“Now, all the financial pundits will rightly tell us that five million dollars is not a high salary for the CEO of a major corporation.”

'Rightly tell us'? There is nothing 'right' about it. Nobody needs to be paid that much, as is witnessed by the salary paid to the PO man in he U.S – about $AU 370,000, to run a much bigger organisation in a country with a much bigger pool of managerial talent than there is in Australia. Australia could have head-hunted that gentleman for $500,000 or less. And what the bosses of private banks get has nothing to do with what the boss of a public department gets; although the incomes of bank CEOs are also a national disgrace.

Nobody in Australia should be paid more than our Prime Minister, who is responsible for running an entire country. Sure, he he isn't much good at it, but neither are many of the overpaid CEOs of companies, including the ex-Post Office man.

Things are getting tougher all the time for Joe Bloggs in Australia, and it isn't because he is getting higher wages. Rising costs are due to the greed of big business, incompetent politicians and CEOs of everything.

I would like to see some of the people responsible put out into a crowd of angry average Australians for a little rough justice. The 'system' is not going to serve them their just desserts.

The kids in year 5 got an assignment to write an essay about poverty. One boy wrote:

"Once there was a poor family: the father was poor, the mother was poor, the children were poor, their nanny was poor, their cook was poor, their chauffeur was poor, their gardener was poor, their maid was poor..."

Such is this talk about companies where all poor employees earn less than a million dollars a year - what a sacrifice!

Yes, many people want to achieve and many are happy to do what it takes for free, only, some bug in their programming made them want to achieve different things than what the author considers an "achievement". Surely they and the vast majority of us will all be happy to have "no wealth, just secure financial independence" that would allow us the time to achieve what we truly want without the burden of having to get up every morning and work for other people's achievements.

ttbn - Quote "Nobody in Australia should be paid more than our Prime Minister, who is responsible for running an entire country."

There are more senior public servants that get a lot more than Turnbull, furthermore why should he get paid more than the American President. That indicated the is a big problem with how and by who their salaries are determined and reviewed.

Yes, instead of being paid for it, prime-ministers should rather be fined for running us over!

Didn't the author say that they do it for the achievement, not for the money?

(ditto for public self-servants)

The issue shouldn't be how much the Australia Post CEO was paid, but whether we got our money's worth.

I've heard it claimed that he was responsible for the huge growth of the logistics side of the business, in which case he may well have been worth all that he was paid. But I've seen no detailed analysis of his achievements, let alone any comparison of what could have been expected to happen anyway with any competent CEO.

So I'm concerned that many people are labelling him overpaid when they, like I, don't really have sufficient information to know whether he was overpaid or not.

No Adian, the poor man was doing it tough and had to make all manner of sacrifices! I've had the lousiest day being fleeced by not too clever filipino amater crooks merely masquerading as legitimate businessmen and am not too forgiving? I'll let you know the pushbike scam when it's all but over. [Order two get stung for six?]

The CEO's salary package ought to have reflected the fact that Australia Post and it's profits still belong to the people! If an extraordinary shareholder's meeting were called, this ambit claim by the CEO would be voted down!

Look, it's no more difficult to make decisions for three men or thirty. All that changes are the numbers which get bigger and applies equally to 300, 3,000 or 30,000.

The fact that this bloke thought he needed to keep this a secret and then needed to resign, when asked to justify his comparatively (public servant) obscene salary, tells us he knows that the position wasn't worth what he charged us.

If he thought he was worth that money, he needed to get into private enterprise, where this unethical greed is good nonsense is the new normal?

Moreover, I don't buy the story you seem to be selling and suspect his so called achievements, were essentially crafted by far less rewarded junior assistants, truth be known?

Give me the job and the super competent assistants and I'll do it for $500,000 plus car, plus reasonable tax invoice supported expenses, plus inflation or the CPI whichever is greater. Per year and after tax! And for one ten year term! My signature is just as illegible as it ever was!

And could be turned into a rubber stamp and used by the assistants, while I quaff cognac laced coffee and puff on expensive havanas in the boardroom, all while waffling on to all and sundry, (other dept heads) about the simply splendid job we're doing (nice work if you can get it) for my commensurate reward?
Alan B.

More evidence and more ammunition for why the "people" will vote for Pauline Hanson...
Totally out of touch in the commissioned ranks.
This is the same ruling class that pushed our troops over the parapets in WW1 to be mowed down in successive lines by enemy machine guns.
And the clarion call from the ranks of NCO's why do we put up with this lot?
Choice...Nil!