5 Salaries of Auto Industry CEOs

Reader Comments
Back to article

Thanx all for correcting my mathematical mistake.....I do know simple math...however I was so ticked off that I did not pay attention.to all of the ZEROES!!!!!..and I even proof read before emailing...imagine that!!! Anyway, my point is still however the compensation of these Executives is and has always been way over the top and borders on the ridiculous....The salaries of the Govenors of all 50 states and the President of the United States do not equal the total of the Auto executives and some of the aforementioned Executives compensation..So, I reiterate my point that many could remain employed if some of this changed.....Regardless of the ideas we may offer up, cleaner energy...etc.....this is not fair......

Debbie Mercer of IL 5:25PM December 08, 2008

The whole thing seems like craziness, straight up. I could not believe what I was hearing being debated about the UAW "average hourly salaries" vs. those of the Japanese car manufacturers operating here. It just seems very obvious to me that all those who have been mis-managing these companies into dire straights should not have those golden parachutes and high salaries with bonuses. I find the facts you quoted an underscore to the problem. I'm sure that the new CEO of Florida Lighting will justify the bonus based upon the fact that without those 100 employees, there is no repeating labor cost for them. They just don't get it. Public corporations should also bear a responsibility to the people of the communities from which they prosper. And keeping folks employed should be part of their responsibilities. I'm not talking about relieving the place of dead wood, I talk of cutting just for the sake of having higher profits. If one really takes the time to think about it, corporate america has switched services over into sophisticated answering systems and robotics which usually account for one large lump sum investment and a maintenence investment on an annual basis. They system more than pays for itself in the first year, in the case of keeping customers on the phone without single human contact. Some companies will lose business by this total lack of regard to their consumer base, but municipal business and utilities, monopolies or near monopolies, just don't care. The attitude is, where else you gonna go - gotcha! These cuts in labor do save companies in their labor expense. Some of that should be given to better training of the remaining labor force. You create a better employee, it benefits the company dynamically.
I don't know what else to say about the bailout except that for a long time now, I believe our own representatives - the senators and congresspersons whom we elected, are no longer representing the people. Some of them to the disdaining tune of thinking we cannot possibly know enough to give credence to our whims. I'm so tired of that. When representatives stop representing the people, then they are pandering with other powers. It's not just wrong, it is a disregard to the service for which they were employed. They have failed in their primary responsibility, and as such, it should be much easier than it is to hold them responsible for their actions or inactions. They already think they do such good work for such a demanding position that they regularly vote themselves wonderful raises that far exceed the standard of living and inflation increases since their last raises. And the boss - "we the people" cannot even put them on notice.
I'm not one for undermining our government - I just think that something went wrong with our checks and balances system and it has stopped working the way it was intended to work. We need to fix that first. But how?
Lin

Lin Cava of 2:25PM December 06, 2008

I was referring to Debbie’s math, not yours, Lin; I am an engineer, so I am familiar with simple math. The CEOs of the big three salaries do not equal the billions they are asking for; that said, I agree…most of executive salaries of most large companies in the US make way too much. The last CEO of the failing company, Sprint, made over sixty million dollars, his last year there. The first thing new CEO of Florida Power and Lighting did was let go over one hundred employees, only to get a bonus equal to the salaries of those let go.

of FL 9:45AM December 06, 2008

Also, Debbie,
The bailout amount that the car companies are looking for is
$34 BILLION dollars. Money that you and I and every taxable person in the nation will be contributing to pay, long into our future.
I agree something needs to be done, but I don't think $34 BILLION will even help if we're going to put the recovery of these companies on the backs of their employees. There are lots of things we, as the lenders, might stipulate here. One might be their contribution to alternative energy vehicles.
Perhaps not.
But stipulations need to be made, and they need to be made in such a way that if we do the bailout - which looks more and more likely by the day - they must live up to. That line of action has to include a restructuring before taxpayers money is handed over, not after. In addition, there should also be full agreement that if the company, in its newly funded state, should be part of a buy-out, that the company who purchases a "Bailed out" company is also subject to the same governmental review and restructuring of salaries and pensions. That should keep things under control a bit more. What would we do if they defaulted or fight the clauses they agreed to in order to get the bail out funds? It would be a heinous thing to see the government go into the car manufacturing business, and they don't want to. But the government could broker a deal with third parties that would play by the rules and not only fix what's wrong, but become more stable in the long run, not just "patched up". Who would those third parties be? Perhaps the more sucessful auto makers might take on such a foreclosure type deal. Or perhaps they could become part of a team of the best "heads" in the business to figure out how to run the companies up, rather than down. That's not for me to say. But a free ride on the backs of the taxpayers should not be one of the options. We are all going to feel the effects of these bail outs.
Lin

