Macquarie Network ::: 2GB | 2CH | LIVENEWS | STREET CORNER | RUGBYLEAGUELIVE | WHAT CAREER | AMAZING AUSTRALIANS :::
Tuesday, 02 December 2008

Rudd to take swipe at fat cat salaries

15/10/2008 6:51:00 PM.  | AAP

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST FEATURES

Fat-cat corporate salaries may become a thing of the past after Prime Minister Kevin Rudd pledged to tackle the "extreme capitalism" at the root of the global financial crisis.

Mr Rudd today revealed the government would be working with local regulators to draw up a model to be used in Australia and overseas to keep exorbitant executive pay packets under control.

"You've got to act at home and you've got to act abroad on this," he told the National Press Club.

"This is not just a question of fairness and perceived fairness in the system, it goes actually to the kernel of the incentive structures around risk-taking."

Mr Rudd wants to rein in "executive greed", warning a lack of regulation to keep this in check was to blame for the near collapse of the global financial system.

The government will work with the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority (APRA) to determine appropriate policy to deal with the problem of executive remuneration.

His plan - which appears to be largely targeted at finance executives - would link capital adequacy requirements to executive remuneration.

Mr Rudd said governments across the globe had been forced to prop up the financial system as markets had failed due to the twin evils of fear and greed.

"The champions of extreme capitalism have been found to have feet of clay," he said.

"Fear is the first of these demons we must see off.

"Dealing with the greed which has caused the fear will come after that."

Australian Greens leader Bob Brown, an avowed critic of mega-salary packages, wants to limit to $5 million the salaries of executives working for banks taking part in the government banking guarantee.

He wants to amend legislation underpinning the government's recent economic rescue packages when it arrives in the Senate.

"If executives want to leave this country because they are dissatisfied with an annual $5 million payout I think most Australians would be down to the wharf to see them off," Senator Brown said.

COMMENTS

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Perhaps Rudd can start with the huge salaries that Iemma paid his press staff....they were probably the tip of the iceberg?

Posted by: Gazza Benson, Blacktown

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

What a goose! What shareholders pay their executives is nobody's business but their own. What he should do is strengthen shareholders' prerogatives to this end, in which case he should be working with ASIC not APRA. This is political posturing again.

Posted by: A Narchy, The Hills

Thursday, 16 October 2008

shareholders will have to learn, cause theyre just about to get a lesson

Posted by: art anderson, siberia

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Tax them into submission. These greedy sods need to be brought to heel, tax salaries over $200,000 at 99% and include share deals and perks in the taxable income. Call it the Greed tax.

Posted by: Graeme Henderson, Darling Downs

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Graeme Henderson-Tax them and send them to the gulag archipelago. Make them all clones of our ever so efficient Politicians-especially the Labor ones- and our Public Servants. Do any of you left wing idiots know what the total dollar value of the financial Market collapse represents and what the percentage of executive salaries is to it? Don't think so-you are just opposed to high salaries in principle-because you haven't got the brains to generate enough business to warrant a high salary. Rudd should know that you don’t kill incentive because a few may have abused the system-but then again it is Rudd the Dudd that we are talking about.

Posted by: Desmond Harris, Beacon Hill

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

What a foolish thing for the PM to suggest. Even if he some how managers to regulate the remuneration packages of big business all the best business people in Australia will then go overseas to get paid what they are worth. In them doing so the Government will actually be far worse off, because it will no longer receive the huge taxes they are already receiving from the current senior executives. This will result in people without their knowledge and experience then stepping into those positions and not getting paid anywhere near as much which means the Government will receive far less in tax, which means we will all be worse off. HENDO's rant just confirms how out of touch with reality he is, just like the PM.

Posted by: Phil A, Central Coast

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

I'm always amazed that this argument, that you have to pay lots of money to attract/retain the best, appears only to apply to CEOs in some people's minds. There are many flaws but I will concentrate on two: a) surely the chamber of commerce (the fat cats union) would agree this argument is good enough for other when they fight next wage case out, if it is good enough for them b) who says these CEOs are any good anyway?

Posted by: darren carrow, brisbane

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Darren Carrow, a) there is no imposed cap on employees' wages if they are good at what they do, other than market price. In private enterprise, people generally get paid what they are worth as determined by the market. If they don't then they leave and join another firm. b) The bad CEO's don't last long because shareholders will agitate for their removal. Perhaps Rudd should strengthen shareholders' prerogative in this matter to hasten accountability.

