Truist Financial Corp. boosted CEO Bill Rogers' total compensation by about 27.3% last year, according to a recent filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Source Salary.com
8 replies (most recent on top)
I think the most challenging thing about this news for me is that most of the bank was told, this same year, that there would be no COLA due to the company not doing super well. Although whether or not the CEO takes a big raise isn't a 1:1 relationship with how the company is doing, not taking it (and publicly) would have been a great way to demonstrate the concept of "lead from the front". Just shows the short term decision making going on when you have leadership that's never run a bank of this scale and mostly have their eyes on retirement.
I'll take door number two
What puzzles me is the fact that it was approved in the midst of cratering stock price, EPS, customer satisfaction, and very publicized issues with accounts and cards.
The Board must be either easily fooled or outright corrupt. I don’t even know which razor applies anymore.
It's been posted elsewhere on this board, but the CWA is organizing bank workers.
https://betterbanks.org/
CEOs who get massive salary increases while workers get 2.5 - 3% annual increases is EXACTLY why the UAW is on strike now.
Heads I win tails you lose.
It is rare to find a public company CEO with real talent or vision unless they founded the company under their leadership. CEOs are extraordinary politicians however. Ineffective unless giving BS psyche up speeches. People see though these phony leaders quite easily. The title CEO, especially when coupled with chairmanship (obvious accountability dodge), should be viewed with contempt until the person demonstrates sound character and supreme accountability, the military provides a good framework for how to choose and cultivate leaders.
Collective bargaining is one way to hold these low life worms and phonies to account.
While getting the job is hard. Being CEO is easy. Accountability and consequences are separate matters.
This is a broad based fault in governance for public companies. It is difficult to truly align executives with shareholders in a public company environment. As an exec, I can earn fat salaries, bonuses, gain influence from corporate largesse (leadership schools, donations), and realize direct and indirect benefits (performance awards, corp jet, fancy dinners, office buildings, general internal and external bootlicking ) way above the loss on stock and options that I own as an exec. Worst case scenario. I get replaced and receive a generous severance package and because i was CEO go work with PE or as an advisor or board member earning multi six figure honorariums or join the speaking circuit as a revolutionary leader.
Blackrock, fidelity L&G are just trying to match the index thereby reinforcing all the issues ive spoken about. Activist investors which we need more of vs the passives/index folks are very rare indeed.
It might sound very cynical but please tell me I'm wrong (i want to be) and public companies (like the company we wont name for fear saying a dirty word) leadership shows us adam Smith in action. The economics are quite simple and its nice job that permits failing up if you can get it.
It's really not his fault. Blame society.
All good. We changed all the metrics now so you can’t reach them to achieve your bonus. Bill needed the money it’s hard being CEO of company you are tearing down.