Wounded Warrior Execs fired

[Mike1234567]

So you are saying you would be willing to run a $2 billion company for a $13,000 salary?

See?? That's the problem. These are not supposed to be 'companies'. They 'claim' to be charities. Please don't tell me you can't discern the difference.

 

[Mreed911]

See?? That's the problem. These are not supposed to be 'companies'. They 'claim' to be charities. Please don't tell me you can't discern the difference.

There is no difference.

 

[Mike1234567]

There is no difference.

I know... but there's 'supposed' to be a difference and most people 'assume' there is a difference. There 'should' be a difference.

 

[deemus]

You are expecting someone to work a 60 hr week for $13k a year. That's unreasonable.

There's no difference. That organization needs a skilled person to manage that much money, and that many activities.

A person cannot even survive on $1000 a month.

 

[Mike1234567]

You are expecting someone to work a 60 hr week for $13k a year. That's unreasonable.

There's no difference. That organization needs a skilled person to manage that much money, and that many activities.

A person cannot even survive on $1000 a month.

No, not for $13K per year... but not millions either.

 

[AustinN4]

No, not for $13K per year... but not millions either.

Since American Red Cross was being discussed I looked up the CEO's salary. It was $562 thousand and change, and amounted to only 0.01% of total expenses. Since ARC is headquartered in DC I would say that is a very reasonable salary in a very expensive to live area.

I have searched for ARC's number of paid employees but couldn't find anything current. The last I found was several years old and at that time it was north of 35,000; which is a very big enterprise, NFP or otherwise.

.. but there's 'supposed' to be a difference and most people 'assume' there is a difference.

You seem to be in the minority here, so I would say most people don't agree with you.

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

Yeah, over a half a million dollars is justifiable for a CEO, nah.

United Way got into big trouble a few years back when it was discovered how absolutely corrupt their CEO was discovered to be with squandering money on himself, a chauffeur driven limo, and other massive perks he gave himself, but given a few years for the public's memory to fade, it's business as usual at ye old UW.

Those of you who rely on the research for the charities you think you can trust - How can you 'know' you can trust the research?

Who's to say it isn't corrupt too?

And no, I'm not stating they are corrupt, but when very large dollars are involved be it with charities or any thing else, be skeptical, very skeptical about what you're told is gospel.

 

[AustinN4]

Yeah, over a half a million dollars is justifiable for a CEO, nah.

You seem to have a distorted view of what it costs to hire a CEO of a large 35,000+ employee enterprise, NFP or otherwise. So, Mr. Mowingmanic, what would you consider justifiable?

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

AN4,

I'm familiar with the salary/talent argument.

Without going into great detail, I've a buddy who's a CEO of a corporation. He earns $250,000 annually.

Previous positions have entailed his being a Sr. Vice President at a very prestigious corporation (I won't disclose the name but, it's widely recognized) and was wooed away to his current position because of his talent.

There seems to be a rather distorted idea that to obtain the necessary talent obscene salaries are de rigueur, they're not.

Great talent can be had for high salaries, not outrageous salaries.

The American public has been hoodwinked into believing if one is anointed
with the hallowed title of CEO any amount paid is perfectly justfiable.

It isn't.

Look at Japanese CEO salary structures.

They don't mirror American CEO salaries and Japanese CEO's are highly skilled, and to use one of your salary yardsticks, are responsible for thousands of employees.

 

[AustinN4]

The American public has been hoodwinked into believing if one is anointed
with the hallowed title of CEO any amount paid is perfectly justfiable.

"Any amount paid", since you didn't define it, could be either justifiable or not, depending on the situation and location.

You didn't answer my question at to what you thought was justifiable, if not the $526 thousand in question since you thought it wasn't justifiable.

 

[Mike1234567]

"Hoodwinked"... yes that's an appropriate description of We, the People.

 

[rushthezeppelin]

AN4,

I'm familiar with the salary/talent argument.

Without going into great detail, I've a buddy who's a CEO of a corporation. He earns $250,000 annually.

Previous positions have entailed his being a Sr. Vice President at a very prestigious corporation (I won't disclose the name but, it's widely recognized) and was wooed away to his current position because of his talent.

There seems to be a rather distorted idea that to obtain the necessary talent obscene salaries are de rigueur, they're not.

Great talent can be had for high salaries, not outrageous salaries.

The American public has been hoodwinked into believing if one is anointed
with the hallowed title of CEO any amount paid is perfectly justfiable.

It isn't.

Look at Japanese CEO salary structures.

They don't mirror American CEO salaries and Japanese CEO's are highly skilled, and to use one of your salary yardsticks, are responsible for thousands of employees.

No offense but your thinking on the value of certain types of work seems very closely aligned with Marxist views (maybe not all the way there). The market pays you the worth you give it. Obviously companies, for profit and nfp, deem that their CEOs are providing the worth to the company that they are then paying said CEOs. You do realize the average corporation is getting bigger and bigger too and is having bigger and bigger profit to employee ratios? Have you even taken the time to do the math on the average CEO and how their pay compares to the company they work for. Did you know that if you were to take the CEO of Walmart's pay and spread it throughout the entire company that everyone would get a whopping half cent an hour raise? Most other CEOs it's in the range of 20-50 cents per hour raise. Putting some arbitrary glass ceiling on this field will just be another stifling factor on business innovation.

 

[Mreed911]

$250k total comp (salary + bonus) is mid-level in technology, with managers managing upwards of $10mm of business/revenue at that point.

A good tech salesperson in a high demand large enterprise line can make $400k+ a year on sales of $10-20mm.

$500k for a CEO isn't out of line...as base pay.

 

[deemus]

$250K for a CEO is fairly low. Depends on number of employees, revenue amounts of company, etc. I know a couple that make over $1 million (thousands of employees & rev over $100 million), and a couple that make $200K (dozen employees and rev under $10 mil). CEO of "a company" is pretty wide open. For WWP and SA, I think $500K is very reasonable. They are very large organizations. But I agree that millions is out of line for a charity.