The $145 Million CEO

[Paul98]

The board of the company with whom he has an agreement.

So the current system that is setup gives them the right? It's themselves giving themselves there own rights? That is just blind ideology. If stealing was legal you would think it's your right to be able to steal.

This is why we need a change, we can't give these people the option to screw there workers while profiting off it themselves. They make huge sums of money on the backs of workers, these same workers don't do much better at all if the company does better. If the company does worse or is having problems or wants to make more money the workers get screwed. All along while the top does better and better almost no matter what happens.

The workers already get screwed if things go bad they should do better if things are good.

From what I have seen is that it really depends on how the business is run, the risk involved, the size and a whole host of other things. There isn't a one size fit's all solution which is the problem, and the solution is not going to be easy to give workers a better position. It's not just a problem with business but how large business works with government in order to make things help specific things which tilt the battle in their direction.

 

[Michael]

This is why we need a change, we can't give these people the option to screw there workers while profiting off it themselves. They make huge sums of money on the backs of workers, these same workers don't do much better at all if the company does better. If the company does worse or is having problems or wants to make more money the workers get screwed. All along while the top does better and better almost no matter what happens.

"on the backs of workers"? Are you a Marxist? The workers are paid a wage and benefits to do their job. They are paid the market rate or better or the company ends up with turnover and retention issues. The CEO is this case in an employee as well and is being paid the "market" rate.

You, and others, are confusing the CEO being on the Board with controlling the Board. In the end, the Chairman has 1 vote and is not even on the important committees (Audit and Compensation). You act as if the management just passes the Board a salary demand, they all sign it and then go off to a golf club to play a round and drink fine wine.

There are issues with the way the system works, and I recommended a good book on the subject (available in a Kindle edition, so easy to get). However, there has been serious Board reform and law changes ("Say on Pay" is the most recent one) that makes reality far different than your delusions.

For the people that want to point out what other countries pay their CEOs, you're ignoring the entire system they operate under, but the real determining factor is the market. If US companies are wasting money on too much executive compensation, it will self correct. Please note that CEO (and the other C positions) are pretty high risk. They do routinely get fired in the USA which is not the case in other countries.

Michael

 

[Paul98]

"on the backs of workers"? Are you a Marxist? The workers are paid a wage and benefits to do their job. They are paid the market rate or better or the company ends up with turnover and retention issues. The CEO is this case in an employee as well and is being paid the "market" rate.

You, and others, are confusing the CEO being on the Board with controlling the Board. In the end, the Chairman has 1 vote and is not even on the important committees (Audit and Compensation). You act as if the management just passes the Board a salary demand, they all sign it and then go off to a golf club to play a round and drink fine wine.

There are issues with the way the system works, and I recommended a good book on the subject (available in a Kindle edition, so easy to get). However, there has been serious Board reform and law changes ("Say on Pay" is the most recent one) that makes reality far different than your delusions.

For the people that want to point out what other countries pay their CEOs, you're ignoring the entire system they operate under, but the real determining factor is the market. If US companies are wasting money on too much executive compensation, it will self correct. Please note that CEO (and the other C positions) are pretty high risk. They do routinely get fired in the USA which is not the case in other countries.

Michael

Michael

You can call me what ever you like, I don't follow any of these ideologies. Trying to follow one ideology is never a good idea. All you are doing is stating how the system currently works. This system isn't working for the majority of people. Just because you have a job and a "good" living doesn't mean that the system is working for you.

 

[Michael]

Paul98 - At about 9% unemployment, that means that 91% of the people that are trying to find a job have. Now 9% is too high, but the system appears to be working for the majority. Also, most surveys show that the majority of people are not upset at pay differences. People want opportunity, not redistribution by fiat.

Also, you are making claims on how the system works that are not backed up by either reality nor common sense. And your views of how the system works appears Marxist to me. You may claim not to be one, but what you are expressing as your belief on this topic is Marxist. Taking your views to the logical conclusion, all workers in all companies should be paid the same salary regardless of the actual job they do.

Michael

 

[Acanthus]

That's where the board steps in.

I would agree with that to some degree. The problem is the "favors" system in place right now where people sit on many boards for many companies and get to determine their own insane pay by proxy agreements.

 

[Acanthus]

Paul98 - At about 9% unemployment, that means that 91% of the people that are trying to find a job have. Now 9% is too high, but the system appears to be working for the majority. Also, most surveys show that the majority of people are not upset at pay differences. People want opportunity, not redistribution by fiat.

