expand...
Who else has the required experience and understanding of the workings of the business? There are perhaps a handful of SVPs at Google that could conceivably replace him, however, this would be suboptimal, since they don’t have 9 years experience or being a CEO, they are already paid 10’s of millions of dollars too, and it would create a new void that needed to be filled below them. The cost of replacing him would be much higher than his annual income.
 
MoHaG said:
That would ensure that the best people will never work for SOEs...
Click to expand...
I'm perfectly fine with that. SEOs should not exist at all in my opinion. Look at the Post Office and SAA. The private competitors are years ahead. SEO = feeding ground for corruption.

Let's take the Eskom CEO as a good example. You can pay the CEO R 100 million a month, and he'd still have to toe the government line, so there's no point in attracting the best of the best as long as the government controls the SEO.
 
A monarchy is a form of government where a single person, typically a king or queen, holds supreme power and authority over a nation or state. The monarch's power is usually hereditary, passed down through a royal bloodline, and the monarch may reign for life or until they voluntarily abdicate or are removed from power.

Monarchies can vary in their degree of political influence and can exist in constitutional or absolute forms. In a constitutional monarchy, the monarch's role is largely ceremonial, and governmental power is held by an elected body or a parliament, while in an absolute monarchy, the monarch holds complete control over the government and its affairs.

While there are certainly differences between a modern business and a monarchy, there are also some similarities in terms of how power and authority are distributed. Like a monarch, a business may have a single person or a small group of people who hold ultimate decision-making power and are responsible for the success or failure of the organization.

This may be a CEO or a board of directors, for example. Additionally, like a monarch, those in positions of power within a business often have significant influence over the lives and livelihoods of those who work for the organization, much like how a monarch's decisions can impact the lives of their subjects. However, there are also significant differences, such as businesses operating within a legal and regulatory framework, and the power structures within a business are generally more fluid and subject to change than those within a monarchy.

Businesses can support government donations in several ways, depending on the specific circumstances and needs of the government in question. Some possible strategies include:

Direct donations: Companies may choose to make direct donations to government agencies or programs, either in the form of cash or in-kind contributions such as goods or services.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives: Many companies have established CSR programs that aim to support social or environmental causes, which can include working with governments to address specific issues or challenges.

Public-private partnerships (PPPs): Governments may work with private companies to develop PPPs, which are collaborative initiatives that leverage the resources and expertise of both sectors to achieve shared goals. PPPs can take many forms, such as joint ventures, outsourcing agreements, or service contracts.

Advocacy and lobbying: Businesses can use their influence and resources to advocate for policies or programs that align with their interests or values, and to lobby government officials to support specific initiatives or causes.

Tax incentives and credits: Governments may offer tax incentives or credits to businesses that support certain charitable or social causes, which can provide a financial incentive for companies to engage in philanthropic activities.

Overall, businesses can play an important role in supporting government donations and other philanthropic initiatives, and companies can use a range of strategies to contribute to the public good.

Thus one can conclude that democracy is an ideal and exist in principle only.
 
Today's CEOs, yes, definitely cap them all at R12,500 a month. They are all useless. Older CEOs from the 1980s and earlier, hell no.
 
vigras rojara said:
Christ. I get called a libtard and a commie quite often here.

And yet we have conservative leaning people arguing that the owners of companies shouldn't decide on exec remuneration and that it should be government dictated?

The shareholders carry the risk and they deal with the consequences.
Click to expand...

Here in SA, the Tax payers take ALL the risk. I am sure you would like your overlords to take more money from their pockets...

My little left winger!
 
Quicks said:
Here in SA, the Tax payers take ALL the risk. I am sure you would like your overlords to take more money from their pockets...

My little left winger!
Click to expand...
How are tax payers taking “ALL” the risk for say Vodacom’s performance?
 
Yes. Executive salaries should be somehow linked to average salaries across the organization. For example, if the average employee earns R20k, the CEO can earn up to R200k.

I used to be very against this, but looking at the latest executive salaries in South Africa is sickening. No single employee adds that much value.
 
Emjay said:
Yes. Executive salaries should be somehow linked to average salaries across the organization. For example, if the average employee earns R20k, the CEO can earn up to R200k.

I used to be very against this, but looking at the latest executive salaries in South Africa is sickening. No single employee adds that much value.
Click to expand...
I believe that it’s very possible to add that much value. At my last company the CEO made approx 100x of what I did. I wasn’t a fan of the guy personally - arrogant guy who would work in the $2m car he wanted to buy to a presentation given to bunch of engineers painfully paying their $1m mortgages over 30 years.

He was a technical visionary though and took some really out there bets, most of which paid off in several orders of magnitude his compensation.

I really think that comp is about potential impact and rarity of the candidates. It is shocking when a bad CEO gets these kind of comp numbers, but the good one’s are a slam dunk. Same goes for other executive or even technical positions that require unique perspectives and experiences of the company/industry (top engineering managers, specialists, etc.).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X