Current Events & Hot Topics

Featured Posts
Over the last 30 years, CEO pay grew 127 times faster than worker pay
November 17, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I know we are talking a lot about hostess but this article states that CEO pay has increased 127 times that of labor.  127 times.

Thats wrong.

Union Claims Hostess Executives Received Raises In Advance Of Bankruptcy (CORRECTION)

Posted: Updated: 11/17/2012 10:01 am EST

CORRECTION: An earlier version of as well as an earlier headline of this post incorrectly stated that Greg Rayburn received a 300 percent raise as CEO of Hostess as the company approached bankruptcy. Rayburn wasn't CEO of Hostess until after the company filed for bankruptcy. The post also incorrectly stated that he was paid a salary of up to $2,550,000 per year. His salary when he joined the company was $100,000 per month, according to a company spokesman.

Hostess could have ensured the Twinkie's survival simply by paying the executives less, one of the unions organizing company workers alleges.

Of course, to hear the company tell it, the maker of Wonder Bread and Twinkies simply can’t survive ongoing worker strikes at its plants. The company claims its hand was forced when it only came to an agreement with one of its two unions after several months in negotiations.

The union says there’s another way the Twinkie-maker could have avoided liquidating and laying off all of its 18,500 workers: by paying the executives less money.

Hostess’ creditors accused the company in April of manipulating executive salaries with the aim of getting around bankruptcy compensation rules, the Wall Street Journal reported at the time. In response, Rayburn announced he would cut his pay and that of other executives to $1 until Dec. 31 or whenever Hostess came out of bankruptcy.

That was after Hostess had already awarded the company's top four executives raises of between 75 and 80 percent, even though the company had already hired restructuring lawyers, according to the WSJ.

The situation isn't specific to Hostess. Over the last 30 years, CEO pay grew 127 times faster than worker pay, according to a July report.


  • glitterteaz
    November 17, 2012 at 11:58 PM

    this is most big corporations issues

  • NWP
    by NWP
    November 18, 2012 at 12:28 AM

    Yep...I agree with you Survivor. Totally wrong.

  • rfurlongg
    November 18, 2012 at 8:10 AM
    Bump :-).
  • momtoscott
    November 18, 2012 at 8:51 AM

     I'm sure the usual people will chime in defending execs' "rights" to be paid hundreds of times the compensation of a janitor or delivery boy, but the difference in compensation of executives and the rank and file is obscene, IMO.

  • mmtosam06
    November 18, 2012 at 8:56 AM

    yep CEO's and Executives should have been given a paycut before it got to the point that it did.

  • meriana
    by meriana
    November 18, 2012 at 9:09 AM

    Yes, it's wrong but it isn't going to change until public perception changes. For years the general public has been told that corporations are unfairly dealt with via taxes, etc., that the "job creators" deserve to keep more of what they work hard for; the list goes on but the basic idea is that they should be held in high esteem, given pretty much whatever they ask for via legislation because their "largesse" (creating jobs) is what allows the rest of us to thrive. People have, over time, completely bought into it often against their own interests. The result is that CEO and executive compensation is reaching astronomical porportions while worker wages are staying the same or being reduced. These days when a large company needs to cut costs they do so by reducing worker hours and/or pay while the compensation for those at the top stays the same or in some cases increases and the general public is all to accepting of it. How often have we seen, just here on this board, people going on about how those at the top shouldn't have to deal with a higher tax rate, they should be able to keep more of what they worked hard for. Then those same people will villify Union workers for striking against a wage reduction as though they don't have any right to expect to keep what their hard work earns simply because they are workers, not executives. The Unions and workers are seen as the greedy bad guys even though they are not asking for more than to be able to support their families.

    Somehow over time, it has become acceptable for those at the top to increase their compensation even if it means reducing that of the workers in order to do so. At times it really does seem that rather than moving forward, society is moving backwards to a time when the corporate heads held all the power and the average worker was simply a pawn, easily replaced, in the game of wealth gathering.

  • illinoismommy83
    November 18, 2012 at 9:16 AM

    If you want better pay, stop being a laborer. I lack sympathy that factory workers who pull down on a handle for a living don't make very much.

  • JacksMom1221
    November 18, 2012 at 9:18 AM
    Kinda the same thing that's going on in our government, huh? Hope we don't end up like Hostess.
  • SuperChicken
    November 18, 2012 at 9:29 AM

    Does that even include the bonuses they "earn?"

  • survivorinohio
    November 18, 2012 at 9:30 AM

    Quoting illinoismommy83:

    If you want better pay, stop being a laborer. I lack sympathy that factory workers who pull down on a handle for a living don't make very much.

    Love these pat answers.  You are aware ? that laborers are the majority and we need them...Not everyone can be a ceo.

Current Events & Hot Topics

Active Posts in All Groups
More Active Posts
Featured Posts in All Groups
More Featured Posts