How come executives never 'return value to the shareholder' by taking less compensation themselves?
4 replies (most recent on top)
if CEO is not getting what he supposed to get , instead he will also hang one signboard and go in circles for $300 a week and enjoy OT + nice medical and pension benefits with no stress at all
Most of their compensation is in the form of stock options.
Give me a break. Executive compensation for folks like Lowell IS approved by the shareholders through the Board of Directors. The company's shareholders -- i.e., the people who OWN the company -- seem to think Lowell is doing a good job. That is why they re-appointed him. The executive holding of stock in Verizon is a matter of public record and is a tiny fraction of what some large shareholders, such as the unions, hold.
Executive compensation has NOTHING to do with this strike. It is a drum the unions like to bang on because it sounds good in a headline or a sound bite.
For those who don't follow the math, let me make it simple for you:
If the average union employee made $100,000 in total compensation (that number is intentionally low) and there are approximately 38,000 union employees, the total compensation per year is $3.8 Billion. Lowell's compensation is 0.47% of that amount. Do you still think that is the big sticking point here?
By all means, make your case for why the union is right and the company is wrong. But, please stop making these stupid and misleading arguments. You folks are, or at least should be, better than that.
The executives ARE the shareholders. Just checkout their compensation packages. Collectively they have millions of shares of Verizon stock.
So when they say they are protecting shareholder value, what they are really saying, "I'm protecting my stock values". Ka-peesh?