GM’s First Female CEO Will Make Half Of What Her Predecessor Made

[geardaddy]

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/02/04/3243951/mary-barra-pay-gap/
-snip-

In December, General Motors (GM) made headlines for picking Mary Barra to replace Dan Akerson as its new CEO. That meant she would not only be the first woman at the helm of the carmaker, but any global carmaker.

But while she may have shattered that glass ceiling, her pay is another story. Looking at the company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Elizabeth MacDonald notes that Barra will be paid $4.4 million in total compensation, which includes a base salary of $1.6 million. Akerson, on the other hand, made an estimated $9 million, with a $1.7 million base salary and $7.3 million in stock. That means Barra will make less than half of what he made. In fact, Akerson will continue to make more as her, as GM will pay him $4.68 million as an outside senior adviser.

Worse, Barra comes to the job with an outsized amount of previous experience. She’s been with the company since 1980 and was most recently serving as senior vice president of global product development. Akerson, on the other hand, came into the role without a background running a car company, previously serving as a managing director of private equity firm The Carlyle Group, although he has been on GM’s board since 2009.

You've come a long way, baby.


More at link

[lumberjack_jeff]

2. Poor thing. n/t

[snooper2]

3. somebody isn't good at math and doesn't understand stock options

[joeglow3]

37. DING DING DING DING

We have a winner!!!

[merrily]

63. Did you see the word "options" in the story too?

[joeglow3]

70. Performance comp. stock based comp. all the same

Again, proves someone doesn't understand how executive comp and section 162(m) work.

[merrily]

73. It was a simple question,

asked because I thought I must be overlooking the word.

Would it have given you a headache to respond without adding a gratuitous personal insult for no apparent reason?

P.S. Section 162(m) of what? The internal Revenue Code?


And I don't see the words you used in the article either. Did see this in another article, though;

ETA: he interesting nugget couched in fine print was that some of Akerson’s compensation was shifted from from restricted stock units, which take more than there years to fully vest, to stock salary, which Akerson can realize sooner. This was done “in acknowledgment of the possibility of his retirement before the completion of the three-year vesting period,” the proxy statement said.

http://www.freep.com/article/20130425/BUSINESS/304250105/Compensation-top-GM-execs-rose-2012-Akerson-received-11-1M

A restricted stock unit is not an option. It's shares of stock that you cannot sell right away.

[joeglow3]

75. Sorry for the bluntness

Section 162(m) of the internal revenue code limits the amount a company can deduct for the CEO and others (typically the individuals whose compensation is required to be disclosed with the SEC in the annual report, excluding the CFO - I assume the CFO is excluded because they would have greater access and ability to cook the books and effectively be rewarded for it). Currently, any base compensation in excess of a million dollars a year is permanently non-deductible for tax return purposes for the company.

The limit does not apply to performance based compensation. Companies will have a compensation committee that is typically made up of a couple board of directors and the rest being outside individuals. This committee will approve performance metrics that, if met will result in additional compensation for the individuals included in the plan. These amounts are typically paid out in stock options, RSU's or a combination of the two.

Thus, it is not surprising that the plan has not been decided upon yet for this individual. Therefore, it is not an honest comparison to look at one individual and include their performance based pay AND anything the are getting as a result of the separation with someone's base pay only.

I apologize for the curtness/rudeness.

[merrily]

76. Thank you for the apology--very rare on message board-- and I accept gratefully.

That is the end of that from my end.


Thank you for the explanation. I do understand performance bonuses, but not all bonuses are paid in stock options. Apparently, his bonus was not.

[merrily]

62. I did not see the word "options" in the story.

[merrily]

74. He did not get options. He got shares of stock outright, except for a restriction on how

fast he could sell them. That is not a stock option.

[HappyMe]

4. I don't feel bad for people

that make that much money.

[justiceischeap]

5. Yes but I can imagine the conversation that went along with the decision

to hire her. "Hey, she's a woman, we can pay her less and all us old white guys can make more."

I don't feel bad either that she isn't fleecing consumers so she can live a lavish lifestyle but you can bet the money she isn't getting someone else is.

[HappyMe]

6. The money she isn't getting sure

as hell isn't being passed down to a lowly office worker.

People here rail against high CEO salary packages all the time. So I'm not sure if I should be all indignant about this. Am I supposed to be peeved because she's a woman, or glad because maybe this might become a trend. I would rather the CEOs all make less, regardless of gender.

[LanternWaste]

9. No doubt. However, when it is in fact, regarded by gender

" I would rather the CEOs all make less, regardless of gender..." No doubt. However, when it is in fact, regarded by gender (as it so often is), CEO pay becomes an additional and accurate window through which to perceive other problems.