Posted by: A Narchy, The Hills

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Cont... If you meant that everybody should be paid highly, irregardless of whether their contribution is highly valued or not then I suggest you revisit that particular experiment in USSR and the former eastern block countries in Europe. China, which is a nominal communist state abandoned this practice some 20 years ago.

Posted by: A Narchy, The Hills

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Darren let me explain to you another way with a little story as told by a Professor of Economics: It’s probably not a good idea to tax the rich more. Here is a little story as told by a professor of economics as to why. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this: The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers", he said "I'm going to reduce the cost of your meal by $20." Following the reduction, dinner for the ten would now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay

Posted by: Phil A, Central Coast

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Sounds like a tale spun by one of those discreditied far right free market think tank people who are probably looking for a different brand of snake oil to hawk right about now. Closer to the mark, in the Australian context, would be: the middle income earners pay a good slice of the bill each, the working poor pay a liitle less each, but it hurts them a lot more, the fat cat pays nothing, except to his accountant to who explains why to the owner, and the disadvantaged wait for the scraps...

Posted by: darren carrow, brisbane

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Darren the site didn't allow the full story to be displayed, unfortunately. If it had it would of given you a far better understanding as to why the Government shouldn't keep trying to punish the high money earners. But then again you and HENDO are so blinded but you own opinions you wouldn't of understood it anyway. So it was probably better they didn't post it in full. You may as well just go on living in your socialist bubble.

Posted by: Phil A, Central Coast

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Phil, interestingly Sparrow claims not to be socialist? But he is "anti" almost anything, so I'd pitch him as (at least) "anarchist". Read his threads, they are full of ideological rant that is flawed in reality. I think he'd like to be in some kind of communist utopia where he heads the government....sounds like North Korea!

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Good. I'm glad all his left-leaning public servent morons have finally been woken up too, but guess what? Thats all we'll ever hear of the matter. As usual Rudd will put this in the hands of Committee no. 178 and it will disappear up its own black hole.

Posted by: Mike Dennis, Bella Vista

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Make them join a union. That will make sure that they get paid peanuts while still having more work piled on.

Posted by: Alex Uren, Luddenham

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

''make them join a union '' from my experiences being in a union always meant superior wages and shorter working hours .

Posted by: trevor crook, wiley pk

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Classic comment Alex. Now I would like to see that !!!! I think the PM should clean out the bloated public service first. How much does his staff secretary earn a year, and what other perks do they get besides their salaries. At least the shareholders pay their exec's not the taxpayers. Those in glass houses PM, clean out your own fat cats, then talk tough to corporations.

Posted by: susan lawe, gippsland

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Sue, in NSW (I'm not sure of the specific numbers) but there are something like 300+ public servants on full pay "unemployed" because there is no job for them! I'd like to see that given more publicity.

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

How dare you cut our pay.Would you accept a paycut? I don't think so. How will I buy my G5 and my 100foot cruiser? Who will feed my 20 servants I mean employees. Lets be serious here. There is no way that one person is ever worth more than $200-300kyr.Anything higher is just a side-effect of greedy capitalism. I believe if you put a cap all the greedy exec's will leave Aust.You will most likely end up with more caring harder working and probably smarter exec's taking their positions. Go the CAP!

Posted by: peter fatcat, point piper sydney

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Dont hold your breath Geoff. Have a few in Vic too, but there is always some jumped up excuse why they just cant end their employment. Bloated Govt, federal and state, fat cat bureaucrats living off the taxpayer.

Posted by: susan lawe, gippsland

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Shouldn't this principle apply to his own govt and ministry - how many spin doctors/advisors are there to cover Rudd's behind! How many are there for Swan's and how many for Gillard etc etc - I hope he starts the cuts in the public service first before he starts shooting off his mouth in the corporate field which basically is none of his business - the fatcats are in the public service and everyone should already know about the public waste!

Posted by: RS ****, sydney

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Lets not forget "labor mates" who get plum government contracts without having to tender. Maxine McSpew and her staff are currently prime examples. It also defies logic to think that Dudd's wife never received any favours when contracts were handed out buy the Qld govt and companies who did business with the Qld govt. Why not investigate these deals Kev? or do different rules apply to labor mates to the rest of the community. Hypocrite!!!