Also, you are making claims on how the system works that are not backed up by either reality nor common sense. And your views of how the system works appears Marxist to me. You may claim not to be one, but what you are expressing as your belief on this topic is Marxist. Taking your views to the logical conclusion, all workers in all companies should be paid the same salary regardless of the actual job they do.

Michael

I would like to see a survey wherein people faced with facts and figures about wealth inequality were supportive of it. I'm sure you could try to twist things around with questions like "do you think socialist practices like a robin hood tax system should be used to balance out wages?" and you would get a lot of no's... Saying there isn't any discontent about the issue would be a huge misrepresentation of a LOT of people, though.

 

[Acanthus]

Paul98 - At about 9% unemployment, that means that 91% of the people that are trying to find a job have. Now 9% is too high, but the system appears to be working for the majority. Also, most surveys show that the majority of people are not upset at pay differences. People want opportunity, not redistribution by fiat.

Also, you are making claims on how the system works that are not backed up by either reality nor common sense. And your views of how the system works appears Marxist to me. You may claim not to be one, but what you are expressing as your belief on this topic is Marxist. Taking your views to the logical conclusion, all workers in all companies should be paid the same salary regardless of the actual job they do.

Michael

U6 unemployment is far far higher, and is the real figure to use when considering economic health.

 

[dmcowen674]

Yes, I am a Canadian, why? I have lived in the USA for close to 20 years, but still am Canadian.

Michael

Just odd how some are so passionate on something that doesn't pertain to them personally.

Like in the gas threads how people that have never been to Chicago make dumb comments that they think I'm talking about stations near the airport being the most expensive when if you lived here you would know that is not the case. The stations near the airport are actually the cheapest here.

 

[Paul98]

Paul98 - At about 9% unemployment, that means that 91% of the people that are trying to find a job have. Now 9% is too high, but the system appears to be working for the majority. Also, most surveys show that the majority of people are not upset at pay differences. People want opportunity, not redistribution by fiat.

Also, you are making claims on how the system works that are not backed up by either reality nor common sense. And your views of how the system works appears Marxist to me. You may claim not to be one, but what you are expressing as your belief on this topic is Marxist. Taking your views to the logical conclusion, all workers in all companies should be paid the same salary regardless of the actual job they do.

Michael

So if the majority of people actively looking and counted in the unemployment numbers just have a job then the system is working. It doesn't matter if their wages are getting worse, if they have to take pay cuts or freeze while at the same time doing more work.

You are an idiot I never claimed anything of the sort, and to say i did is just trolling. This is also exactly what I said, you don't take a pure ideological system which you seem to have done. Pure ideology is shit.

 

[blackangst1]

You can call me what ever you like, I don't follow any of these ideologies. Trying to follow one ideology is never a good idea. All you are doing is stating how the system currently works. This system isn't working for the majority of people. Just because you have a job and a "good" living doesn't mean that the system is working for you.

Youre a naive little child. And a fucking idiot.

 

[dmcowen674]

Please note that CEO (and the other C positions) are pretty high risk.

They do routinely get fired in the USA which is not the case in other countries.

High risk Bahahahahahahahaha

They look forward to it because they get millions on exit and go on to the next company to do it again.

Come on seriously

 

[Paul98]

Youre a naive little child. And a fucking idiot.

You clearly aren't smart enough to come up with any sort of argument, my guess is that you like many others are blinded by their ideology.

 

[cybrsage]

Just odd how some are so passionate on something that doesn't pertain to them personally.

Like in the gas threads how people that have never been to Chicago make dumb comments that they think I'm talking about stations near the airport being the most expensive when if you lived here you would know that is not the case. The stations near the airport are actually the cheapest here.

It is the competition by the airport that does it. It is also cheaper out in places like Glen Ellyn than it is anywhere in Cook County...or at least it was a while back when I lived there.

 

[cybrsage]

Just because you have a job and a "good" living doesn't mean that the system is working for you.

Actually, that is the best indicator that it is working for you. If you have a job and a good living, the system is certainly not harming you.

 

[momeNt]

Considering Oprah Winfrey made twice the amount of this CEO, are we arguing for higher CEO compensation to be more on par with the entertainment industry? Rock star CEO compensation should probably add up to more compensation than actual rock stars no?

 

[palehorse]

Considering Oprah Winfrey made twice the amount of this CEO, are we arguing for higher CEO compensation to be more on par with the entertainment industry? Rock star CEO compensation should probably add up to more compensation than actual rock stars no?

Maybe someone who hates wealth needs to release a list of "acceptable" 1% ers...