[HappyMe]

10. I am all about the equal pay

for equal work. However when it comes to the very top tier, I can't find much sympathy in my heart for 1%ers. Let's get some jobs and decent money for those of us down here in the real world.

[yawnmaster]

50. Considering that 5 of the 14 board of directors for GM are women, I can't imagine that conversation.

http://www.gm.com/company/aboutGM/board_of_directors0.html

[Heather MC]

36. Aren't we suppose to Applaud CEO's taking pay cuts.

Oh the Conundrum

[merrily]

64. I don't feel bad for the $1,000,000 or more a year club, either, but

that is not exactly the point of the story.

[HappyMe]

72. The outgoing guy also served as

chairman, so that could be a pretty big part of the salary difference.

I still think that all CEOs should make less money.

[TexasProgresive]

7. Too bad it takes promoting a woman to CEO

to begin moving executive corporate pay to something reasonable.

Maybe all senior corp exec should be women.

[ProfessorGAC]

15. Where I Was Going

I'm conflicted by this, because she shouldn't be making what her predecessor made, but then neither should have he.
GAC

[hfojvt]

27. GAC!!!

I was just thinking, I had not seen you in forever.

[DURHAM D]

8. Oh dear...

The guys better watch out. If too many women are in the room they will pull down everyone's salary.

[bettyellen]

14. I think that is what has already happened. I know quite a few places that favor hiring women

because men generally ask for more compensation, and put themselves out of the running. I have heard it expressed -again and again- if you need leadership, pay extra for a man, women will not be automatically given respect - if you need the hard work done, hire a woman. That is a common frame for this.

[Nay]

52. That, of course, is one of the more rational reasons men don't want to compete

with women in the work world -- they 'drag down wages.' What's funny is that their own eagerness to hire cheap labor in the form of women is now biting THEM in the ass instead of someone else.

[progressoid]

11. Sooo...Yeah! and Booo!

[Progressive dog]

12. Only $4.4 million per year,

lowest hourly at GM is $8/hour, so it's only about 250X that.

[geardaddy]

13. Agreed.

[Dopers_Greed]

16. Cry me a river

A CEO not making enough is probably the last thing we should be outraged about.

[marble falls]

17. She's still over paid. Period. I'm trying to weep for her but I can't even get a tear out. Halleluah

there's finally a woman chairman, its more than about time once we realize that women make up more than 50% the engineers at college and have for years and that women by at least half the cars in this nation.


Women buy more cars than men - and influence almost all car purchases
http://www.examiner.com/article/women-buy-more-cars-than-men-and-influence-almost-all-car-purchases

[geardaddy]

18. Agreed. She's overpaid.

Just posting based on the fact that she's getting less (although still too much) than her male counterpart.

[merrily]

65. Don't weep for her. Weep for women to whom the same kind of thing

happens all the time and has happened since forever.

[marble falls]

66. These are who I am much much more worked up over: underpaid women without a living wage.

[merrily]

67. Ain't it the truth. Many of them head of households, too.

A retired high school teacher told me that, when when she started out men even made more in public schools. She complained and the response was they had families to support. Not true. They got more even if they were single. She was supporting her divorced sister and her nephew, which she pointed out. No one cared and no one raised her pay.

[marble falls]

69. I bet that a single woman is more likely to be supporting a family than a single man.

[hfojvt]

19. hard to believe

considering she made $4.9 million in 2011.

http://www.freep.com/article/20130425/BUSINESS/304250105/Compensation-top-GM-execs-rose-2012-Akerson-received-11-1M

[Javaman]

20. anything over my current pay would be an improvement.

I shead no tear for those who live in the stratusphere of wages.

[marions ghost]

21. Don't care about her gender

This is what's wrong with America.

[former9thward]

22. Not entirely accurate.

The proposed compensation, according to GM, does not include compensation that could be awarded under the company’s long-term incentive plan, which is subject to approval by GM stockholders at the company’s Annual Meeting in June.

Barra said she has “complete faith” in the board and executive compensation committee to set a fair compensation. She added, GM has "an extensive process" to determine executives' compensation structure.

http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2014/01/new_gm_ceo_mary_barra_downplay.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+flint_journal_news+(Flint+Journal+News+-+MLive.com)

[mythology]

68. This is correct

The previous CEO was known to be retiring and so didn't receive any long term compensation where as yet GM hasn't announced what the new CEO's long term compensation will be. But GM has said that the difference in their pay will be negligible after that is factored in. The long term compensation will be announced later this year.


http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/04/news/companies/gm-ceo-pay/

[Spitfire of ATJ]

23. One of the BONEHEAD moves the prior CEO did was sell the Electro-Motive Division...

This was the part of GM that make locomotives.

Think about that for a second.

