Job losses and real-estate

[Matt J]

Ford's top 5 execs raked in over $60 million in 2007:

"In addition to information about the Annual Meeting, the 2008 proxy provides a detailed review of total 2007 compensation provided, granted to or received by five named executive officers during the year -- based on the company's 2007 performance. Details include:

-- Alan Mulally, Ford president and chief executive officer, earned
$2,000,000 in salary and received incentive bonus awards of $7 million.
Total 2007 compensation was $21,670,674, which includes salary,
bonuses, the Company-recognized expense for stock options and other
stock-based awards, as well as all other compensation.

-- Don Leclair, Ford executive vice president and chief financial officer,
earned $1,005,633 in salary and received incentive bonus awards of $3
million. His 2007 compensation totaled $11,703,127.

-- Mark Fields, Ford executive vice president and president, The Americas,
earned $1,255,634 in salary and received incentive bonus awards of
$2,850,000. His 2007 compensation totaled $8,389,898.

-- Lewis Booth, Ford executive vice president, Ford of Europe and Premier
Automotive Group, earned $868,133 in salary and received incentive
bonus awards of $2,250,000. His 2007 compensation totaled $10,264,463.

-- Mike Bannister, Ford executive vice president and CEO, Ford Motor
Credit Company earned $708,700 in salary and received incentive bonus
awards of $2,150,000. His 2007 compensation totaled $8,677,747."

Kinda makes those assemblers "inflated" salaries seem like peanuts.

 

[SHELLY]

What if they stopped cranking out gas hogs?

What if the government hadn't subsidized "gas hogs" after 9-11. Every small business "Dr Tom, Plumber Joe and Realtor Harry" was cruising down the street in "Chevy Subdivisions" on Uncle Sam's dime.

.

 

[Miss Critter]

Ford's top 5 execs raked in over $60 million in 2007. They've earned their bonuses because Ford only had a net loss of $2.7 Billion--which would have been less if they weren't given bonuses:

"In addition to information about the Annual Meeting, the 2008 proxy provides a detailed review of total 2007 compensation provided, granted to or received by five named executive officers during the year -- based on the company's 2007 performance. Details include:

-- Alan Mulally, Ford president and chief executive officer, earned
$2,000,000 in salary and received incentive bonus awards of $7 million.
Total 2007 compensation was $21,670,674, which includes salary,
bonuses, the Company-recognized expense for stock options and other
stock-based awards, as well as all other compensation.

-- Don Leclair, Ford executive vice president and chief financial officer,
earned $1,005,633 in salary and received incentive bonus awards of $3
million. His 2007 compensation totaled $11,703,127.

-- Mark Fields, Ford executive vice president and president, The Americas,
earned $1,255,634 in salary and received incentive bonus awards of
$2,850,000. His 2007 compensation totaled $8,389,898.

-- Lewis Booth, Ford executive vice president, Ford of Europe and Premier
Automotive Group, earned $868,133 in salary and received incentive
bonus awards of $2,250,000. His 2007 compensation totaled $10,264,463.

-- Mike Bannister, Ford executive vice president and CEO, Ford Motor
Credit Company earned $708,700 in salary and received incentive bonus
awards of $2,150,000. His 2007 compensation totaled $8,677,747."

Not to impugn your veracity, here, shelly, but your numbers cannot be true. I've been assured by 6htGen on another thread that fat cats are a fiction contained only in union literature, and that all executive bonuses are for well-proven "talent." ;-)

 

[SHELLY]

Not to impugn your veracity, here, shelly, but your numbers cannot be true.

If you have any problem with the "numbers," you'll have to take it up with Ford--they are from Ford's 2007 Annual Report and notice of its 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders:

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=28003

.

 

[30ashopper]

Kinda makes those assemblers "inflated" salaries seem like peanuts.

Multiply a typical CEO salary by 20, then multiply a typical line worker salary by 100,000.. that should clear up any confusion. I think I read somewhere that a typical unionized line working makes somewhere around 60K a year including benefits. Maybe everybody needs to take a pay cut? I think both groups have been selfish.. resulting in the downfall of one of America's greatest industries. e.g. everyone involved is to blame. (and we get to bail them out for their excess.. yeah!!)

 

[SHELLY]

Multiply a typical CEO salary by 20, then multiply a typical line worker salary by 100,000.. that should clear up any confusion. I think I read somewhere that a typical unionized line working makes somewhere around 60K a year including benefits. Maybe everybody needs to take a pay cut? I think both groups have been selfish.. resulting in the downfall of one of America's greatest industries. e.g. everyone involved is to blame. (and we get to bail them out for their excess.. yeah!!)

..and how much were store-front mortgage processors making per hour writing up subprime mortgages and refi's during the RE money grab?

At least autoworkers are in a "value-added" business turning a bunch of parts into a car, whereas subprimates turned a bunch of lies written on paper into...well :scratch:...nothing.

.

 

[Miss Critter]

If you have any problem with the "numbers," you'll have to take it up with Ford--they are from Ford's 2007 Annual Report and notice of its 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders:

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=28003

.

Mea culpa, shelly. I forgot to include this in my post:

 

[Matt J]

Multiply a typical CEO salary by 20, then multiply a typical line worker salary by 100,000.. that should clear up any confusion. I think I read somewhere that a typical unionized line working makes somewhere around 60K a year including benefits. Maybe everybody needs to take a pay cut? I think both groups have been selfish.. resulting in the downfall of one of America's greatest industries. e.g. everyone involved is to blame. (and we get to bail them out for their excess.. yeah!!)

I have to disagree. I also don't like the tone of the post shifting blame from CEO's to line workers, but that's my personal opinion. Sixty thousand a year including benefits isn't really that much spending power when you deduct the benefits. That's also an average and as I understand it most of these workers have been there for a while, it's not really a high turnover industry.

I'd love to see a breakdown of that $60,000 as I would bet about 1/3 is benefits. That only leaves $40,000 per year. Guess we could crush them down to minimum wage though, that would definitely help Wal-Mart's bottom line and send even more money to China.

 

[30ashopper]

I have to disagree. I also don't like the tone of the post shifting blame from CEO's to line workers, but that's my personal opinion. Sixty thousand a year including benefits isn't really that much spending power when you deduct the benefits. That's also an average and as I understand it most of these workers have been there for a while, it's not really a high turnover industry.

I'd love to see a breakdown of that $60,000 as I would bet about 1/3 is benefits. That only leaves $40,000 per year. Guess we could crush them down to minimum wage though, that would definitely help Wal-Mart's bottom line and send even more money to China.

So you're saying the high cost of hiring a CEO is the reason GM is insolvent? Guess what, it's a combination of things - ineficiency, high cost of labor, and pensions -

http://www.npr.org/news/specials/gmvstoyota/

So what's the solution? Cut the CEO's salary in half, one third? Honestly, do you really think that'll fix the problem?

 

[scooterbug44]

It's not a fix, but seeing as how just cutting the bonuses and extras of the top 5 execs (while keeping salaries the same) would give them $50 million to work with, I don't see why they can't START there, before they line up for a gov't handout.