Anyone have the DNC top individual donors list handy?

 

[daishi5]

I work for a company that is implementing a Mckesson product, and we are a Mckesson shop, and I have a few things to say about it. The #1 big thing is that healthcare is under a huge government mandate to implement EMR systems, which Mckesson just happens to sell. The deadline for Electronic Medical Record Meaningful Use https://www.cms.gov/EHRIncentivePrograms/ are quickly approaching, and with Mckesson selling the software to meet the mandates, it is not really surprising that Mckesson is doing well. Don't give the credit to the CEO, the governent basically mandated that a huge number of people go buy expensive products from Mckesson, GE, EPIC or the like. It would be hard for any company to not do well.

Mckesson seems to have been doing a huge number of sales, but they do not have the personnel to support the number of projects they have. I just had a major system go live without a person for technical support, our go live was a failure that required our CEO to escalate the issue in order to get a technical person who knew how the product worked. We literally had no support on the day of our go live.

I don't feel comfortable giving out numbers, but what it comes out to is, we expect to receive millions dollars from the government. For every dollar we get from the government, we gave about two dollars to mckesson for their EMR system in order to meet meaningful use. We did this, because if we fail, we would have been penalized around twice as much in medicare payments as the size of the bonus. (That is hard to explain without real numbers, but if we meet meaningful use, we get 5 dollars, if we fail we lose 10 dollars in medicare funding, so we gave 10 dollars to mckesson.)

The company is a horrible example of a free market success. The government is forcing all healthcare organizations to purchase expensive software to receive large bonuses or face huge fines and Mckesson is waiting to sell the healthcare organizations to avoid the governments threats.

 

[dmcowen674]

I work for a company that is implementing a Mckesson product, and we are a Mckesson shop, and I have a few things to say about it. The #1 big thing is that healthcare is under a huge government mandate to implement EMR systems, which Mckesson just happens to sell. The deadline for Electronic Medical Record Meaningful Use https://www.cms.gov/EHRIncentivePrograms/ are quickly approaching, and with Mckesson selling the software to meet the mandates, it is not really surprising that Mckesson is doing well. Don't give the credit to the CEO, the governent basically mandated that a huge number of people go buy expensive products from Mckesson, GE, EPIC or the like. It would be hard for any company to not do well.

Mckesson seems to have been doing a huge number of sales, but they do not have the personnel to support the number of projects they have. I just had a major system go live without a person for technical support, our go live was a failure that required our CEO to escalate the issue in order to get a technical person who knew how the product worked. We literally had no support on the day of our go live.

I don't feel comfortable giving out numbers, but what it comes out to is, we expect to receive millions dollars from the government. For every dollar we get from the government, we gave about two dollars to mckesson for their EMR system in order to meet meaningful use. We did this, because if we fail, we would have been penalized around twice as much in medicare payments as the size of the bonus. (That is hard to explain without real numbers, but if we meet meaningful use, we get 5 dollars, if we fail we lose 10 dollars in medicare funding, so we gave 10 dollars to mckesson.)

The company is a horrible example of a free market success. The government is forcing all healthcare organizations to purchase expensive software to receive large bonuses or face huge fines and Mckesson is waiting to sell the healthcare organizations to avoid the governments threats.

Thank you for your post.

Shows how there is no "Free Market" in the U.S. anymore.

It's 110% a scam and sham.

 

[BoberFett]

Thank you for your post.

Shows how there is no "Free Market" in the U.S. anymore.

It's 110% a scam and sham.

Then maybe the left should stop blaming it for failure. Sounds like, yet again, government is at least partially to blame.

 

[Lanyap]

So the Mckesson CEO owes his high salery to Mr Obama.

For Immediate Release: Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Contact: CMS Office of Public Affairs
202-690-6145



ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS AT A GLANCE

“Our recovery plan will invest in electronic health records and new technology that will reduce errors, bring down costs, ensure privacy and save lives.”

- President Obama, Address to Joint Session of Congress, February 2009


As promised by the President, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 included under which, according to current estimates, as much as
$27 billion over ten years will be expended to support adoption of electronic health records (EHRs)...

https://www.cms.gov/apps/media/pres...ge=&showAll=&pYear=&year=&desc=&cboOrder=date

 

[dmcowen674]

So the Mckesson CEO owes his high salary to Mr Obama.

Republicans won't admit to that especially the rabid ones on here.

 

[palehorse]

Republicans won't admit to that especially the rabid ones on here.

Why wouldn't they?

They're despicable -- Obama's Government mandates to buy things, that is.