Here you have a company with scientists and engineers on the payroll that have combined diesel engines hooked up to generators to power electric motors to power drive wheels to milk out every single mile possible from even a teaspoon of fuel. People who could easily scale all of that down for cars and trucks. Think about the ads too. A truck towing a boat or a trailer and a train going side by side on a country road and a "from the people who brought you" meme topped off by outrageously unbelievable mileage.

Instead, this idiot bought Hummer and produced SUVs.

[geardaddy]

25. That was an incredibly boneheaded move.

I wasn't aware of that. Thanks.

[tammywammy]

29. It was a few CEOs earlier than his immediate predecessor.

CEO Rick Wagoner sold off Electro-Motive (that was in 2005) - that's three preceding Akerson. The CEO preceding Wagoner, Jack Smith, is the one that purchased Hummer.

Wagoner quit back in 2009
This guy Fritz Henderson was then CEO until 1 Dec 2009
Ed Whitacre was interim CEO from 1 Dec 2009 to 1 Sept 2010
Akerson took over 1 Sept 2010.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

30. I'm not surprised there was more than one idiot.

[lumberjack_jeff]

35. Dan Ackerson

In July 2009, Akerson was named to the board of directors of General Motors as a representative of the U.S. Treasury, which owns a 61% stake in GM.[11] On August 12, 2010 it was announced that Akerson would be the successor of Ed Whitacre as CEO of General Motors, starting September 1, 2010 and would also assume the Chairman of the Board position on January 1, 2011. General Motors, during Akerson's first year of tenure in 2011, earned a record $7.6 billion in profit off of $150.3 billion in sales.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Akerson

The guy who saved GM deserves some props. Were it not for him, the company wouldn't have survived long enough to appoint a female successor.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

46. And that business model of not representing shareholders caused a meltdown on the Right....

Mainly because it was a success and they feared it would spread to other industries.

Imagine if the government did that to Big Oil.

[LittleGirl]

43. My engineer brother worked for GM

back then and he lost his job because of this. Stupid stupid mistake.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

44. I keep being reminded of this...

[LittleGirl]

48. Love MM

Too bad he gets such a bad rap. He really is the pulse of the working class folks.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

51. A lot more than Ed Schultz.

[Sheldon Cooper]

24. I wonder if the responses would be the same if we were talking about the

first Black CEO, or the first openly gay CEO. I suspect there'd be quite a bit more outrage if that were the case. But hey, it's just a woman here, so what the fuck ever...

[HappyMe]

26. I would react the same.

I don't care who they sleep with or what race or gender they are - over paid 1%er.

[Starry Messenger]

40. Wait until male executives start getting paid less because of lower female exec salaries.

Then we'll hear the screaming about how awful women devalue the workforce.

[Glassunion]

28. I'm outraged

and stuff...

How the fuck is a CEO supposed to live on 4.4 million? In today's day and age, that is near impossible. And with the recent cutbacks in SNAP benefits, how will this poor lady take care of her children? You cannot feed a family on 4.4 million dollars. In a family of her size, that would be like only having 1.1 million dollars a year for each person in her family. That's it... Just a measly 1.1 million dollars.

These stories about the working poor really get to me. Sorry.

[erpowers]

31. Much Ado About Nothing

I understand some at DU might not like me writing this, but this article is much ado about nothing. In a later update to the article the pay difference was explained by saying Barra was only the CEO of the company while her predecessor was both the chairman and CEO of the company. Her base pay is only $100,000 less than her predecessor, so the pay gap seems reasonable since she is only doing one job while her predecessor did two jobs. I think the fact that Barra is only the CEO of the company also accounts for the fact that she is paid less in stock options.

As we look at the CEO pay gap we probably should look at how many female CEOs are just the CEO of the company. It might be the case that in all the instances listed in the article the female CEOs are only the CEO of their company while their male counterparts are both the chairmen and CEOs of the companies. That might actually explain the pay gap.

[valerief]

32. Well, you never know when she'll get pregnant and leave.

[Vashta Nerada]

33. I'm torn on this.

On one hand, I'm pissed that they're paying a woman CEO less than what the male CEO made, but on the other hand I don't give a shit if it's a few million dollars less when she's still getting millions of dollars.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

34. what this is, is a window into what all women face everywhere.

Less pay for same (or BETTER) qualifications.

What career woman here hasn't had the experience of seeing younger, less experienced male colleagues promoted, or given their jobs, even as they are asked to train the new guy?



Male ego is a destructive thing.



All CEO' s should be demoted in pay. And, no, the money witheld from her won't be going to workers.

Maybe she can become a voice for more reasonable executive pay. The time is right for her to step up as a truth teller, if she so chooses.....society is ready to hear it.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

38. Wouldn't that be wonderful. I hope she does this very thing -

All CEO' s should be demoted in pay. And, no, the money witheld from her won't be going to workers.

