Tuesday, 15 May 2012
How to shame those overpaid executives
There is one thing that make me concerned all this "shareholders' revolt" is a storm in a tea cup.
The shareholders are not that activists after all. Think of the salaries of the fund managers and their interest that the pay culture at the top change. I would say their salaries are humongous and their interest is... let me calculate it... zero.
Take HSBC. Major shareholder is Standard Life Investments, managing £150 billions of other people's money. The boss of Standard Life Investment is Keith Skeoch who collected £2m in 2011. Don't know much about SLI performance, but the parent Standard Life increased its profits by cutting 600 jobs and cutting the pension scheme. Not breakthrough management in my book, take any 12 year old - he can cut jobs to deliver bottom line numbers.
How likely are these folks to change the big corporation culture of £millions being handed to "leaders" merely for showing up in the office?
Why aren't any employee reps in the remuneration committees?
Why shouldn't the CEO publish his/her total income and effective tax rate paid on it, so that the employees not only see they make the 317th part of their beloved chief strategist, but they pay more taxes to Mr Osbourne coffers (percentage wise).