said by FFH5:said by morbo:Where is the logic in doubling this guy's salary? I know it's the titanic he's driving, but still. That is pretty dumb even for Charter.
As a stockholder in many companies I don't want to see overpaid execs even more so than many people here that hate corporations.
BUT, please remember that Charter probably didn't have any choice in what they paid the CEO in 2008. When he was hired the company signed a CONTRACT with his compensation no doubt laid out in pages of excruciating detail and checked over by a group of lawyers hired by Smit. They had a choice when negotiating the contract, but after that their hands are tied.
So, don't look for logic when trying to understand why an under-performing company doubled a CEO's salary after a bad year. That ship no doubt sailed before 2008 results were known.
What is needed are Boards of Directors that negotiate CONTRACTS that are tied much more tightly to meeting profit goals and not just the desire to get a so-called superstar CEO. And there should be terms that allow firing without any golden parachutes if the goals aren't met.
Will that mean, the Board won't always get the person they want? YES!! But if more Boards followed this practice, then prices will come down on CEO salaries and more accountability will be in the contracts.
so you dont know the little secret huh?
how must board members used to be CEO's....and how they work together to make sure they help each other out...regardless of how retarded the contract is.
every contract i sign with my clients and employees have performance clauses, "for cause" clauses, and other tools that let me really stick it to people who fuck up and fuck up badly....but for some reason these CEO contracts are iron clad always in favor of the CEO.
its even worse then baseball.
the corporate structure at most companies now is just one big joke of making as much money as you possibly can and getting out with a can full of gold