Maybe she can become a voice for more reasonable executive pay. The time is right for her to step up as a truth teller, if she so chooses.....society is ready to hear it.

[snooper2]

39. She is actually going to make more money than the last CEO

The author isn't good with basic principles of math FYI

[BlancheSplanchnik]

41. I'll need you to break it down for me, then.

Please, because it looks pretty clear on the face of it.

Also, my input concerned deeper societal issues exemplified by the article.

[geardaddy]

42. +1000

[JDPriestly]

47. +1000

Younger women have a slightly better chance of getting a job. They are pretty, after all.

Older women? Just getting a job that pays well and involves taking responsibility is tougher.

Usually you are offered a low salary for the job description and expected to be quiet when your male boss speaks.

I'm generalizing. There are exceptions. But the rule is older women have a tough time in the workplace.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

57. yes. I wouldn't want to be looking for work as an older woman....

I already experience differing treatment now that I'm "of a certain age" . And I've been here over 25 years.

But anyway...I've seen studies showing the differences in post-graduation trajectories for men and women.....male graduates get hired at higher starting pay, get more promotions, get rewarded for starting families, etc. And of course, benefits, retirement and soc. security is less, being nased on percentage.

I wish i could find it again.

[JDPriestly]

59. You are so right.

[JDPriestly]

45. Equal pay for equal work?

It's still just a lot of talk. Congress needs to get busy.

[tammywammy]

49. Barra is only CEO, Akerson was CEO and Chairman

That explains the $100,000 difference in their base pay. GM's long term compensation plan is bering restructured since GM isn't beholden to the government any more. Her long-term compensation plan will be unveiled in April.

Akerson received a large amount of short-term compensation, since he was close to retirement and didn't get any long-term compensation. I suspect that their overall compensation packages will be very close when her full compensation is revealed in April.

[Romulox]

53. Daniel Akerson was installed by the Treasury/Obama administration, recruited from the Carlyle group.

Make of that what you will.

Akerson joined MCI Inc. in 1983 where he served as the CFO for several years as well as President and Chief Operating Officer.[5] He left MCI in 1993 to become chairman and chief executive of General Instrument, where he succeeded former and future United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.[6]

In 1996, Akerson was hired to be the chief executive of Nextel. During his tenure as CEO, Nextel's revenues grew from $171.7 million in the year before his arrival to more than $3.3 billion in 1998. Shortly after stepping down as CEO of Nextel in July 1999, Akerson was brought in by Craig McCaw to run Nextlink Communications, later rebranded as XO Communications.[7] XO Communications entered bankruptcy in June 2002, and Akerson resigned as CEO in December 2002.[8] Akerson joined The Carlyle Group in 2003.[9] While at The Carlyle Group, Akerson ran the Company's largest private equity fund.[10]

In July 2009, Akerson was named to the board of directors of General Motors as a representative of the U.S. Treasury, which owns a 61% stake in GM.[11] On August 12, 2010 it was announced that Akerson would be the successor of Ed Whitacre as CEO of General Motors, starting September 1, 2010 and would also assume the Chairman of the Board position on January 1, 2011. General Motors, during Akerson's first year of tenure in 2011, earned a record $7.6 billion in profit off of $150.3 billion in sales.[12] However, automotive journalist Peter De Lorenzo criticized him heavily for opposing Mark Reuss and the product development team.[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Akerson

[Drew Richards]

54. This is so wrong in so many ways...I don't know if I would accept the position at all with that

kind of slap in the face of what they consider her worth to the company.

FU GM

[tammywammy]

55. Maybe because there's more to it than that.

Her long-term compensation hasn't been settled and will be released in April. Her predecessor had no long-term since he was close to retirement, so he had a much larger amount of short-term compensation. Barra's base salary is $100,000 less because she's not also the Chairman of the Board.

I think this is probably a big to-do over nothing, and once her final salary is released in April it'll be very similar to his total compensation.

[Drew Richards]

56. sound logic we should wait and see...(rant) its too much anyway dammit...plutarchs! (snark)

[bucolic_frolic]

58. Gee

they could'a had me for $600 a week

[tinrobot]

60. How is reducing CEO salaries a bad thing?

CEOs are typically paid way too much, both male and female. Carly Fiorina comes to mind as one example of this.

Step in the right direction, I say.

[pangaia]

61. "...$4.68 million as an outside senior adviser. "

WTF?
I'll be an outside adviser for... 1 MIL.

[47of74]

71. Did she ask for it to be less?

Sometimes such people ask that their salary be set at a lower level so the company has more money available.

[Romulox]

77. THIS! is what feminism is all about. nt