It seems that the pay some CEOs receive for doing their job is exceeded only by the pay they receive when they get the sack.

For shareholders of large publicly listed companies it is their destiny to get screwed. Which I would not mind so much if it were not for compulsory superannuation

In these changing time where we have our Australian Government advertising with our tax dollars about our duty in changing the IR awards for the good for our economy, they first and foremost need to start with the executives.

And if they come the nonsense that nobody will do a good job if they don't pay them millions, they should look for an internal promotion from the bottom of their company tree who is actually doing the job for him/her.

Lets look at who pays the CEO’s of both private companies and public listed companies.

It is not a public debate – the matter of executive salaries is a private matter between the owners of the corporation and the executive on whose (perceived) skills they intend to rely.

What I or anyone else feels about the salary package of any CEO does not matter – unless we are a shareholder of the employing entity – and if some shareholder thinks a CEO is being paid more than he is worth – they are best to liquidate their holding and find something else to invest in before their thoughts are realised and the stock falls in value.

The reason anyone does anything is complex and multiply motivated. I agree with the author, thinking any executive is motivated solely by financial reward is to display a paucity of comprehension about people, a total cynicism to their motives and complete ignorance to the meaning of the word “motivation” – remember the remuneration package is only ever payable based on performance – no performance means no cash-flow available to meet the payment.

Without disrespect regarding your comment and a broad job discription of a CEO position.

It has become a public debate through media and shareholders. The debate continues as the public are now asked on behalf of our current Government to make changes to an Australian award system for the betterment of the Australian Economy.

If indeed it is a private matter between the business and the CEO, the public must now reason why the "Business" feels compelled to make such a large contribution and accumulation of wealth to one person, if indeed there is a crisis with business and the affordability of Labour cost structuring and the Flexibity to sack employees at a profit and Loss reports notice as an effective way to change a printed report.

We have seen too many incidences in the media and newspapers on white collar crime and insider trading(the latest is a high profile,celebrity who is due to attend court) not to now start questioning why Business and its executives are choosing to pay themselves large sums of money at the expediture of community and consumer service. And how the forethought is always focused on shareholders pcokets.

Let us face it, the true winner in the stockmarket will be the holder of many shares with lots of capital to back themselves up.

The average person in the street will contribute to the stockmarkets shares(fodder), maybe to be a small time winner but to allow others up the ladder of influence, the additional funds to fund their extravagant lifestyles.

That is why I propose a new Tax system. The electronic debit tax

Col, the definition of performance can miss the mark at times. Short term targets can be achieved at the long term expense of the company.

It should also be noted that some of these corporations are semi government. The legal shareholders are govt ministers, the real shareholders are the tax payers.

Part of the debate involves the balance between free market and social responsibility. Not an issue which is going to be covered adequately in 350 word snipets (I don't have the answers anyway).

R0bert

Robert - sure "performance" misses the mark and the CEO miss out on the performance bonus - seems fair to me - be the institution a public, semi-public or private venture.

Agree totally the determination of performance measure needs a lot more work – I tend toward growth in net asset worth rather than share price and certain other triple – bottom – line analysis are a better medium term measure than current years profit (after manipulation / changes to accounting policies), noting 3BL includes some recognition of social responsibility