Posted by: Pete 2, North Sydney

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

I was watching the National Press Club telecast and Krudd posturing and could hardly believe my ears when Krudd came out with APRA are going to produce this global template as if anybody out of Australia is going to be too interested, and then I was more amazed that not one journalist had the nous or courage to even grill him on it, and how much are some of them paid, and then doesn't Kev just love spending time with celebs and how many millions are they pulling in? - the man is very sick!!!

Posted by: Neville Simms, Sydney

 

Thursday, 16 October 2008

HA HA HA HA Will he start with his wifes salary or with his own NO NO NO NO Just another show of how Rudd thinks he is the be all and end all of everything. Jan

Posted by: jan baker, bangor

 

Thursday, 16 October 2008

RS I don't think his spin doctors are getting paid 26mil a year. Undoubtedly many business men and women are getting paid large sums of money but no one person in the public service has a salary of 26mil and i'd be very surprised if it even reached half a mil. So therefore that argument doesn't stand. We need to put a cap on individual earnings. For the same price as a Macquarie bank ceo gets they can employ 52 people at half a mil a yr and im sure they'll do a better job than one man..

Posted by: peter fatcat, sydney

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Peter fatcat: There are many public servants that you are not aware of that receive money such as the CEO's in Area Health Services?FATCATS is a term which has always been used in the public service - there are also Board members and Directors attached - you think they get paid nothing? This is where the public monies are wasted on behiind the scenes faceless bureaucrats! - Statutory Bodies - Presidents who are put in these cushy jobs for a period of 5 years at least!Now that's just the states!

Posted by: RS ****, Sydney

 

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Prime Minister Rudd, can you look into CEO of Qantas Geff Dixon salary package of over $10,000.000, look what this man has done to Qantas safety yet he is happy to walk away with this amount of money..HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN? Dixson has run Qantas to the ground......................................

Posted by: g maybury, sydney

 

Thursday, 16 October 2008

The current exhorbitant salaries paid to public service Heads and financial CEO's, particularly Banks is an utter disgrace. A standard salary in the range of $300K to $420K may be realistic. It must be remembered that Bank Heads are nothing more than accounts clerks - and many are crook ones at that.They are not brain surgeons so there exists no shortage of them for the task. If they don't like the reduced salary they can move overseas, the vacancy advertised and it shall be filled immediately.

Posted by: Tony Obrian, Woy Woy

 

Thursday, 16 October 2008

This is another attempt to divert our attention away from the Government acgtions on the current very seriouse and urgent Global financial crisis. This is a subject that must be addressed but not at the expense of action requred to maintain the stability of the Australian financial system.

Posted by: Maxwell Stewart,

 

Thursday, 16 October 2008

Dudd Dudd Dudd - he must then start with his wife - is he saying that she is a fat cat and making too much money or is she exempt?? this is clearly another way for him to divert from the fact that he is clueless on how to deal with this current crisis - as i keep saying, he talked down the economy when he came in to power - now he is trying to talk it up ( this strategy has backfired on him and his moron team)

Posted by: Tony M, Bangor

 

Friday, 17 October 2008

Why is it that a lowly employee loses say $1000 and gets fired. A ceo loses $10000000000 and gets a golden handshake. Wheres the fairness and reason? The only reason is there are a elite few running this world, they have their elite CEO club and they trade with eachother and no one else can get in. Now it seems for whatever reason they don't trust eachother and have in the result come un-stuck and exposed their little games. Please someone prove me wrong because I hate to be right..

Posted by: peter fatcat, sydney

Friday, 17 October 2008

Ok - the reason is in their contract of employment it says if i leave i get $xxx....an employee often doesn't have that clause. Shareholders elect the board of directors, and the board hires the CEO, the CEO will simply turn the job down if they don't get what they want. You can put in all the laws you want, maybe you can get someone & maybe you can't, but you cannot force someone to take a job for $400K, when they could get $4mil or more for the same thing. Salaries didn't cause this crisis!

Posted by: Concerned Liberal, Minto

 

Sunday, 19 October 2008

Ok Concerned Liberal. Can you tell me why the board hires these CEO's? Does it have anything to do with WHOM they know and associate with?. Or mearely their tertiary education. Also salaries DID cause this collapse. If the CEO's didn't have those clauses 'if I get these results I will get $xxxxxxxx', they wouldn't be inclined to take such high risks. It was the greed to earn more that meant they took extreme risks and in the end destroyed the world economy. Simle equation.

Posted by: peter fatcat, sydney

 
 

YOUR SAY