Lin Cava of NY 7:06AM December 06, 2008

There are 52 weeks in a year. If the world were perfect, then each month would have four, and we would have 13 months. However we would have to pay the monthly bills once more each year. So, there are 4.3 weeks in a month. The better way to do it is to take an annual salary and divide it by 52 to get the weekly salary, then by 40 to get the hourly salary. The Monthly salary would come from dividing the annual salary by 12, not from multiplying the weekly salary by four.
So, in any number of publications, it can be ascertained that UAW assembly line workers make about $57,000 per year before tax. Federal tax would clock in at about 21%, which is $11,970. If you subtract that from the gross pay, you get $45,030. In Dearborne, Michigan, on the State's own tax site, they claim that tax there is about 3.9% of what the Federal Tax is. I used 4%. If you take $11,970. and multiply that by 4% you come up with the state tax of roughly $4,788. Subtract that from the $45,030. left of salary after the Feds and you get $40,242. in annual salary that is roughly "Take Home Pay".
I did not take other amounts from it that often reduce take-home pay, such as payments for union dues, payments for taking a "better" medical plan - often a choice that can be made, nor did I subtract for unemployment benefits, compensation, or disability. So, in fact, the UAWs average guy's take home pay is probably a litte less than stated. Each individual would be different, as you know, also based upon marital status and amount of dependents.
In any case, what's left equates into $3,353.50 a month by dividing the take home pay by 12. It's necessary to do this as most of our bills are monthly, and the comparison of earnings to expenses must be compared on a monthly basis. You might break it all the way down into weekly, but it would be more cumbersome.
The point remains that our legislators are looking to get some of the answer to the future stability of the american Auto Manufacturers from the salaries of those who can least afford it. Yes, UAW is a strong union, and without them, who knows what the average line worker might be making. Compare that to what they pay their executives. There is not only one executive in these companies, there are many. The guys with their hands out are not willing to give up any of what they already have, but would rather look to the salaries of their work force to help reduce their labor costs to assure that the company runs in the black. I say that their whole salary base, including executives, needs to be restructured - not just their UAW employees. I also feel that these exorbitant bonuses should stop. Everyone likes a bonus, but bonuses in excess of $12 million is a bit much for the CEO of a car company that is failing to thrive. His salary alone covers what he/she should be responsible to do, and even that is excessive. Worse, executives have retirement and parting severence packages that are excessive.
Lin

Lin Cava of NY 6:50AM December 06, 2008

I do not get your math, Debbie Mercer of IL.

of FL 7:47PM December 05, 2008

I do not get your math, Debbie Mercer of IL.

of FL 7:43PM December 05, 2008

The folks looking for the money are pinning their failures upon the "credit industry failures".
Yet in 2007, the CEOs of the US Automobile Manufacturers earned upwards of $12 million in bonuses above their salaries. Bonuses for failure - and the Credit Industry is to blame?
There is no indication of change or admission that they have been and continue to squander what money they have.
Before one cent of my children's and grandchildren's income is mortgaged for the billions necessary to help the auto industry our lawmakers should make certain that a restructuring of salaries and retirement benefits is in the hands of the People. That would be the prerequisite. These folks should not be on the breadline with their hands out to retire in a way that the folks who are bailing them out cannot be. They must be willing to give it back, take living salaries, not excessive ones, and forego the bonuses for executives.
Instead we hear how the "Average hourly salary of a UAW worker is $74. vs. the average hourly salary of a Japaness Auto Manufacturer in the US at $48". Are our lawmakers serious? Not only will the bailout come from the sweat of the American worker, but they want the ones who are making the least to GIVE BACK? By the way. Those AVERAGE hourly wage rates are meaningless. They are top heavy. The average UAW worker on the assembly line makes about $57,000 a year, with any available overtime and before taxes. Are the folks that represent us going to sell our futures to help an industry who refuses to be restructured before one cent is loaned to them or worse, granted to them? Chrysler is on the breadline for the second time. The first time, the bonds were all paid back. But Chrysler also "paid back" the US citizens who bailed them out by building the then largest automobile manufacturing plant in the world in Mexico and closing plants nationwide in the US.
Did they think we'd forgotten?
Lin
http://lincava.deviantart.com/

Lin Cava of NY 4:43PM December 05, 2008

These people are just out of touch with the real world, we the worker have the back bone they never needed to get with the program and live life in a bulb that was never lit by a normal life. It is a sad life they have, to think the way they do and have in life out of touch. I hope they enjoy a material life as they have nothing of life as it should be.

Robert of NH 10:33AM December 04, 2008