The rewards of being the newly-minted CEO of a Fortune 500 company are obvious in the employment agreement between Carthage-based Leggett & Platt and its new CEO David Haffner.
According to the agreement, which was filed today with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Haffner will receive an annual salary of $775,000 and a cash bonus of $542,500, giving him a grand total of $1,317.500 a year.
According to the agreement, Hafner's salary will be reviewed each year by the company's Compensation Committee which may give him a raise, but cannot cut his salary.
That would be enough benefits for most of us, but Haffner's deal features other perks. According to the agreement, "(Haffner) shall be granted non-qualified options to purchase a number of shares of the company's common stock equal to $2,325,000 divided by the closing price of the company's common stock on May 10, 2006."
He also will receive at least four weeks of paid vacation and can participate in any insurance, pension, profit sharing, stock bonus, stock option, stock purchase or other benefit the company has, according to the agreement.
And that's not all.
"The company shall pay or reimburse the executive for all transportation, hotel,living and related expenses incurred by the executive on business trips away from the company's principal office and for all other business and entertainment expenses reasonably incurred by him in connection with the business of the company and its subsidiaries or affiliates."
Haffner's former position, chief operating officer, will now be held by Karl Glassman, whose employment agreement was also filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Glassman has been serving as executive vice president. Glassman will receive a base salary of $620,000, and a $372,000 bonus, bringing him to $992,000 annually.
8 comments:
Good for him. I can't imagine anyone reading this would turn down this kind-o-jack.
It's not a matter of him being greedy enough to take the money or not, it's another example of how much difference there is between the way the Corporations treat the select few while the majority of thier employees never get the opportunity to be compensated anywhere near these amounts. What makes his job worth so much more than the people that sweat out a living for the company and help make the large profits by stepping up production or being quality minded?
A little concept called the free market determines what people can make - from the CEO to the person unloding springs from the truck.
Paying everyone the same (or close to it) simply would not work. For further evidence, see the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic 1917-1991.
Actually, I believe you are making my point for me. In the Soviet Union wasn't there some that controlled all of the wealth while everyone else was expected be be grateful for what was given them?
Wow. Where to begin?
If you're actually comparing the social and economic structure of the Soviet Uninon to the United States in 2006 where more people enjoy a higher standard of living than at any time in the history of civilization, I actually have no idea of how to begin to compare and contrast the differences for you.
Trust me, you don't want to go to the numbers on this one...
It bugs me a little to think that I have stock in a corporation that thinks they have to spend that kind of money to get a good CEO. We have seen over the past years that the salary size has nothing to do with the skills of the individual they hire. And when they make the wrong choice, it costs another fortune to make then go away. More and more there is little, if any, accountability in the upper corporation management. Looks to me that if they all would reduce the salaries they would end up with the same quality leader with more money to divide with the stockholders.
Anonymous post # 6 understands my point, I am not comparing the U.S.A. to the U.S.S.R. other than to remind you that the Corporate mentallity seems to be willing to let a few share the wealth while the majority of the dedicated employees get only a crumb for thier hard work.
I do not expect everybody to make exactly the same amount of money. Wages should be based on individual performance and company performance alike, from top to bottom. A business owner needs a return on his money for the risk of his investment in addition to his wages, but a wise owner will partner with thier dedicated workers and reward them as well in good times of profit.
When you watch large corporations like this one and closer to home for me, O'Sullivans in Lamar, it makes no sense how they can justify paying a CEO this kind of money while the company is in bankruptcy.
From the stories that I have always heard about Sam Walton, WalMart was a success because of his leadership and the way he treated his customers and employees. Unfortunately now that he is gone WalMart has gone the way of all other corporations, they no longer treat the employees as partners nor share the wealth the way they did. From management level down they have cut benefits and profit sharing drasticly from the way Sam had treated his employees. Yet the Corporate level leadership has kept the increased wealth and additional profits for themselves.
Quit complaining about executive pay for a change. If you want that kind of compensation for yourself then got out and get teh qualifications to deserve it. The ability to complain on open access media does not make any of you the authority on how much your superiors should be paid for thier time. Have a look at Mr. Haffners resume and see if yours would qualify as equal. Doubt it!
Post a Comment