Yabby,
Mate good to see we are not alone in advocating some common sense, do you believe we can get beyond National Competition Policy, and move to National Effenciency and Excellence Policy? It would be exciting to think that we could!

Shonga, alot of companies that have done well in Australia, have done so because they are pseudo monopolies. Their CEOs then try to claim compensation, because of that fact. Why did the AMP for instance pay Trumball what it did, when it did? What did he do to deserve it?

I believe that alot more thought needs to be given as to how we select aptitude and talent. I once had a girlfriend who was a professor of ENT surgery, who trained young surgeons. I asked her how they selected who would be trained, out of the many applications.
It really came down to a committee sitting around a table, everyone giving their 5c worth. The net result was that some people with little natural aptitude in hand-eye coordination, ie using a scalpel, got through the system. They also landed up being not very good surgeons, which doesent really help the patients.

IMHO within most companies there are probably extremely talented people, who would make great leaders. We just need to find better ways to identify them, rather then the present methods. Most of those people would naturally thrive on being CEO, without tens of millions of $ required to motivate them.

Yabby, I couldn't agree more mate, I long for the day when National Competition Policy is out, and National Excellence and Effincy Policy is in, which is what we need.

C.E.O.'s are overpaid employees, who could not possibly earn $67,000 per week. Good to see your informed comments mate, all the best to you.
Regards, Shaun.

In the mid-70s the oil-shock rocked the car industry. Mazda who had just released rotary engine cars (smooth running but fuel-hungry) were particularly badly hit. As they restructured and re-designed their cars Mazda management took pay cuts but left worker's wages alone. But then their CEO had risen through the ranks from the shop floor and understood that the real source of wealth for the company was its workers not its management. Unfortunately the dingbats running most of Australia's top companies actually think they are important and worth the $$$ they get paid.

In the 1990s the Karpin Report highlighted the second-rate nature of Australia's business managers - and nothing has changed; they're still second rate - its just we pay them more.

The CEOs deservr all they can get. I mean who else could have thought out the situation where if you make a purchase on a credit card say a single purchase that was worth $400.00 and nothing else, but meanwhile you get a statement that shows that $400.00 owing,then you have that money refunded into the account for whatever reason by the vendor, (in other words you no longer have the dept in the credit card) you still have to pay $400.00 into your account? Otherwise they charge you interest on the full amount. Later if you then try to get the money back as your credit card is now in dbit to you, if you take $400.00 out they consider that as a cash withdrawal and charge interest accordingly.

How's that for ingenuity ? I say give them all they deserve

The Cid,
I agree give them exactly what they deserve in the 1970's they recieved 4 times the average weekly male earning, today it has risen to 60 times the average weekly male earnings, with a c.e.o. last week recieving a mere 66% pay increase that took him up to approximately $3.5 mil p.a.

I say draw them all up an AWA which gives them 4 times the average weekly male earnings again, just imagine how Australian labour costs would fall, being of course a great benefit to this great nation.