Comments on: New United Airlines exec snags $525,000 salary — let’s hope it doesn’t ask for a bailout

By: Ed Kummel

Ed Kummel — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 22:17:01 +0000

I for one am very against these obscene pay compensations that executives get…
Take a look at Nardelli, the CEO of Home Depot. In his 4 year reign, his company lost over 12% of it’s value, yet when he was “asked” to leave, he still walked out with his bonus’s and forgivin loans and golden parachute intact.

Look, I’m all for compensating an executive what he/she is worth, but come on…make it comensurate to performance! If the company does good, the executive gets their full salary plus a reasonable bonus. If the company does poorly, then the executive should get his negotiated salary minus double the value the company went down in value…
That seems like a reasonable compensation package to me!
Ed
web/gadget guru

By: Joe Buhler

Joe Buhler — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 21:37:44 +0000

If these senior bozos at the U.S. legacy carriers would be paid on a performance basis their salaries would soon be in the very low six figures to be justifiable!

I have nothing against high executive pay, provided it is in return for excellent performance and that is certainly not the case for most carriers or many other major companies, e.g. banks…. Nevertheless, the corner office types continue to be overpaid while the layoffs continue. At the same time the public is surprised at how low the quality of service is today, if we can talk of service at all. Pathetic!

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:23:43 +0000

I’m with John on this one. If you are truly qualified for the job, then executive pay should be $1 – that’s right one dollar. You should already be well healed by the time you are a CEO that you can live off your past pay checks. Most of the CEO’s in any buiness are already millionaires, so they don’t really need the income. And all their trips, parties, etc. are paid for out of company money. As others have pointed out, the workers who really make the company tick are getting paid peanuts with no annual salary rise and expected to stay on the job with no bonus. What would happen if ALL the workers changed jobs every 2 years – where would all the corporate knowlegde be? Could the CEO really run the company if they lost ALL the lowest paid employees?

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:09:44 +0000

My favorite executive pay practice is earning bonuses after filing for bankruptcy or claiming golden parachutes after a forced sale (see some of the recent bank near-failures). These should all be nullified, IMO.

By: Jerk Me Off Slowly

Jerk Me Off Slowly — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 06:54:04 +0000

We already took over United’s Pension bailout, that idiot was supposed to be the best for the job. Also, if the assholes in those positions did a better job, they would not be in the positions they are in, they should be more concerned about making money for the company rather than themselves. Get real people, we are getting screwed and you are all blind.

By: Bob

Bob — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 05:23:08 +0000

ACTUALLY, if Ms Mikells friends would quit writing and start reading, they would find that United executives have the highest levels of pay in the airline industry while providing the lowest quality product by the industry standards. All of their pre-9/11 pay has been restored while ALL the other airline employee groups have yet to approach their pre-9/11 incomes. This despite the the fact that sacrafices were to be ’shared’ by all employees, as guaranteed at the time. Despite what their OWN industries provide, the comparison is meaningless. If they think things have improved with the current temporary executives, they haven’t done their homework.

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:18:47 +0000

I agree with Oscar – that sounds like a pretty modest salary for a CFO of a company the size of UAL.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:47:51 +0000

What do you mean if EVER? What the hell do you think happened after 9/11?
Were those billions in dollars given to the airlines industry NOT a bail out?
That’s another example of governement stepping in, supposedly to “stop the bleeding” only to have it come back to bite the American Taxpayer in the behind later. Airlines bailed out after 9/11–continued poor service today, due to money loosing carriers. Any one else see the connection. Hmmm….shocking.

By: Frank

Frank — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:43:26 +0000

Here comes the argument that to retain a qualified Management workforce, you need to compensate them accordingly. I cant tell you how many times I’ve watched a CEO, CFO, and OTHERS swaltz right in and OUT with their GOLDEN PARACHUTES after a “few” years on the job. BIG PAY CHECKS, BIG STOCK OPTIONS and RETIREMENT PACKAGES, yet the employees are left with salaries that compare to 1988 levels. Fight for years to get a decent raise or improvement to their contracts. Once a contract becomes amendable, the company will negotiate at a snail’s pace, often doing so for SEVERAL YEARS. An impasse occurs and you wonder why LABOR votes to strike. Patience has run it’s course when you watch these individuals (rather well) COMPENSATED regardless of whether they contribute to a profitable company or not.

By: Oscar

Oscar — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 15:17:53 +0000

That’s actually a rather low salary for the CFO of a major company, the firm I work for is far smaller than UA (albeit profitable) and our CFO would laugh at that salary package.