Speaking of editorials - you're completely inventing a fantasy about an entire group of people being "infuriated by the peasants demanding scraps."īut regardless, your facts are completely off base.įor example, the CEO of McDonald's had a total comp package of $10.8 million in 2020. We wouldn't be even having this conversation if these same board and director level types weren't infuriated by rank and file workers asking for better working conditions that could easily be paid for with that gap. It's a measure allowing the SEC to punish individuals with no proof of wrongdoing. The measure being discussed in the OP has nothing to do with the wealth gap. Punishing innocent people is never the answer.īottom line: This is not a progressives problem, it is a wealth gap problem. The rule was originally discarded for good reason.
A viciously punitive measure against a class of people that progressives hate, which will accomplish nothing and be a source of endless strife as ideologues try to punish innocent people in order to send a message. This is essentially just red meat for the progressives. Financialy simply aren't restated that often for misconduct, and when they are, you can generally force disgorgement rather than a clawback if the CEO or CFO were involved. It was palatable with the CEO and CFO because the buck stops with them, but expanding a harsh rule that doesn't care about knowledge to other executives down the chain was seen as a step too far.įurther, the article points out that even the current rule for CEOs snd CFOs is rarely triggered to begin with. The SEC had originally proposed this rule after the 2008 meltdown, but withdrew it as it was generally seen as unfair due to the fact that the rule does not require the executive in question to have any knowledge of the cheating. This new rule would expand this to other types of executives, and to additional types of cheating. So, for example, if the company's profit was reported as $X and therefore the CEO and CFO received $Y as bonuses based on that, but then it turns out that the company cheated on the data in some way and the numbers have to be revised downward, then part of that bonus can be clawed back to bring it in line with the new numbers. They're reintroducing a proposed rule about executive compensation clawback provisions they had previously discarded.Ĭurrently, the rules allow for the partial clawback of CEO or CFO incentive-based pay if the company financials have to be restated due to compliance misconduct. The SEC is not targeting compensation levels for executives. Since nobody seems to be reading the actual article, I'll go ahead and point this out: Submit news article (no analysis/opinion) If your post is not a good fit for /r/news, consider submitting to one of these subreddits instead:
Your account must be email-verified to participate in /r/news.
Aim executive mod#
See a post that violates the rules below? Did your post get stuck in the spam filter? Have a question about the rules? Just want to give feedback? Send the mod team a message.
0 kommentar(er)
