Let's put a lie to rest, shall we? Encapsulated by this tweet I saw today, but often repeated:

Happily, in among the news stories from five years ago, Accountancy magazine has a table of CEO remuneration last year, so we can have some fun with sums.
Let's take Frank Chapman, CEO of BG Group. He earned £7,451,398 last year. So could he have entertained a "tiny bit of redistribution"? BG Group has 6,172 staff, most of whom work outside the UK. So, even if Frank had decided to work for nothing, the maximum each member of staff could have received would be £1,200 more. And do BG Group employees feel hard done by? One can only presume that they would seek employment elsewhere if they did. The accounts show that total remuneration for employees was $1,126,000,000 which works out at $182,000 per employee. Is that not considered a reasonable salary?
Or, for a more extreme example, look at Justin King at Sainsbury's. He earned £2,601,449 in 2010. Had his pay packet been shared among Sainsbury's 146,900 employees, each could have enjoyed an additional £17.71.
The idea that bosses should earn less so that their employees can earn more is driven by a combination of envy, idiocy and economic naivety. While bosses do earn a lot, they are responsible for the livelihoods of many thousands of employees. Even if you wanted to redistribute, it would generate such a negligible difference to staff, it would be meaningless.
Filed under: Economics with tags accountancy magazine, bg group, directors, j sainsbury, justin king, remuneration, twitter
1 Comment »